23 research outputs found

    Safety and effectiveness of propranolol in severely burned patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    Background The objective of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness and safety of propranolol compared to placebo or usual care for improving clinical relevant outcomes in severely burned patients (TBSA \u3e20%). Methods Relevant articles from randomized controlled trials were identified by a literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. We included trials involving patients with a severe burn (\u3e20% of total body surface area affected). Trials were eligible if they evaluated propranolol and compared to usual care or placebo. Two investigators independently assessed articles for inclusion and exclusion criteria and selected studies for the final analysis. We conducted a meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Results We included ten studies in our systematic review. These studies randomized a total of 1236 participants. There were no significant differences between propranolol and placebo with respect to mortality (RD −0.02 [95% CI −0.06 to 0.02]), sepsis (RD −0.03 [95% CI −0.09 to 0.04]), and the overall hospital stay (MD −0.37 [−4.52 to 3.78]). Propranolol-treated adults had a decrease in requirements of blood transfusions (MD −185.64 [95% CI −331.06 to −40.43]) and a decreased heart rate (MD −26.85 [95% CI −39.95 to −13.75]). Conclusions Our analysis indicates that there were no differences in mortality or sepsis in severely burned patients treated with propranolol compared with those who had usual care or placebo. However, the use of propranolol in these patients resulted in lower requirements of blood transfusion and lower values of heart rate. The evidence synthesized in this systematic review is limited to conclude that propranolol reduces the length of hospital stay among severely burned patients. Future trials should assess the impact of propranolol on clinically relevant outcomes such as mortality and adverse events

    A meta-analysis of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) or open aortic cross-clamping by resuscitative thoracotomy in non-compressible torso hemorrhage patients

    Get PDF
    Background The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effect of REBOA, compared to resuscitative thoracotomy, on mortality and among non-compressible torso hemorrhage trauma patients. Methods Relevant articles were identified by a literature search in MEDLINE and EMBASE. We included studies involving trauma patients suffering non-compressible torso hemorrhage. Studies were eligible if they evaluated REBOA and compared it to resuscitative thoracotomy. Two investigators independently assessed articles for inclusion and exclusion criteria and selected studies for final analysis. We conducted meta-analysis using random effect models. Results We included three studies in our systematic review. These studies included a total of 1276 patients. An initial analysis found that although lower in REBOA-treated patients, the odds of mortality did not differ between the compared groups (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.17–1.03). Sensitivity analysis showed that the risk of mortality was significantly lower among patients who underwent REBOA, compared to those who underwent resuscitative thoracotomy (RT) (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.68–0.97). Conclusion Our meta-analysis, mainly from observational data, suggests a positive effect of REBOA on mortality among non-compressible torso hemorrhage patients. However, these results deserve further investigation

    The Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery : defining a model for antimicrobial stewardship-results from an international cross-sectional survey

    Get PDF
    Background: Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs (ASPs) have been promoted to optimize antimicrobial usage and patient outcomes, and to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial-resistant organisms. However, the best strategies for an ASP are not definitively established and are likely to vary based on local culture, policy, and routine clinical practice, and probably limited resources in middle-income countries. The aim of this study is to evaluate structures and resources of antimicrobial stewardship teams (ASTs) in surgical departments from different regions of the world. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in 2016 on 173 physicians who participated in the AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections) project and on 658 international experts in the fields of ASPs, infection control, and infections in surgery. Results: The response rate was 19.4%. One hundred fifty-six (98.7%) participants stated their hospital had a multidisciplinary AST. The median number of physicians working inside the team was five [interquartile range 4-6]. An infectious disease specialist, a microbiologist and an infection control specialist were, respectively, present in 80.1, 76.3, and 67.9% of the ASTs. A surgeon was a component in 59.0% of cases and was significantly more likely to be present in university hospitals (89.5%, p <0.05) compared to community teaching (83.3%) and community hospitals (66.7%). Protocols for pre-operative prophylaxis and for antimicrobial treatment of surgical infections were respectively implemented in 96.2 and 82.3% of the hospitals. The majority of the surgical departments implemented both persuasive and restrictive interventions (72.8%). The most common types of interventions in surgical departments were dissemination of educational materials (62.5%), expert approval (61.0%), audit and feedback (55.1%), educational outreach (53.7%), and compulsory order forms (51.5%). Conclusion: The survey showed a heterogeneous organization of ASPs worldwide, demonstrating the necessity of a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach in the battle against antimicrobial resistance in surgical infections, and the importance of educational efforts towards this goal.Peer reviewe

    Evolving trends in the management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 waves. The ACIE appy II study

    Get PDF
    Background: In 2020, ACIE Appy study showed that COVID-19 pandemic heavily affected the management of patients with acute appendicitis (AA) worldwide, with an increased rate of non-operative management (NOM) strategies and a trend toward open surgery due to concern of virus transmission by laparoscopy and controversial recommendations on this issue. The aim of this study was to survey again the same group of surgeons to assess if any difference in management attitudes of AA had occurred in the later stages of the outbreak. Methods: From August 15 to September 30, 2021, an online questionnaire was sent to all 709 participants of the ACIE Appy study. The questionnaire included questions on personal protective equipment (PPE), local policies and screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection, NOM, surgical approach and disease presentations in 2021. The results were compared with the results from the previous study. Results: A total of 476 answers were collected (response rate 67.1%). Screening policies were significatively improved with most patients screened regardless of symptoms (89.5% vs. 37.4%) with PCR and antigenic test as the preferred test (74.1% vs. 26.3%). More patients tested positive before surgery and commercial systems were the preferred ones to filter smoke plumes during laparoscopy. Laparoscopic appendicectomy was the first option in the treatment of AA, with a declined use of NOM. Conclusion: Management of AA has improved in the last waves of pandemic. Increased evidence regarding SARS-COV-2 infection along with a timely healthcare systems response has been translated into tailored attitudes and a better care for patients with AA worldwide

    Injuries in Bolivia: Initial trauma registry results from five hospitals in Santa Cruz de la Sierra

    No full text
    Aim: Trauma is a leading cause of global deaths. Many resource-limited settings, like Bolivia, lack data on injury mechanisms and outcomes, restricting targeted initiatives for prevention and quality improvement. We reviewed initial results from five hospital-based trauma registries in Santa Cruz de la Sierra to explore injury characteristics in this Bolivian region.Materials and methods: From October 2015 until May 2016 emergency department (ED) staff gathered trauma patient information, including personal and injury demographics, prehospital facts, and hospital disposition, with subsequent transfer into an online platform.Results: The registry captured N = 3,220 patients, of which 64% were male aged 21 years (IQR 6, 37). Hospital transport occurred via private car (37%), taxi (23%), or ambulance (15%), with many presenting on the day of injury (74%) within four hours (52%). Most injuries occurred at home (38%) or in the street (29%), were blunt (64%), and resulted from falls (43%), road traffic incidents (13%), or dog bites (8%). Common classifiable injuries (N = 2,874) included head/face/extremity contusions (43%), extremity fractures (12%), arm/hand penetrating injuries Conclusion: These data suggest trauma patients at registry hospitals frequently are not hospitalized and many injuries are preventable. A more complete trauma representation within the city requires data quality improvement, program expansion, and supplementary data source inclusion. Results will inform health system resource planning and preventative strategies, enabling evidence-based interventions that reduce injury morbidity and mortality in Bolivia. Clinical significance: These results qualify the injury burden in this Bolivian region, serving as the basis for future interventions to improve injured patient outcomes, and reduce morbidity and mortality

    Status of trauma quality improvement programs in the Andean region: What foundation do we have to build on

    No full text
    Introduction Trauma quality improvement (QI) programs have been shown to improve outcomes and decrease cost. These are high priorities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where 2,000,000 deaths due to survivable injuries occur each year. We sought to define areas for improvement in trauma QI programs in four LMICs. Methods We conducted a survey among trauma care providers in four Andean middle-income countries: Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. Results 336 physicians, medical students, nurses, administrators and paramedical professionals responded to the cross-sectional survey with a response rate greater than 90% in all included countries except Bolivia, where the response rate was 14%. Eighty-seven percent of respondents reported morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences occur at their hospital. Conferences were often reported as infrequent – 45% occurred less than every three months and poorly attended – 63% had five or fewer staff physicians present. Only 23% of conferences had standardized selection criteria, most lacked documentation – notes were taken at only 35% of conferences. Importantly, only 13% of participants indicated that discussions were routinely followed-up with any sort of corrective action. Multivariable analysis revealed the presence of standardized case selection criteria (OR 3.48, 95% CI 1.16–10.46), written documentation of the M&M conferences (OR 5.73, 95% CI 1.73–19.06), and a clear plan for follow-up (OR 4.80, 95% CI 1.59–14.50) to be associated with effective M&M conferences. Twenty-two percent of respondents worked at hospitals with a trauma registry. Fifty-two percent worked at institutions where autopsies were conducted, but only 32% of those reported the autopsy results to ever be used to improve hospital practice. Conclusions M&M conferences are frequently practiced in the Andean region of Latin America but often lack methodologic rigor and thus effectiveness. Next steps in the maturation of QI programs include optimizing use of data from autopsies and registries, and systematic follow-up of M&M conferences with corrective action to ensure that these activities result in appreciable changes in clinical care
    corecore