12 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Pharmacologic labour analgesia and its relationship to postpartum psychiatric disorders: a scoping review.
PurposeThis scoping review aimed to summarize the current literature on postpartum psychiatric disorders (e.g., postpartum depression, postpartum anxiety, postpartum post-traumatic stress disorder) and the possible relationship of these disorders to the use of pharmacologic labour analgesia (e.g., epidural analgesia, nitrous oxide, parenteral opioids) to identify knowledge gaps that may aid in the planning of future research.SourcesPubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched from inception to November 9, 2018 for studies that included both labour analgesia and the postpartum psychiatric disorders specified above.Principal findingsTwo reviewers assessed the studies and extracted the data. Of the 990 identified citations, 17 studies were included for analysis. Existing studies have small sample sizes and are observational cohorts in design. Patient psychiatric risk factors, method of delivery, and type of labour analgesia received were inconsistent among studies. Most studies relied on screening tests for diagnosing postpartum psychiatric illness and did not assess the impact of labour analgesia on postpartum psychiatric illness as the primary study objective.ConclusionsFuture studies should correlate screen-positive findings with clinical diagnosis; consider adjusting the timing of screening to include the antepartum period, early postpartum, and late postpartum periods; and consider the degree of labour pain relief and the specific pharmacologic labour analgesia used when evaluating postpartum psychiatric disorders
Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world
Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality.
Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States.
Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis.
Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection
Recommended from our members
Pharmacologic labour analgesia and its relationship to postpartum psychiatric disorders: a scoping review.
PurposeThis scoping review aimed to summarize the current literature on postpartum psychiatric disorders (e.g., postpartum depression, postpartum anxiety, postpartum post-traumatic stress disorder) and the possible relationship of these disorders to the use of pharmacologic labour analgesia (e.g., epidural analgesia, nitrous oxide, parenteral opioids) to identify knowledge gaps that may aid in the planning of future research.SourcesPubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched from inception to November 9, 2018 for studies that included both labour analgesia and the postpartum psychiatric disorders specified above.Principal findingsTwo reviewers assessed the studies and extracted the data. Of the 990 identified citations, 17 studies were included for analysis. Existing studies have small sample sizes and are observational cohorts in design. Patient psychiatric risk factors, method of delivery, and type of labour analgesia received were inconsistent among studies. Most studies relied on screening tests for diagnosing postpartum psychiatric illness and did not assess the impact of labour analgesia on postpartum psychiatric illness as the primary study objective.ConclusionsFuture studies should correlate screen-positive findings with clinical diagnosis; consider adjusting the timing of screening to include the antepartum period, early postpartum, and late postpartum periods; and consider the degree of labour pain relief and the specific pharmacologic labour analgesia used when evaluating postpartum psychiatric disorders
National case series of group A streptococcus pleural empyema in children: clinical and microbiological features
No abstract available
Reduction of cardiac imaging tests during the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of Italy. Findings from the IAEA Non-invasive Cardiology Protocol Survey on COVID-19 (INCAPS COVID)
Background: In early 2020, COVID-19 massively hit Italy, earlier and harder than any other European country. This caused a series of strict containment measures, aimed at blocking the spread of the pandemic. Healthcare delivery was also affected when resources were diverted towards care of COVID-19 patients, including intensive care wards. Aim of the study: The aim is assessing the impact of COVID-19 on cardiac imaging in Italy, compare to the Rest of Europe (RoE) and the World (RoW). Methods: A global survey was conducted in May–June 2020 worldwide, through a questionnaire distributed online. The survey covered three periods: March and April 2020, and March 2019. Data from 52 Italian centres, a subset of the 909 participating centres from 108 countries, were analyzed. Results: In Italy, volumes decreased by 67% in March 2020, compared to March 2019, as opposed to a significantly lower decrease (p < 0.001) in RoE and RoW (41% and 40%, respectively). A further decrease from March 2020 to April 2020 summed up to 76% for the North, 77% for the Centre and 86% for the South. When compared to the RoE and RoW, this further decrease from March 2020 to April 2020 in Italy was significantly less (p = 0.005), most likely reflecting the earlier effects of the containment measures in Italy, taken earlier than anywhere else in the West. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic massively hit Italy and caused a disruption of healthcare services, including cardiac imaging studies. This raises concern about the medium- and long-term consequences for the high number of patients who were denied timely diagnoses and the subsequent lifesaving therapies and procedures