Comparing follow-up of patients with vitamin K antagonists in a health center: pre- and post- COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction and objectives: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the follow-up of patients treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) may have been affected. This study aims to compare how these patients were monitored preand post-COVID-19 pandemic and understand the impact of non-face-to-face appointments on their follow-up. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a Portuguese Health Center. The study included patients treated with VKAs and followed at the Health Center for international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring between March 2019 and March 2021. Data collected: sex, age, type of VKA; INR; date of INR assessment, type of appointment (face-to-face or phone/e-mail). Rosendaal’s method was used to calculate pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 time in therapeutic range (TTR). Good TTR control was defined if values ≥ 70%. Results: 44 patients were included. The mean TTR in the pre-COVID-19 period was 64.55% (95% CI: 58.10 - 71.00%). The post-COVID-19 mean was slightly higher (+ 2.26%), 66.81% (95% CI: 59.66 - 73.97%), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.576). The use of non-face-to-face appointments did not contribute to worsening post-pandemic TTR, showing no lower follow-up than during pre-pandemic period in which all contacts were face-to-face [CI (95%) -0.397 - 0.196 for a reference range -0.489 - 0.693]. Conclusions: The TTR value in both periods was similar and lower than the value defined for effective hypocoagulation. The use of non-face-to-face consultation in the post-COVID-19 period does not seem to have influenced the quality of hypocoagulation.Introdução e objetivos: Durante a pandemia COVID-19 o acompanhamento de doentes medicados com antagonistas da vitamina K (AVKs) pode ter sido afetado. Este estudo pretende comparar a forma como estes doentes foram monitorizados antes e depois da pandemia COVID-19 e compreender o impacto da consulta não presencialno seu seguimento. Métodos: Estudo de coorte retrospetivo num Centro de Saúde em Portugal. O estudo incluiu doentes tratados com AVKs e seguidos no Centro de Saúde para monitorização do International Normalized Ratio (INR) entre março de 2019 e março de 2021. Dados recolhidos: sexo, idade, tipo de AVK; INR; data da avaliação do INR, tipo de consulta (presencial ou por telefone/e-mail). Foi utilizado o método de interpolação linear de Rosendaal para calcular o tempo em intervalo terapêutico (TTR) pré- e pós-COVID-19. Foi definido um bom controle se valores de TTR ≥ 70%. Resultados: Foram incluídos 44 doentes. A média de TTR no período pré-COVID-19 foi de 64,55% (95% IC: 58,10 - 71,00%). A média pós-COVID-19 foi ligeiramente superior (+ 2,26%), 66,81% (95%IC: 59,66 - 73,97%), mas a diferença não foi estatisticamente significativa (p = 0,576). A utilização da consulta não presencial não contribuiu para o agravamento do TTR no período pós-pandemia, não mostrando um seguimento inferior ao do período pré-pandemia em que todos os contatos foram presenciais [IC (95%) -0,397 - 0,196 para um intervalo de referência -0,489 - 0,693]. Conclusões: O valor de TTR em ambos os períodos foi semelhante e inferior ao valor definido para hipocoagulação eficaz. A utilização da consulta não presencial no período pós-COVID-19 não parece ter influenciado a qualidade da hipocoagulação

Characterisation of microbial attack on archaeological bone

As part of an EU funded project to investigate the factors influencing bone preservation in the archaeological record, more than 250 bones from 41 archaeological sites in five countries spanning four climatic regions were studied for diagenetic alteration. Sites were selected to cover a range of environmental conditions and archaeological contexts. Microscopic and physical (mercury intrusion porosimetry) analyses of these bones revealed that the majority (68%) had suffered microbial attack. Furthermore, significant differences were found between animal and human bone in both the state of preservation and the type of microbial attack present. These differences in preservation might result from differences in early taphonomy of the bones. © 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licenseBackground: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research