Objective To compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with community-acquired and hospital-acquired sepsis. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study that included all patients with a diagnosis of sepsis detected between January 2010 and December 2015 at a private hospital in southern Brazil. Outcomes (mortality, intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay) were measured by analyzing electronic records. Results There were 543 hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of sepsis, with a frequency of 90.5 (85 to 105) cases/year. Of these, 319 (58%) cases were classified as hospital-acquired sepsis. This group exhibited more severe disease and had a larger number of organ dysfunctions, with higher hospital [8 (8 - 10) versus 23 (20 - 27) days; p < 0.001] and intensive care unit [5 (4 - 7) versus 8.5 (7 - 10); p < 0.001] lengths of stay and higher in-hospital mortality (30.7% versus 15.6%; p < 0.001) than those with community-acquired sepsis. After adjusting for age, APACHE II scores, and hemodynamic and respiratory dysfunction, hospital-acquired sepsis remained associated with increased mortality (OR 1.96; 95%CI 1.15 - 3.32, p = 0.013). Conclusion The present results contribute to the definition of the epidemiological profile of sepsis in the sample studied, in which hospital-acquired sepsis was more severe and was associated with higher mortality.

Background: The myocardial bridge constitutes one of the main differential diagnoses of coronary artery disease. However, it remains an underdiagnosed condition and its physiopathological mechanisms and therapeutics are yet to be elucidated.

ObjectiveTo describe the improvements of an early warning system for the identification of septic patients on the time to diagnosis, antibiotic delivery, and mortality.MethodsThis was an observational cohort study that describes the successive improvements made over a period of 10 years using an early warning system to detect sepsis, including systematic active manual surveillance, electronic alerts via a telephonist, and alerts sent directly to the mobile devices of nurses. For all periods, after an alert was triggered, early treatment was instituted according to the institutional sepsis guidelines.ResultsIn total, 637 patients with sepsis were detected over the study period. The median triage-to-diagnosis time was reduced from 19:20 (9:10 - 38:15) hours to 12:40 (2:50 - 23:45) hours when the manual surveillance method was used (p = 0.14), to 2:10 (1:25 - 2:20) hours when the alert was sent automatically to the hospital telephone service (p = 0.014), and to 1:00 (0:30 - 1:10) hour when the alert was sent directly to the nurse's mobile phone (p = 0.016). The diagnosis-to-antibiotic time was reduced to 1:00 (0:55 - 1:30) hours when the alert was sent to the telephonist and to 0:45 (0:30 - 1:00) minutes when the alert was sent directly to the nurse's mobile phone (p = 0.02), with the maintenance of similar values over the following years. There was no difference in the time of treatment between survivors and non-survivors.ConclusionElectronic systems help reduce the triage-to-diagnosis time and diagnosis-to-antibiotic time in patients with sepsis.

Background It is known that patients with COVID-19 are at high risk of developing delirium. The aim of the study was to compare the incidence of delirium between critically ill patients with and without a diagnosis of COVID-19. Methods This is a retrospective study conducted in a southern Brazilian hospital from March 2020 to January 2021. Patients were divided into two groups: the COVID-19 group consisted of patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or serological tests who were admitted to specific ICUs. The non-COVID-19 group consisted of patients with other surgical and medical diagnoses who were admitted to non-COVID ICUs. All patients were evaluated daily using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC). The two cohorts were compared in terms of the diagnosis of delirium. Results Of the 649 patients who remained more than 48 h in the ICU, 523 were eligible for the study (COVID-19 group: 292, non-COVID-19 group: 231). There were 119 (22.7%) patients who had at least one episode of delirium, including 96 (32.9%) in the COVID-19 group and 23 (10.0%) in the non-COVID-19 group (odds ratio [OR] 4.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.69 to 7.26; p < 0.001). Among patients mechanically ventilated for two days or more, the incidence of delirium did not differ between groups (COVID-19: 89/211, 42.1% vs non-COVID-19: 19/47, 40.4%; p  =  0.82). Logistic regression showed that the duration of mechanical ventilation was the only independent factor associated with delirium (p  =  0.001). Conclusion COVID-19 can be associated with a higher incidence of delirium among critically ill patients, but there was no difference in this incidence between groups when mechanical ventilation lasted two days or more.