Background: Insomnia is common in hospitalized patients. However, no study has examined new onset of insomnia in patients without a prior history of insomnia. Objectives: Incidence of new onset of insomnia in inpatients, associated factors and resolution rate after 2 weeks. Method: This is a prospective observational study conducted at a community hospital. We used the Insomnia Severity Index questionnaire to screen for insomnia in all patients located in the general medical floors from day 3 to day 5 of their hospital stay. We excluded patients with a prior insomnia history. Results: Out of the 205 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 75 patients (36%) reported insomnia. Severe insomnia was present in 3% of patients. Difficulty in maintaining sleep is the most common symptom. Frequent staff disruptions due to blood draws and vital signs checks were reported by 68% as the cause of insomnia, followed by illness associated causes (64%) and sleep disruption due to noise and or brightness (23%). Patients with insomnia had more awakenings due to noise, brightness, and staff interruptions than those without insomnia (1.35 times vs. 0.9 times, p = 0.027). Patients with respiratory symptoms, cardiac monitoring, oxygen use, private rooms, and no sedative use did not have a higher insomnia risk. Patients with insomnia had significant lower satisfaction scores than patients without insomnia (4.53 vs. 4.05, p = 0.001) but did not have a different length of stay (6.18 vs. 6.19, p = 0.97). In 31% of patients with insomnia who were able to be contacted two weeks after discharge, 75% of them had insomnia resolution. Conclusion: New onset of insomnia occurred in 36% of hospitalized patients. Most common causes are staff disruption and disease symptoms. It was usually short-term and could decrease patients’ satisfaction score.
Background: Neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) has been proposed by medical guidelines for early severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) because of its survival benefits. However, new studies have provided evidence contradicting these results. Method: A search was performed of the Pubmed, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Virtual Health Library databases for randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating 28-day mortality in ARDS patients treated with NMBA within 48 h. An English language restriction was applied. Relevant data were extracted and pooled into risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effect model. Sensitivity and metaregression analysis were performed. Results: From 2675 studies, we included five RCTs in the analysis, for a total of 1461 patients with a mean PaO 2 / FIO 2 of 104 ± 35 mmHg. The cisatracurium group had the same risk of death at 28 days (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.78-1.03; I 2 = 50%, p = 0.12) and 90 days (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.62-1.06; I 2 = 56%, p = 0.06) as the control group (no cisatracurium). The secondary outcomes of mechanical ventilation duration and ventilator-free days were not different between the two groups. Cisatracurium had a significantly lower risk of barotrauma than the control group with no difference in intensive care unit (ICU)-induced weakness. The PaO 2 /FIO 2 ratio was higher in the cisatracurium group but not until 48 h. Meta-regression analysis of the baseline PaO 2 /FIO 2 ratio, positive endexpiratory pressure (PEEP) revealed no heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis excluding the trial using high PEEP and light sedation strategy yielded an improvement in all mortality outcomes. Conclusion: NMBA improves oxygenation only after 48 h in moderate, severe ARDS patients and has a lower barotrauma risk without affecting ICU weakness. However, NMBA does not reduce ventilator-free days, duration of mechanical ventilation or, most importantly, the mortality risk regardless of the severity of ARDS.
Background: Sickle cell disease (SCD) affects 100,000 patients in the USA. However, no recent data was available for annual national trends in hospitalization rates, in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS) and costs of SCD admissions due to its complications. Methods:This study was conducted to study the trends of hospitalization rates, in-hospital mortality, LOS and hospital charges due to SCD-related complications in African American (AA) patients from 2004 to 2012 in the USA. Complications included acute chest syndrome, splenic sequestration, bacterial pneumonia, sepsis, stroke, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism, retinal circulation complications, priapism, disorders related to biliary stones, or those required blood transfusions. We obtained the study population from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.
Introduction The aim of this study is to investigate and summarize the treatment efficacy and adverse effects (AEs) of sorafenib in the treatment of metastatic medullary thyroid carcinomas (MTCs). Methods We included studies reporting the treatment efficacy or drug toxicity of sorafenib as a single therapeutic agent in MTCs. Pooled incidence and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for complete response, partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and sorafenib‐related AEs were calculated using random‐effect model. Results Eight trials with 101 metastatic MTCs were included for meta‐analyses. The overall PR and SD were 21% (95% CI = 9‐33) and 58% (95% CI = 41‐75), respectively. Hand‐foot syndrome, diarrhea, alopecia, mucositis, skin rash, fatigue, and hypertension were the most commonly observed AEs. Conclusion Our results show that sorafenib treatment has a modest effect and might be a candidate treatment in patients with metastatic MTCs who have failed other therapeutic regimens.
Background: In the recent years, the overall trends in hospital admission and mortality of interstitial lung disease (ILD) are unknown. In addition, there was some evidence that interstitial lung disease death rate highest in the winter but this finding was only available in one study. This study will investigate the trend and seasonal variations in hospital admission and mortality rates of ILD from 2006 to 2016. Method: From the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, we collected all cases with the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 or ICD-10 codes of ILD excluding identifiable external causes (drug, organic or inorganic dusts) from 2006 to 2016. Hospitalization rates of each year were calculated based on U.S Census population data. Monthly hospitalization and in-hospital mortality rates were analyzed by seasonal and trend decomposition. Subgroups of idiopathic interstitial fibrosis (IPF), acute respiratory failure (ARF), pneumonia were analyzed. Results: From 2006 to 2016, all-cause hospital admission rate of patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) and IPFonly subgroup declined but their overall mortality remained unchanged (except IPF subgroup and acute respiratory failure subgroup). Acute respiratory failure related admission account for 23% of all causes and pneumonia 17.6%. Mortality of ILD in general and subgroup of ILD with ARF was highest in winter, up to 8.13% ± 0.60 and 26.3% ± 10.2% respectively. The seasonal variations of hospital admission and mortality of ILD in general was not changed when infectious pneumonia cases were ruled out. All cause admission rates were highest in months from January to April. Subgroup analysis also showed seasonal variations with highest hospitalization rates for all subgroups (IPF, ARF, pneumonia) in the months from December to April (winter to early Spring). Conclusion: From 2006 to 2016, admission rates of ILD of all causes and IPF subgroup declined but in-hospital mortality of ILD of all causes remained unchanged. Mortality of IPF subgroup and acute respiratory failure subgroup trended down. All-cause hospital admissions and mortality of ILD have a strong seasonal variation. Hospitalization rates for all subgroups (IPF, ARF, pneumonia) were highest in the months from December to April.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.