COVID-19-related in-hospital mortality has been reported at 30.7–47.3% in Brazil, however studies assessing exclusively private hospitals are lacking. This is important because of significant differences existing between the Brazilian private and public healthcare systems. We aimed to determine the COVID-19-related in-hospital mortality and associated risk factors in a Brazilian private network from March/2020 to March/2021. Data were extracted from institutional database and analyzed using Cox regression model. Length of hospitalization and death-related factors were modeled based on available independent variables. In total, 38,937 COVID-19 patients were hospitalized of whom 3058 (7.8%) died. Admission to the intensive care unit occurred in 62.5% of cases, and 11.5% and 3.8% required mechanical ventilation (MV) and renal replacement therapy (RRT), respectively. In the adjusted model, age ≥ 61 years-old, comorbidities, and the need for MV and/or RRT were significantly associated with increased mortality (p < 0.05). Obesity and hypertension were associated with the need for MV and RRT (p < 0.05).
Introduction Adverse events are common and are responsible for a significant burden in the healthcare setting. Such issues can vary according to the local culture and relevant policies. The current literature on the subject primarily addresses Anglo-Saxon cultures; this study focused on understanding the perception of disclosure in a middle-income country in Latin America. Methods In this descriptive study conducted from June–August, 2021, an online self-administered survey about disclosure practice used a convenience sample of 995 Brazilian healthcare professionals. Results Based on two different outcomes presented following a hypothetical adverse event (outcome 1: death; outcome 2: no permanent damage), 77.9% of participants fully agree that disclosure should be performed in both scenarios. Although 67.1% claimed that disclosure changes the perception of the institution by those involved, only 8.3% fully agree that there would be a reduction in trust regarding the institution. Despite only 11.5% of participants fully agreeing that disclosure increases the chance of legal action against professionals and institutions, 92.7% fully or partially agree that judicialization was possible in scenario 1, and 72.4% agree it was possible in scenario 2. Of the participants, 64.2% claimed they already faced a “disclosure” situation, and 44.3% fully believe that the person directly involved in the adverse event should participate in the disclosure. Conclusion In this sample of professionals from a middle-income country in Latin America, the practice of disclosure was considered ethical, and the majority of respondents affirmed that it should always be performed. Nonetheless, this call for transparency collides with participants' perception of a higher risk of legal action when disclosure is performed after a negative outcome situation.
BackgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of perioperative morbimortality. Despite significant efforts to advance evidence-based practice, prevention rates remain inadequate in many centres.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of different strategies aimed at improving adherence to adequate VTE prophylaxis in surgical patients at high risk of VTE.MethodBefore and after intervention study conducted at a tertiary hospital. Adherence to adequate VTE prophylaxis was compared according to three strategies consecutively implemented from January 2019 to December 2020. A dedicated hospitalist physician alone (strategy A) or in conjunction with a nurse (strategy B) overlooked the postoperative period to ensure adherence and correct inadequacies. Finally, a multidisciplinary team approach (strategy C) focused on promoting adequate VTE prophylaxis across multiple stages of care—from the operating room (ie, preoperative team-based checklist) to collaboration with clinical pharmacists in the postoperative period—was implemented.ResultsWe analysed 2074 surgical patients: 783 from January to June 2019 (strategy A), 669 from July 2019 to May 2020 (strategy B), and 622 from June to December 2020 (strategy C). VTE prophylaxis adherence rates for strategies (A), (B) and (C) were (median (25th–75th percentile)) 43.29% (31.82–51.69), 50% (42.57–55.80) and 92.31% (91.38–93.51), respectively (p<0.001; C>A=B). There was a significant reduction in non-compliance on all analysed criteria (risk stratification (A (25.5%), B (22%), C (6%)), medical documentation (A (68%), B (55.2%) C (9%)) and medical prescription (A (51.85%), B (48%), C (6.10%)) after implementation of strategy C (p<0.05). Additionally, a significant increase in compliance with adequate dosage, dosing interval and scheduling of the prophylactic regimen was observed.ConclusionPerioperative VTE prophylaxis strategies that relied exclusively on physicians and/or nurses were associated with suboptimal execution and prevention. A multidisciplinary team-based approach that covers multiple stages of patient care significantly increased adherence to adequate VTE prophylaxis in surgical patients at high risk of developing perioperative VTE.
No abstract
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.