We describe a potentially cost‐saving, efficient alternative to hospitalising patients for diagnostic purposes: quick diagnosis units (QDUs) managed by internal medicine specialists. QDUs facilitate early diagnosis for patients with potentially serious disease, and avoid hospitalisations, hospital‐related morbidity and unnecessary health costs. To function well, QDUs require the patient's first visit to occur as soon as possible after referral; preferential patient access to diagnostic tests; and strict referral criteria (QDU patients must have symptoms suggestive of severe disease, but be well enough to attend several appointments for diagnostic tests). We describe the experience of two Spanish QDUs in which the most frequent diagnosis was malignant neoplasm. We conclude that QDUs are an effective alternative to conventional hospitalisation, reducing delays in diagnosing potentially severe disease, such as cancer. They reduce costs without lowering the quality of diagnostic practice or patient care, and free acute‐care beds for patients in need of treatment.
Introduction Some local protocols suggest using intermediate or therapeutic doses of anticoagulants for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). However, the incidence of bleeding, predictors of major bleeding, or the association between bleeding and mortality remain largely unknown. Methods We performed a cohort study of patients hospitalized for COVID‐19 that received intermediate or therapeutic doses of anticoagulants from March 25 to July 22, 2020, to identify those at increased risk for major bleeding. We used bivariate and multivariable logistic regression to explore the risk factors associated with major bleeding. Results During the study period, 1965 patients were enrolled. Of them, 1347 (69%) received intermediate‐ and 618 (31%) therapeutic‐dose anticoagulation, with a median duration of 12 days in both groups. During the hospital stay, 112 patients (5.7%) developed major bleeding and 132 (6.7%) had non‐major bleeding. The 30‐day all‐cause mortality rate for major bleeding was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 36%‐54%) and for non‐major bleeding 32% (95% CI: 24%‐40%). Multivariable analysis showed increased risk for in‐hospital major bleeding associated with D‐dimer levels >10 times the upper normal range (hazard ratio [HR], 2.23; 95% CI, 1.38–3.59), ferritin levels >500 ng/ml (HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.02–3.95), critical illness (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.14–3.18), and therapeutic‐intensity anticoagulation (HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01–1.97). Conclusions Among patients hospitalized with COVID‐19 receiving intermediate‐ or therapeutic‐intensity anticoagulation, a major bleeding event occurred in 5.7%. Use of therapeutic‐intensity anticoagulation, critical illness, and elevated D‐dimer or ferritin levels at admission were associated with increased risk for major bleeding.
Background : Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 are at increased risk for thrombosis, acute respiratory distress syndrome and death. The optimal dosage of thromboprophylaxis is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tinzaparin in prophylactic, intermediate, and therapeutic doses in non-critical patients admitted for COVID-19 pneumonia. Design, setting, and participants : Randomized controlled, multicenter trial (PROTHROMCOVID) enrolling non-critical, hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Interventions: Patients were randomized to prophylactic (4500 IU), intermediate (100 IU/kg), or therapeutic (175 IU/kg) doses of tinzaparin during hospitalization, followed by 7 days of prophylactic tinzaparin at discharge. Measurements: The primary efficacy outcome was a composite endpoint of symptomatic systemic thrombotic events, need for invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or death within 30 days. The main safety outcome was major bleeding at 30 days. Results : Of the 311 subjects randomized, 300 were included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 56.7 [14.6] years; males, 182 [60.7%]. The composite endpoint at 30 days from randomization occurred in 58 patients (19.3%) of the total population; 19 (17.1 %) in the prophylactic group, 20 (22.1%) in the intermediate group, and 19 (18.5%) in the therapeutic dose group (P= 0.72). No major bleeding event was reported; non-major bleeding was observed in 3.7% of patients, with no intergroup differences. Conclusions: In non-critically ill COVID-19 patients, intermediate or full-dose tinzaparin compared to standard prophylactic doses did not appear to increase benefit regarding the likelihood of thrombotic event, non-invasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen, or death. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT04730856). Funding: This independent research initiative was supported by Leo-Pharma; Tinzaparin was provided by Leo Pharma.
Aims: Little is known about the prognosis of patients with massive pulmonary embolism (PE) and its risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) compared with non-massive PE, which may inform clinical decisions. Our aim was to compare the risk of recurrent VTE, bleeding, and mortality after massive and non-massive PE during anticoagulation and after its discontinuation. Methods and results: We included all participants in the RIETE registry who suffered a symptomatic, objectively confirmed segmental or more central PE. Massive PE was defined by a systolic hypotension at clinical presentation (<90 mm Hg). We compared the risks of recurrent VTE, major bleeding, and mortality using time-toevent multivariable competing risk modeling. There were 3.5% of massive PE among 38 996 patients with PE. During the anticoagulation period, massive PE was associated with a greater risk of major bleeding (subhazard ratio [sHR] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-2.32), but not of recurrent VTE (sHR 1.15, 95% CI 0.75-1.74) than non-massive PE. An increased risk of mortality was only observed in the first month after PE. After discontinuation of anticoagulation, among 11 579 patients, massive PE and non-massive PE had similar risks of mortality, bleeding, and recurrent VTE (sHR 0.85, 95% CI 0.51-1.40), but with different case fatality of recurrent PE (11.1% versus 2.4%, P = .03) and possibly different risk of recurrent fatal PE (sHR 3.65, 95% CI 0.82-16.24). Conclusion: In this large prospective registry, the baseline hemodynamic status of the incident PE did not influence the risk of recurrent VTE, during and after the anticoagulation periods, but was possibly associated with recurrent PE of greater severity.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.