METHODS: Prospective interrupted time series cohort study conducted at three time points in EDs in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia of adult patients presenting to the ED with dyspnea as a main symptom. Data were collected over three 72-hour periods and included demographics, comorbidities, mode of arrival, usual medications, prehospital treatment, initial assessment, ED investigations, treatment in the ED, ED diagnosis, disposition from ED, in-hospital outcome, and final hospital diagnosis. The primary outcomes of interest are the epidemiology, investigation, treatment, and outcome of patients presenting to ED with dyspnea.
RESULTS: A total of 3,044 patients were studied. Patients with dyspnea made up 5.2% (3,105/60,059, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.0% to 5.4%) of ED presentations, 11.4% of ward admissions (1,956/17,184, 95% CI = 10.9% to 11.9%), and 19.9% of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (104/523, 95% CI = 16.7% to 23.5%). The most common diagnoses were lower respiratory tract infection (20.2%), heart failure (14.9%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (13.6%), and asthma (12.7%). Hospital ward admission was required for 64% of patients (95% CI = 62% to 66%) with 3.3% (95% CI = 2.8% to 4.1%) requiring ICU admission. In-hospital mortality was 6% (95% CI = 5.0% to 7.2%).
CONCLUSION: Dyspnea is a common symptom in ED patients contributing substantially to ED, hospital, and ICU workload. It is also associated with significant mortality. There are a wide variety of causes however chronic disease accounts for a large proportion.
METHODS: VKA control was assessed retrospectively by time-in-the-therapeutic range (TTR) (Rosendaal method) and percentage INR-in-range (PINRR) in 991 White, Afro-Caribbean and South-Asian AF patients [overall mean (SD) age 71.6 (9.4) years; 55% male; mean (SD) CHA2DS2-VASc score 3.4 (1.6)] over a median (IQR) follow-up of 5.2 (3.2-7.0) years.
RESULTS: Compared to Whites, mean (SD) TTR and PINRR were significantly lower in South-Asians [TTR 67.9% vs. 60.5%; PINRR 58.8% vs. 51.6%, respectively] and Afro-Caribbeans [TTR 67.9% vs. 61.3%; PINRR 58.8% vs. 53.1%, respectively], despite similar INR monitoring intensity. Logistic regression revealed non-white ethnicity [OR 2.62; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] (1.67-4.10) and OR 3.47 (1.44-8.34)] and anaemia [OR 1.65 (1.00-2.70) and OR 6.27 (1.89-20.94)] as independent predictors of both TTR and PINRR
METHODS: A literature search was performed on six databases using the terms "malnutrition", "hospitalised elderly", "nutritional assessment", "Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA)", "Geriatric Nutrition Risk Index (GNRI)", and "Subjective Global Assessment (SGA)".
RESULTS: According to the previous studies, the prevalence of malnutrition among hospitalized elderly shows an increasing trend not only locally but also across the world. Under-recognition of malnutrition causes the number of malnourished hospitalized elderly to remain high throughout the years. Thus, the development of nutritional screening and assessment tools has been widely studied, and these tools are readily available nowadays. SGA, MNA, and GNRI are the nutritional assessment tools developed specifically for the elderly and are well validated in most countries. However, to date, there is no single tool that can be considered as the universal gold standard for the diagnosis of nutritional status in hospitalized patients.
CONCLUSION: It is important to identify which nutritional assessment tool is suitable to be used in this group to ensure that a structured assessment and documentation of nutritional status can be established. An early and accurate identification of the appropriate treatment of malnutrition can be done as soon as possible, and thus, the malnutrition rate among this group can be minimized in the future.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the association between administration of IL-6 antagonists compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality and other outcomes.
DATA SOURCES: Trials were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases between October 2020 and January 2021. Searches were not restricted by trial status or language. Additional trials were identified through contact with experts.
STUDY SELECTION: Eligible trials randomly assigned patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to a group in whom IL-6 antagonists were administered and to a group in whom neither IL-6 antagonists nor any other immunomodulators except corticosteroids were administered. Among 72 potentially eligible trials, 27 (37.5%) met study selection criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: In this prospective meta-analysis, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) for 28-day all-cause mortality.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. There were 9 secondary outcomes including progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death and risk of secondary infection by 28 days.
RESULTS: A total of 10 930 patients (median age, 61 years [range of medians, 52-68 years]; 3560 [33%] were women) participating in 27 trials were included. By 28 days, there were 1407 deaths among 6449 patients randomized to IL-6 antagonists and 1158 deaths among 4481 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.95]; P = .003 based on a fixed-effects meta-analysis). This corresponds to an absolute mortality risk of 22% for IL-6 antagonists compared with an assumed mortality risk of 25% for usual care or placebo. The corresponding summary ORs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92; P