Conectar
This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of finerenone, a selective, non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes by age and/or sex.
FIDELITY post hoc analysis; median follow-up of 3 years.
FIDELITY: a prespecified analysis of the FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD trials.
Adults with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease receiving optimised renin–angiotensin system inhibitors (N=13 026).
Randomised 1:1; finerenone or placebo.
Cardiovascular (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF)) and kidney (kidney failure, sustained ≥57% estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline or renal death) composite outcomes.
Mean age was 64.8 years; 45.2%, 40.1% and 14.7% were aged interaction=0.42) and sex categories (HR 0.86 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.96) (male), HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.35 to 2.27) (premenopausal female), HR 0.87 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.05) (postmenopausal female); Pinteraction=0.99). Effects on HHF reduction were not modified by age (Pinteraction=0.70) but appeared more pronounced in males (Pinteraction=0.02). Kidney events were reduced with finerenone versus placebo in age groups interaction=0.51). In sex subgroups, finerenone consistently reduced kidney events (Pinteraction=0.85). Finerenone reduced albuminuria and eGFR decline regardless of age and sex. Hyperkalaemia increased with finerenone, but discontinuation rates were
Finerenone improved cardiovascular and kidney composite outcomes with no significant heterogeneity between age and sex subgroups; however, the effect on HHF appeared more pronounced in males. Finerenone demonstrated a similar safety profile across age and sex subgroups.
by Daiane Rubinato Fernandes, Bruna Nogueira dos Santos, Carolina Scoqui Guimarães, Elaine Barros Ferreira, Amanda Salles Margatho, Paula Elaine Diniz dos Reis, Didier Pittet, Renata Cristina de Campos Pereira Silveira
AimTo gather available scientific evidence on technologies used to teach hand hygiene to professional populations and lays involved in health care in the hospital setting. This systematic review was designed as proposed by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis, included studies reporting primary, original, quantitative research findings with no date limit and written in English, Spanish or Portuguese. The search was performed in the following electronic databases: Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde, US National Library of Medicine, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar and ProQuest. The eligibility criteria were applied independently by two reviewers to select the studies, first by reading the titles and abstracts on the Rayyan platform and then by full text reading of the eligible studies. After a descriptive analysis, the studies were subjected to critical evaluation of their methodological quality using JBI tools.
ResultsSeven studies were included, addressing various methods for teaching hand hygiene using different technological resources, such as audiovisual electronic devices, videos, virtual reality, and gamification using tablets and smartphones, in different populations.
ConclusionUsing technologies to teach hand hygiene considerably helps patients, visitors, and relatives in learning the procedures and efficiently improves hand hygiene compliance rates among healthcare professionals, creating evidence-based repetitive learning opportunities for patients and caregivers.
This study aimed to develop a simulation model to support orthopaedic elective capacity planning.
An open-source, generalisable discrete-event simulation was developed, including a web-based application. The model used anonymised patient records between 2016 and 2019 of elective orthopaedic procedures from a National Health Service (NHS) Trust in England. In this paper, it is used to investigate scenarios including resourcing (beds and theatres) and productivity (lengths of stay, delayed discharges and theatre activity) to support planning for meeting new NHS targets aimed at reducing elective orthopaedic surgical backlogs in a proposed ring-fenced orthopaedic surgical facility. The simulation is interactive and intended for use by health service planners and clinicians.
A higher number of beds (65–70) than the proposed number (40 beds) will be required if lengths of stay and delayed discharge rates remain unchanged. Reducing lengths of stay in line with national benchmarks reduces bed utilisation to an estimated 60%, allowing for additional theatre activity such as weekend working. Further, reducing the proportion of patients with a delayed discharge by 75% reduces bed utilisation to below 40%, even with weekend working. A range of other scenarios can also be investigated directly by NHS planners using the interactive web app.
The simulation model is intended to support capacity planning of orthopaedic elective services by identifying a balance of capacity across theatres and beds and predicting the impact of productivity measures on capacity requirements. It is applicable beyond the study site and can be adapted for other specialties.
Pressure injury prevention is complex, and rates continue to rise. Checklists reduce human error, improve adherence and standardization with complex processes, focus attention on evidence-based practices derived from clinical practice guidelines and are arranged in a systematic manner to manage the entirety of a patient's risk for preventable outcomes. The original Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol was created to provide a checklist of pressure injury prevention measures but needed revision and validation.
This article describes the revision and content validity testing of the Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol Checklist 2.0 that took place in 2022.
Using the International 2019 Clinical Practice Guideline as a foundation, items were identified/revised, and expert review of the items was obtained. The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol 2.0 underwent three rounds of revision by experts from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel. A panel of eight national experts completed the content validity survey. Individual item content validity index and total scale content validity index were used to summarize the content validity survey scores.
The individual item content validity index scores ranged from 0.5 to 1.0. One item (using a mirror to look at heels) was rated as 0.5, three items were 0.75, 20 items were 0.875 and 23 items were 1.0. The item scoring 0.5 was deleted. Those items scoring 0.75 were revised using the content experts' recommendations. The total scale content validity index was 0.93.
The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol 2.0 provides a standardized checklist of evidence-based items that operationalize a rigorous clinical practice guideline for the prevention of pressure injuries. Early intervention using a standardized approach and evidence-based checklist that can be integrated into the workflow of the direct-care nurse and provider provides the best opportunity for successful and sustainable pressure injury prevention.
Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) are a global high-stakes patient safety issue. Key stakeholder perspectives regarding their role and experiences with pressure injuries is critical as part of the solution to minimizing HAPI occurrence and attain sustainability.
A qualitative, descriptive approach provided multiple perspectives of key stakeholders to support the complexity of HAPI care. The qualitative data are a part of a mixed method convergent research study examining pressure injury prevention and management practices.
Nursing system theory, mixed method convergent design, and participatory action research methodologies were chosen to address both the gap analysis development and results, achieve collaborative comprehensiveness, and enable key stakeholder involvement throughout this HAPI prevention and management initiative. Participants were recruited and enrolled from a large Level I trauma hospital and the key stakeholders. Demographic information were collected prior to the individual interview. Focused interviews were conducted virtually using zoom technology. Qualitative data were analyzed using NVivo software and thematic analysis was confirmed across the co-investigators for congruence and applicability to the research questions.
Qualitative interviews with 26 key stakeholders provided data to support and integrate a link with gap analysis results on the complex health issue of HAPIs. Specific barrier and recommendation themes identified interventions that could be prioritized. The 52 barrier and 52 recommendation themes/sub-theme(s) respectively were organized by Donabedian (structure, process, and outcome) with structure elements the majority. The top three structure barrier themes involved equipment and standards for use, staff prevention education, and specialized health professionals. The top three structure recommendation themes involved specialized health professionals, equipment and standards for use, and an educational plan for those at risk or with HAPIs.
The article provides findings from the qualitative portion of a mixed method study related to HAPIs. The qualitative findings associated with the gap analysis quantitative results, achieved the goal of the participatory action research key stakeholders' input into HAPI care and can be replicated internationally.
The benefit of key stakeholder's involvement in solving a clinical problem is sustainability. A quantitative approach and integrating qualitative stakeholders' perspectives provide an in-depth solution that will advance nursing capacity toward health care delivery and HAPI nursing science and policy development on a global level.
To assess if the antecedent statin use was associated with all-cause death among COVID-19 patients enrolled in Medicaid.
Cohort study.
Mississippi Medicaid population.
This study included 10 792 Mississippi Medicaid-enrolled patients between 18 and 64 years of age with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis from March 2020 to June 2021.
Antecedent statin use, which was determined by a record of statin prescription in the 90-day period prior to the COVID diagnosis.
The outcomes of interest included mortality from all cause within 30 days, 60 days and 90 days after index.
A total of 10 792 patients with COVID-19 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, with 13.1% of them being antecedent statin users. Statin users were matched 1:1 with non-users based on age, sex, race, comorbidities and medication use by propensity score matching. In total, the matched cohort consisted of 1107 beneficiaries in each group. Multivariable logistic regression showed that statin users were less likely to die within 30 days (adjusted OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.32 to 0.83), 60 days (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.85) and 90 days (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.82) after diagnosis of COVID-19. Those with low-intensity/moderate-intensity statin use had significantly lower mortality risk in the 60-day and the 90-day follow-up period, while the high intensity of statin use was only found to be significantly associated with a lower odd of mortality within 30 days post index.
After COVID infection, Medicaid beneficiaries who had taken statins antecedently could be at lower risk for death. For patients with chronic conditions, continuity of care is crucial when interruptions occur in their medical care. Further research is required to further investigate the potential mechanisms and optimal use of statins in COVID-19 treatment.
FreshRSS 