Search

Objective: ICU severity scores such as the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) determine neurologic dysfunction based on the Glasgow Coma Scale, a tool that may be limited in a critically ill population. It remains unknown whether alternative methods to assess for neurologic dysfunction, such as FOUR and RASS, are superior. This study aimed to determine the predictive performance of a modified SOFA tool in a large Brazilian ICU cohort. Design: Prospective cohort single center study. Setting: Mixed surgical and medical ICU in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil between August 2015 and December 2018. Patients: All acutely ill ICU admissions, other than postoperative patients or those with insufficient data, were eligible for study inclusion. Measurements and main results: 2147 patients were admitted to the ICU, of which 999 meeting inclusion criteria were included in the final analysis with a median age of 72 years (IQR 58–83) and a female predominance 545 (54%). The SOFA score using GCS, RASS and FOUR for the neurologic component performed marginally in the ability to predict general ICU mortality (SOFAGCS AUC 0.74 vs SOFARASS AUC 0.71 and SOFAFOUR AUC 0.67), with SOFAFOUR performing significantly lower compared to either SOFARASS and SOFAGCS (p<0.04, p<0.004 respectively). All three scores demonstrated decreased discriminate function in the mechanically ventilated population (SOFAGCS AUC 0.70 vs SOFARASS AUC 0.70 and SOFAFOUR AUC 0.55), though SOFAFOUR remained significantly worse when compared to SOFAGCS or SOFARASS (p = 0.034, p = 0.014, respectively).. Furthermore, performance was poor in a subset of patients with sepsis (n = 145) at time of admission (SOFAGCS AUC 0.66 vs SOFARASS AUC 0.55 and SOFAFOUR AUC 0.56). Conclusion: Modification of the neurologic component in the SOFA score does not appear to improve mortality prediction in the ICU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Ministry of Health in Brazil included ethambutol in the intensive phase of sensible tuberculosis (TB) treatment in March 2010, due to the increasing drug resistance, and implemented the fixed dose combination in the TB treatment guidelines. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed to determine the impact of change from three to four drugs schemes on the TB cure and frequency of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in TB patients. To answer this question, we used data from 730 randomly selected patients who received anti-TB treatment between January 2007 and December 2014 in a reference center from Salvador, Brazil. Findings: TB patients who received the RHEZ regimen (n = 365) developed ADRs more frequently than those treated with the RHZ (n = 365) (86 [23.6%] vs. 55 [15.1%]; p = 0.01). This difference in ADR incidence was even higher in patients above 30 years-old (64 [74.4%] vs. 36 [65.5%]; p = 0.01). The overall number of ADR episodes was greater in patients from the RHEZ group than in the group that received RHZ (170 [61.4%] vs. 107 [38.6%]; p = 0.03). Multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusted for age, alcohol use and diabetes demonstrated that patients receiving the RHEZ regimen had increased odds of developing ADRs than those undertaking the RHZ scheme (odds ratio [OR]: 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10–2.35; p = 0.015). The overall cure rate was similar between the distinct treatment groups. Conclusion: The patients treated with the four-drug regimen exhibited increased risk of ADRs compared to those who received the three-drug regimen, and especially in patients older than 30 years of age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]