Search

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the risk factors for healthcare-related infections during the COVID-19 pandemic in intensive care units, to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection, Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection, and ventilator-associated pneumonia, and to describe healthcare-associated infections in the waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This nested case-control study was conducted in a 137-bed adult medical/surgical intensive care unit at a private hospital in São Paulo, Brazil, between January 11, 2019, and May 21, 2022. Case patients were identified using the Nosocomial Infection Control Committee database and control patients were identified using the intensive care unit's EPIMED system. For the analysis of risk factors, the chi-square test, multiple logistic regression model, and Kaplan-Meier method were used to identify independent risk factors, considering p

Introdução Os pacientes de alto-custo são definidos como aqueles poucos responsáveis pela maior parte dos custos hospitalares. Entender seus determinantes é um desafio devido à complexidade das características e condições dos pacientes, mostrando- -se de suma importância para a busca por abordagens mais eficientes de alocação econômica de custos e melhor qualidade de vida. Este trabalho visa entender os determinantes e predizer os pacientes de alto-custo. Esta pesquisa foi financiada pelo Programa de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Institucional do Sistema Único de Saúde (PROADI-SUS), do Ministério da Saúde do Brasil, como parte do projeto “IMPACTO MR - Custos” (DOU NUP 25000.049837/2018-15, novembro de 2018). Métodos Foram analisados 12.296 pacientes admitidos em 5 UTIs com custos obtidos de forma contínua e 5 de forma quadrimestral entre 2019-2022. A Plataforma Impacto MR (2019), é coordenada por 5 hospitais de excelência (entre eles o Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein), em parceria com o Ministério da Saúde e Anvisa, com objetivo de geração de dados e estudos clínicos sobre a multirresistência no país. Variáveis admissionais como a idade (< ou >=60 anos), sexo, natureza do hospital (universitário), índice de Charlson (< ou >=3), fragilidade do paciente (escore MFI), pontuação de gravidade (escore SAPS < ou >=55), razões de admissão baseadas na CID-10, tipo clínico ou cirúrgico, utilização de recursos (SRU), tempo prévio de internação (< ou >=7dias) e região foram incluídas na análise. Os custos foram corrigidos pelo IPCA. Foi criada uma variável resposta que assume 1 se o paciente é alto-custo para os percentis P80, P90, P95 e P99. Para cada, foram feitas comparações de grupo (acima ou abaixo) com o teste do qui-quadrado. Ofensores do alto-custo foram determinados pelo odds ratio do modelo de regressão logística, que também foi utilizado para a predição desses pacientes, com dados divididos em treino (coleta mensal) e teste (coleta quadrimestral), sendo avaliados em métricas como VPP e AUC. Resultados “De N = 12.296, 20% dos pacientes foram responsáveis por 60,31% do custo total, 10% por 41,01%, 5% por 26,14% e 1% por 7,42%; os custos foram de R$12.962 no P80, R$21.430 no P90, R$31.332 no P95 e R$55,057 no P99. Foram observadas diferenças nos grupos baixo-alto custo no índice SAPS, índice Charlson, razões de admissão, utilização de recursos, tempo de internação, tipo de admissão e idade. O modelo de regressão logística identificou que homens, alto índice SAPS e tempo de internação prévio, hospitais universitários e sua região estão associados com o alto-custo (p

Abstract Background In this study we proposed a new strategy to measure cost-effectiveness of second opinion program on spine surgery, using as measure of effectiveness the minimal important change (MIC) in the quality of life reported by patients, including the satisfaction questionnaire regarding the treatment and direct medical costs. Methods Retrospective analysis of patients with prior indication for spine surgery included in a second opinion program during May 2011 to May 2019. Treatment costs and outcomes were compared considering each patients’ recommended treatment before and after the second opinion. Costs were measured under the perspective of the hospital, including hospital stay, surgical room, physician and staff fees and other costs related to hospitalization when surgery was performed and physiotherapy or injection costs when a conservative treatment was recommended. Reoperation costs were also included. For comparison analysis, we used data based on our clinical practice, using data from patients who underwent the same type of surgical procedure as recommended by the first referral. The measure of effectiveness was the percentage of patients who achieved the MIC in quality of life measured by the EQ-5D-3 L 2 years after starting treatment. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. Results Based upon the assessment of 1,088 patients that completed the entire second opinion process, conservative management was recommended for 662 (60.8%) patients; 49 (4.5%) were recommended to injection and 377 (34.7%) to surgery. Complex spine surgery, as arthrodesis, was recommended by second opinion in only 3.7% of cases. The program resulted in financial savings of -$6,705 per patient associated with appropriate treatment indication, with an incremental effectiveness of 0.077 patients achieving MIC when compared to the first referral, resulting in an ICER of $-87,066 per additional patient achieving the MIC, ranging between $-273,016 and $-41,832. Conclusion After 2 years of treatment, the second opinion program demonstrated the potential for cost-offsets associated with improved quality of life.

ABSTRACT Objective: To develop and validate predictive models to estimate the number of COVID-19 patients hospitalized in the intensive care units and general wards of a private not-for-profit hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Methods: Two main models were developed. The first model calculated hospital occupation as the difference between predicted COVID-19 patient admissions, transfers between departments, and discharges, estimating admissions based on their weekly moving averages, segmented by general wards and intensive care units. Patient discharge predictions were based on a length of stay predictive model, assessing the clinical characteristics of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, including age group and usage of mechanical ventilation devices. The second model estimated hospital occupation based on the correlation with the number of telemedicine visits by patients diagnosed with COVID-19, utilizing correlational analysis to define the lag that maximized the correlation between the studied series. Both models were monitored for 365 days, from May 20th, 2021, to May 20th, 2022. Results: The first model predicted the number of hospitalized patients by department within an interval of up to 14 days. The second model estimated the total number of hospitalized patients for the following 8 days, considering calls attended by Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein’s telemedicine department. Considering the average daily predicted values for the intensive care unit and general ward across a forecast horizon of 8 days, as limited by the second model, the first and second models obtained R² values of 0.900 and 0.996, respectively and mean absolute errors of 8.885 and 2.524 beds, respectively. The performances of both models were monitored using the mean error, mean absolute error, and root mean squared error as a function of the forecast horizon in days. Conclusion: The model based on telemedicine use was the most accurate in the current analysis and was used to estimate COVID-19 hospital occupancy 8 days in advance, validating predictions of this nature in similar clinical contexts. The results encourage the expansion of this method to other pathologies, aiming to guarantee the standards of hospital care and conscious consumption of resources.

BackgroundRobust data comparing long COVID in hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients in middle-income countries are limited.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted in Brazil, including hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients. Long COVID was diagnosed at 90-day follow-up using WHO criteria. Demographic and clinical information, including the depression screening scale (PHQ-2) at day 30, was compared between the groups. If the PHQ-2 score is 3 or greater, major depressive disorder is likely. Logistic regression analysis identified predictors and protective factors for long COVID.ResultsA total of 291 hospitalized and 1,118 non-hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were included. The prevalence of long COVID was 47.1% and 49.5%, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression showed female sex (odds ratio [OR] = 4.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.51–8.37), hypertension (OR = 2.90, 95% CI 1.52–5.69), PHQ-2 > 3 (OR = 6.50, 95% CI 1.68–33.4) and corticosteroid use during hospital stay (OR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.20–5.04) as predictors of long COVID in hospitalized patients, while female sex (OR = 2.52, 95% CI 1.95–3.27) and PHQ-2 > 3 (OR = 3.88, 95% CI 2.52–6.16) were predictors in non-hospitalized patients.ConclusionLong COVID was prevalent in both groups. Positive depression screening at day 30 post-infection can predict long COVID. Early screening of depression helps health staff to identify patients at a higher risk of long COVID, allowing an early diagnosis of the condition.

Approximately 45% of patients receive medical services with minimal or no benefit (low-value care). In addition to the increasing costs to the health system, performing invasive procedures without an indication poses a potentially preventable risk to patient safety. This study aimed to determine whether a managed quality improvement programme could prevent cholecystectomy and surgery for endometriosis treatment with minimal or no benefit to patients.This before-and-after study was conducted at a private hospital in São Paulo, Brazil, which has a main medical remuneration model of fee for service. All patients who underwent cholecystectomy or surgery for endometriosis between 1 August 2020 and 31 May 2021 were evaluated.The intervention consisted of allowing the performance of procedures that met previously defined criteria or for which the indications were validated by a board of experts.A total of 430 patients were included in this analysis. The programme prevented the unnecessary performance of 13% of cholecystectomies (p=0.0001) and 22.2% (p=0.0006) of surgeries for the treatment of endometriosis. This resulted in an estimated annual cost reduction to the health system of US$466 094.93.In a hospital with a private practice and fee-for-service medical remuneration, the definition of clear criteria for indicating surgery and the analysis of cases that did not meet these criteria by a board of reputable experts at the institution resulted in a statistically significant reduction in low-value cholecystectomies and endometriosis surgeries.

Background Unplanned extubations are recurrent adverse events in mechanically ventilated children and have been the focus of quality and safety improvement in paediatric intensive care units (ICUs).Local problem To reduce the rate of unplanned extubation in the paediatric ICU by 66% (from 2.02 to 0.7).Methods This is a quality improvement project that was conducted in a paediatric ICU of a private hospital at the quaternary level. All hospitalised patients who used invasive mechanical ventilation between October 2018 and August 2019 were included.Interventions The project was based on the Improvement Model methodology of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement to implement change strategies. The main ideas of change were innovation in the endotracheal tube fixation model, evaluation of the endotracheal tube positioning, good practices of physical restraint, sedation monitoring, family education and engagement and checklist for prevention of unplanned extubation, with Plan–Do–Study–Act, the tool chosen to test and implement ideas for change.Results The actions reduced the unplanned extubation rate to zero in our institution and sustained this result for a period of 2 years, totalling 743 days without any event. An estimate was made comparing cases with unplanned extubation and controls without the occurrence of this adverse event, which resulted in savings of R$955 096.65 (US$179 540.41) during the 2 years after the implementation of the improvement actions.Conclusion The improvement project conducted in the 11-month period reduced the unplanned extubation rate to zero in our institution and sustained this result for a period of 743 days. Adherence to the new fixation model and the creation of a new restrictor model, which enabled the implementation of good practices of physical restraint were the ideas of change that had the greatest impact in achieving this result.

Abstract Objective: To compare the long-term vaccine effectiveness between those receiving viral vector [Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1)] or inactivated viral (CoronaVac) primary series (2 doses) and those who received an mRNA booster (Pfizer/BioNTech) (the third dose) among healthcare workers (HCWs). Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among HCWs (aged ≥18 years) in Brazil from January 2021 to July 2022. To assess the variation in the effectiveness of booster dose over time, we estimated the effectiveness rate by taking the log risk ratio as a function of time. Results: Of 14,532 HCWs, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was confirmed in 56.3% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac vaccine versus 23.2% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac vaccine with mRNA booster (P < .001), and 37.1% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine versus 22.7% among HCWs receiving 2 doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine with mRNA booster (P < .001). The highest vaccine effectiveness with mRNA booster was observed 30 days after vaccination: 91% for the CoronaVac vaccine group and 97% for the ChAdOx1 vaccine group. Vacine effectiveness declined to 55% and 67%, respectively, at 180 days. Of 430 samples screened for mutations, 49.5% were SARS-CoV-2 delta variants and 34.2% were SARS-CoV-2 omicron variants. Conclusions: Heterologous COVID-19 vaccines were effective for up to 180 days in preventing COVID-19 in the SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron variant eras, which suggests the need for a second booster.

Background: Rising healthcare costs demand a transition from the current fee-for-service to a Value-Based Health Care (VBHC) Model. This requires that all future doctors to understand the VBHC Model. We aimed to evaluate the VBHC awareness among Brazilian medical students and to identify it’s associated intrinsic/extrinsic factors through a survey-based, cross-sectional study. Methods: An online survey was sent to students from Brazilian medical schools. A descriptive analysis based on participants' level of awareness about VBHC was performed. The categorical variables included were absolute and relative frequencies using chi-square tests. A multivariate binary logistic regression analysis was performed by calculating the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) to compare each response according to VBHC awareness. Results: We collected 3030 responses from 148 Medical Schools across all Brazilian states. Medical students were compared into 2 groups; 1 was familiar with VBHC (14%; 426); 2 were not (86%; 2575). The univariate analysis showed that group 1 was more willing to share clinical outcomes/costs data related to their practice (57.04%) compared to 2 (48.12%), p

ABSTRACT Objective To analyze the impact of COVID-19 on emergency department metrics at a large tertiary reference hospital in Brazil. Methods A retrospective analysis of consecutive emergency department visits, from January 1, 2020, to November 21, 2020, was performed and compared to the corresponding time frame in 2018 and 2019. The volume of visits and patients’ demographic and clinic characteristics were compared. All medical conditions were included, except confirmed cases of COVID-19. Results A total of 138,138 emergency department visits occurred during the study period, with a statistically significant (p

ABSTRACT Objective Since the rising of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, there is uncertainty regarding the impact of transmission to cancer patients. Evidence on increased severity for patients undergoing antineoplastic treatment is posed against deferring oncologic treatment. We aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on patient volumes in a cancer center in an epicenter of the pandemic. Methods Outpatient and inpatient volumes were extracted from electronic health record database. Two intervals were compared: pre-COVID-19 (March to May 2019) and COVID-19 pandemic (March to May 2020) periods. Results The total number of medical appointments declined by 45% in the COVID-19 period, including a 56.2% decrease in new visits. There was a 27.5% reduction in the number of patients undergoing intravenous systemic treatment and a 57.4% decline in initiation of new treatments. Conversely, there was an increase by 309% in new patients undergoing oral chemotherapy regimens and a 5.9% rise in new patients submitted to radiation therapy in the COVID-19 period. There was a 51.2% decline in length of stay and a 60% reduction in the volume of surgical cases during COVID-19. In the stem cell transplant unit, we observed a reduction by 36.5% in length of stay and a 62.5% drop in stem cell transplants. Conclusion A significant decrease in the number of patients undergoing cancer treatment was observed after COVID-19 pandemic. Although this may be partially overcome by alternative therapeutic options, avoiding timely health care due to fear of getting COVID-19 infection might impact on clinical outcomes. Our findings may help support immediate actions to mitigate this hypothesis.

ABSTRACT Objective: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation compared with percutaneous ethanol injection in patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma in relation to the objective response rate and costs related to the procedure. Methods: This was a prospective single-center randomized trial. The primary outcome was cost-effectiveness. Secondary outcomes were the complete response rate according to the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors 60 days after randomization and the complication rate within 180 60 days. Results: Fifty patients were placed into the following groups: percutaneous ethanol injection (n=23) and radiofrequency ablation (n=27). Fifty-four nodules were randomized (mean follow-up: 205.37 days). The estimated mean hospital cost was US$ 1854.11 and US$ 2770.96 for the Radiofrequency Ablation and Percutaneous Ethanol Injection Groups, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$ -2674.59, which is advantageous for radiofrequency ablation. After 60 d, 28 of 29 nodules in the Radiofrequency Ablation Group achieved complete response versus 12 of 22 in the Percutaneous Ethanol Injection Group (RD, 42.01 [95%CI= 20.55–63.24]; p0.05), respectively. Conclusion: Radiofrequency ablation was more cost-effective and achieved higher complete response and lower complication rates than the Percutaneous Ethanol Injection Group within this cohort. Registry of Clinical Trials: NCT06450613