Miguel Alejandro Pinzón, Santiago Ortiz, Henry Laniado, Nelson Javier Fonseca-Ruiz, Juan Felipe Betancur, Héctor Holguín, Pablo Montoya, Bernardo Javier Muñoz, Beatriz Ramírez, Carolina Arias Arias, Isabel Potes, Luz Maribel Toro, Julian Quiceno
{"title":"COVID-19 肺炎患者入住重症监护病房的时间早晚对比。","authors":"Miguel Alejandro Pinzón, Santiago Ortiz, Henry Laniado, Nelson Javier Fonseca-Ruiz, Juan Felipe Betancur, Héctor Holguín, Pablo Montoya, Bernardo Javier Muñoz, Beatriz Ramírez, Carolina Arias Arias, Isabel Potes, Luz Maribel Toro, Julian Quiceno","doi":"10.3855/jidc.18286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The type of admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) influences the prognosis of patients with severe pneumonia and, in the case of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, this is still unexplored. The objective of this study was to determine the differences between early and late ICU admission.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>A retrospective cohort study of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at two high-complexity hospitals in Colombia. Early ICU admission (EICUA) was defined as direct admission from the emergency department or within the first 24 hours of admission. Late ICU admission (LICUA) was defined as admission from the hospitalization service after 24 hours of arrival. A robust Cox regression was performed for the variable recovery time, to determine the impact of the ICU admission type in the hazard rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>68.2% were EICUA patients and 31.8% were LICUA patients. Recovery and duration of hospital stay were significantly lower in EICUA than in LICUA (9 vs 15 days, p = 0.0001, and 10 vs 15.5 days, p < 0.0001, respectively). However, the duration of ICU stay (7 vs 9 days, p = 0.131) and the invasive mechanical ventilation requirement (48.9% vs 54.9%, p = 0.374) were not statistically significant. The 30-day follow-up showed no difference between the EICUA and LICUA (alive 97% vs 94.6%, p = 0.705).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mortality between EICUA and LICUA patients with COVID-19 pneumonia showed no statistically significant differences. However, the recovery time, the probability intensity of instant recovery, and the duration of hospital stay were better in EICUA than in LICUA. Neither EICUA nor LICUA affects the final status (death) of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":49160,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Infection in Developing Countries","volume":"18 9","pages":"1338-1346"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early vs late ICU admission in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.\",\"authors\":\"Miguel Alejandro Pinzón, Santiago Ortiz, Henry Laniado, Nelson Javier Fonseca-Ruiz, Juan Felipe Betancur, Héctor Holguín, Pablo Montoya, Bernardo Javier Muñoz, Beatriz Ramírez, Carolina Arias Arias, Isabel Potes, Luz Maribel Toro, Julian Quiceno\",\"doi\":\"10.3855/jidc.18286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The type of admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) influences the prognosis of patients with severe pneumonia and, in the case of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, this is still unexplored. The objective of this study was to determine the differences between early and late ICU admission.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>A retrospective cohort study of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at two high-complexity hospitals in Colombia. Early ICU admission (EICUA) was defined as direct admission from the emergency department or within the first 24 hours of admission. Late ICU admission (LICUA) was defined as admission from the hospitalization service after 24 hours of arrival. A robust Cox regression was performed for the variable recovery time, to determine the impact of the ICU admission type in the hazard rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>68.2% were EICUA patients and 31.8% were LICUA patients. Recovery and duration of hospital stay were significantly lower in EICUA than in LICUA (9 vs 15 days, p = 0.0001, and 10 vs 15.5 days, p < 0.0001, respectively). However, the duration of ICU stay (7 vs 9 days, p = 0.131) and the invasive mechanical ventilation requirement (48.9% vs 54.9%, p = 0.374) were not statistically significant. The 30-day follow-up showed no difference between the EICUA and LICUA (alive 97% vs 94.6%, p = 0.705).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mortality between EICUA and LICUA patients with COVID-19 pneumonia showed no statistically significant differences. However, the recovery time, the probability intensity of instant recovery, and the duration of hospital stay were better in EICUA than in LICUA. Neither EICUA nor LICUA affects the final status (death) of patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Infection in Developing Countries\",\"volume\":\"18 9\",\"pages\":\"1338-1346\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Infection in Developing Countries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3855/jidc.18286\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Infection in Developing Countries","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3855/jidc.18286","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
简介重症监护病房(ICU)的入院类型会影响重症肺炎患者的预后,而 COVID-19 肺炎患者的入院类型尚未得到研究。本研究旨在确定早期和晚期入住重症监护室之间的差异:方法:对哥伦比亚两家高复杂性医院的 COVID-19 肺炎患者进行回顾性队列研究。早期入住重症监护病房(EICUA)是指从急诊科直接入院或在入院后 24 小时内入住重症监护病房。重症监护室晚期入院(LICUA)是指患者在入院 24 小时后从住院处入院。对恢复时间这一变量进行了稳健的考克斯回归,以确定ICU入院类型对危险率的影响:68.2%为EICUA患者,31.8%为LICUA患者。EICUA患者的康复时间和住院时间明显低于LICUA患者(分别为9天对15天,P = 0.0001;10天对15.5天,P < 0.0001)。然而,重症监护室的住院时间(7 天 vs 9 天,p = 0.131)和有创机械通气需求(48.9% vs 54.9%,p = 0.374)在统计学上没有显著差异。30天的随访结果显示,EICUA和LICUA之间没有差异(存活率为97% vs 94.6%,p = 0.705):结论:COVID-19肺炎患者的死亡率在EICUA和LICUA之间没有明显的统计学差异。然而,EICUA 患者的康复时间、即时康复的概率强度和住院时间均优于 LICUA 患者。EICUA和LICUA都不会影响患者的最终状况(死亡)。
Early vs late ICU admission in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.
Introduction: The type of admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) influences the prognosis of patients with severe pneumonia and, in the case of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, this is still unexplored. The objective of this study was to determine the differences between early and late ICU admission.
Methodology: A retrospective cohort study of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at two high-complexity hospitals in Colombia. Early ICU admission (EICUA) was defined as direct admission from the emergency department or within the first 24 hours of admission. Late ICU admission (LICUA) was defined as admission from the hospitalization service after 24 hours of arrival. A robust Cox regression was performed for the variable recovery time, to determine the impact of the ICU admission type in the hazard rate.
Results: 68.2% were EICUA patients and 31.8% were LICUA patients. Recovery and duration of hospital stay were significantly lower in EICUA than in LICUA (9 vs 15 days, p = 0.0001, and 10 vs 15.5 days, p < 0.0001, respectively). However, the duration of ICU stay (7 vs 9 days, p = 0.131) and the invasive mechanical ventilation requirement (48.9% vs 54.9%, p = 0.374) were not statistically significant. The 30-day follow-up showed no difference between the EICUA and LICUA (alive 97% vs 94.6%, p = 0.705).
Conclusions: Mortality between EICUA and LICUA patients with COVID-19 pneumonia showed no statistically significant differences. However, the recovery time, the probability intensity of instant recovery, and the duration of hospital stay were better in EICUA than in LICUA. Neither EICUA nor LICUA affects the final status (death) of patients.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Infection in Developing Countries (JIDC) is an international journal, intended for the publication of scientific articles from Developing Countries by scientists from Developing Countries.
JIDC is an independent, on-line publication with an international editorial board. JIDC is open access with no cost to view or download articles and reasonable cost for publication of research artcles, making JIDC easily availiable to scientists from resource restricted regions.