Browsing by Author "Wang, Alfred Z."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Can we predict which COVID-19 patients will need transfer to intensive care within 24 hours of floor admission?
    (Wiley, 2021) Wang, Alfred Z.; Ehrman, Robert; Bucca, Antonino; Croft, Alexander; Glober, Nancy; Holt, Daniel; Lardaro, Thomas; Musey, Paul; Peterson, Kelli; Trigonis, Russell; Hunter, Benton R.; Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background Patients with COVID‐19 can present to the emergency department (ED) at any point during the spectrum of illness, making it difficult to predict what level of care the patient will ultimately require. Admission to a ward bed, which is subsequently upgraded within hours to an intensive care unit (ICU) bed, represents an inability to appropriately predict the patient's course of illness. Predicting which patients will require ICU care within 24 hours would allow admissions to be managed more appropriately. Methods This was a retrospective study of adults admitted to a large health care system, including 14 hospitals across the state of Indiana. Included patients were aged ≥ 18 years, were admitted to the hospital from the ED, and had a positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for COVID‐19. Patients directly admitted to the ICU or in whom the PCR test was obtained > 3 days after hospital admission were excluded. Extracted data points included demographics, comorbidities, ED vital signs, laboratory values, chest imaging results, and level of care on admission. The primary outcome was a combination of either death or transfer to ICU within 24 hours of admission to the hospital. Data analysis was performed by logistic regression modeling to determine a multivariable model of variables that could predict the primary outcome. Results Of the 542 included patients, 46 (10%) required transfer to ICU within 24 hours of admission. The final composite model, adjusted for age and admission location, included history of heart failure and initial oxygen saturation of <93% plus either white blood cell count > 6.4 or glomerular filtration rate < 46. The odds ratio (OR) for decompensation within 24 hours was 5.17 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.17 to 12.31) when all criteria were present. For patients without the above criteria, the OR for ICU transfer was 0.20 (95% CI = 0.09 to 0.45). Conclusions Although our model did not perform well enough to stand alone as a decision guide, it highlights certain clinical features that are associated with increased risk of decompensation.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Characteristics of COVID-19 Patients with Bacterial Co-infection Admitted to the Hospital from the Emergency Department in a Large Regional Healthcare System
    (Wiley, 2021) Lardaro, Thomas; Wang, Alfred Z.; Bucca, Antonino; Croft, Alexander; Glober, Nancy; Holt, Daniel B.; Musey, Paul I., Jr.; Peterson, Kelli D.; Trigonis, Russell A.; Hunter, Benton R.; Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine
    Introduction The rate of bacterial coinfection with SARS‐CoV‐2 is poorly defined. The decision to administer antibiotics early in the course of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection depends on the likelihood of bacterial coinfection. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients admitted through the emergency department with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection over a 6‐week period in a large healthcare system in the United States. Blood and respiratory culture results were abstracted and adjudicated by multiple authors. The primary outcome was the rate of bacteremia. We secondarily looked to define clinical or laboratory features associated with bacteremia. Results There were 542 patients admitted with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, with an average age of 62.8 years. Of these, 395 had blood cultures performed upon admission, with six true positive results (1.1% of the total population). An additional 14 patients had positive respiratory cultures treated as true pathogens in the first 72 h. Low blood pressure and elevated white blood cell count, neutrophil count, blood urea nitrogen, and lactate were statistically significantly associated with bacteremia. Clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly different between patients with and without bacteremia. Conclusions We found a low rate of bacteremia in patients admitted with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. In hemodynamically stable patients, routine antibiotics may not be warranted in this population.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Efficacy of Benzodiazepines or Antihistamines for Patients With Acute Vertigo: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    (American Medical Association, 2022) Hunter, Benton R.; Wang, Alfred Z.; Bucca, Antonino W.; Musey, Paul I., Jr.; Strachan, Christian C.; Roumpf, Steven K.; Propst, Steven L.; Croft, Alexander; Menard, Laura M.; Kirschner, Jonathan M.; Emergency Medicine, School of Medicine
    Importance: Acute vertigo can be disabling. Antihistamines and benzodiazepines are frequently prescribed as "vestibular suppressants," but their efficacy is unclear. Objective: To assess the efficacy of antihistamines and benzodiazepines in the treatment of acute vertigo from any underlying cause. Data sources: We searched the PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception to January 14, 2019, without language restrictions. Bibliographies of the included studies and relevant reviews were also screened. Study selection: We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing antihistamine or benzodiazepine use with another comparator, placebo, or no intervention for patients with a duration of acute vertigo for 2 weeks or less. Studies of healthy volunteers, prophylactic treatment, or induced vertigo were excluded, as were studies that compared 2 medications from the same class. Data extraction and synthesis: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by 2 authors independently for each study. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Main outcomes and measures: The predefined primary outcome was change in 10- or 100-point vertigo or dizziness visual analog scale (VAS) scores at 2 hours after treatment. Secondary outcomes included change in nausea VAS scores at 2 hours, use of rescue medication at 2 hours, and improvement or resolution of vertigo at 1 week or 1 month. Results: Of the 27 trials identified in the systematic review, 17 contributed to the quantitative meta-analysis and involved a total of 1586 participants. Seven trials with a total of 802 participants evaluated the primary outcome of interest: single-dose antihistamines resulted in significantly more improvement on 100-point VAS scores compared with benzodiazepines (difference, 16.1 [95% CI, 7.2 to 25.0]) but not compared with other active comparators (difference, 2.7 [95% CI, -6.1 to 11.5]). At 1 week and 1 month, neither daily benzodiazepines nor antihistamines were reported to be superior to placebo. RCTs comparing the immediate effects of medications (at 2 hours) after a single dose generally had a low risk of bias, but those evaluating 1-week and 1-month outcomes had a high risk of bias. Conclusions and relevance: Moderately strong evidence suggests that single-dose antihistamines provide greater vertigo relief at 2 hours than single-dose benzodiazepines. Furthermore, the available evidence did not support an association of benzodiazepine use with improvement in any outcomes for acute vertigo. Other evidence suggested that daily antihistamine use may not benefit patients with acute vertigo. Larger randomized trials comparing both antihistamines and benzodiazepines with placebo could better clarify the relative efficacy of these medications.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Fluid Resuscitation and Progression to Renal Replacement Therapy in Patients With COVID-19
    (Elsevier, 2022-02) Holt, Daniel B.; Lardaro, Thomas; Wang, Alfred Z.; Musey, Paul I.; Trigonis, Russell; Bucca, Antonino; Croft, Alexander; Glober, Nancy; Peterson, Kelli; Schaffer, Jason T.; Hunter, Benton R.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with respiratory symptoms and renal effects. Data regarding fluid resuscitation and kidney injury in COVID-19 are lacking, and understanding this relationship is critical. Objectives To determine if there is an association between fluid volume administered in 24 h and development of renal failure in COVID-19 patients. Methods Retrospective chart review; 14 hospitals in Indiana. Included patients were adults admitted between March 11, 2020 and April 13, 2020 with a positive test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 within 3 days of admission. Patients requiring renal replacement therapy prior to admission were excluded. Volumes and types of resuscitative intravenous fluids in the first 24 h were obtained with demographics, medical history, and other objective data. The primary outcome was initiation of renal replacement therapy. Logistic regression modeling was utilized in creating multivariate models for determining factors associated with the primary outcome. Results The fluid volume received in the first 24 h after hospital admission was associated with initiation of renal replacement therapy in two different multivariate logistic regression models. An odds ratio of 1.42 (95% confidence interval 1.01–1.99) was observed when adjusting for age, heart failure, obesity, creatinine, bicarbonate, and total fluid volume. An odds ratio of 1.45 (95% confidence interval 1.02–2.05) was observed when variables significant in univariate analysis were adjusted for. Conclusions Each liter of intravenous fluid administered to patients with COVID-19 in the first 24 h of presentation was independently associated with an increased risk for initiation of renal replacement therapy, supporting judicious fluid administration in patients with this disease.