The threshold for a late-onset sepsis (LOS) evaluation varies considerably across NICUs. This unexplained variability is probably related in part to physician bias regarding when sepsis should be "ruled out". The aim of this study is to determine if physician characteristics (race, gender, immigration status, years of experience and academic rank) effect LOS evaluation in the NICU. This study includes a retrospective chart review of all Level III NICU infants who had a LOS evaluation over 54 months. Physician characteristics were compared between positive and negative blood culture groups and whether CBC and CRP were obtained at LOS evaluations. There were 341 LOS evaluations performed during the study period. Two patients were excluded due to a contaminant. Patients in this study had a birth weight of [median (Q1, Q3)]+ 992 (720, 1820) grams and birth gestation of [median (Q1, Q3)] 27 (25, 33) weeks. There are 10 neonatologists in the group, 5/10 being female and 6/10 being immigrant physicians. Experienced physicians were more likely to obtain a CBC at the time of LOS evaluation. Physician characteristics of race, gender and immigration status impacted whether to include a CRP as part of a LOS evaluation but otherwise did not influence LOS evaluation, including the likelihood of bacteremia.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11050479 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12080845 | DOI Listing |
J Cyst Fibros
January 2025
Southern Cross University, Faculty of Health, Coolangatta, Queensland, Australia. Electronic address:
Background: A previous Australia-wide pilot study identified pain as a significant burden in people with CF (pwCF). However, the prevalence, frequency and severity have not been evaluated using validated tools.
Methods: Australian adults, pwCF and healthy controls (HC) were invited to complete an online questionnaire from July 2023 - February 2024, consisting of four validated tools: Brief Pain Inventory, Pain Catastrophising Scale, PAGI-SYM and PAC-SYM.
Clin Investig Arterioscler
January 2025
Unidad de Lípidos y Riesgo Vascular, Servicio de Endocrinología y Nutrición, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, España. Electronic address:
Objective: To confirm the effectiveness and safety of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors in daily clinical practice.
Methods: Retrospective observational study of patients from hospital registry of PCSK9 inhibitor treatment with a follow-up ≥ 6 months. The lipid-lowering effect and safety were evaluated.
Ann Thorac Surg
January 2025
Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Laboratories (CORELAB), University of California, Los Angeles; Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles. Electronic address:
Background: Socioeconomic disadvantage and Medicaid insurance have been linked with inferior survival following heart transplantation, yet the contributing mechanisms remain to be elucidated. We evaluated the association of Medicaid with the development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy(CAV).
Methods: We considered heart transplant recipients ≥18years within the 2004-2022 Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.
Ann Thorac Surg
January 2025
Division of Thoracic Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
Background: Prospective randomized trials have demonstrated noninferior survival between sublobar resection and lobectomy in healthy non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with tumors ≤2cm. However, some patient attributes are not well represented in randomized trials and uncertainty remains in the widespread applicability of randomized trial nodal dissection protocols.
Methods: Patients with ≤2cm, node-negative NSCLC (cT1N0) in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons prospective database were linked to Medicare survival data using a probabilistic matching algorithm.
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol
January 2025
Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals Seidman Cancer Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA. Electronic address:
There is a much debate regarding optimal selection in patients with metastatic cancer who should undergo local treatment (surgery or radiation treatment) to the primary tumor and/or metastases. Additionally, the optimal treatment of newly diagnosed metastatic cancer is largely unclear. Current prognostication systems to best inform these clinical scenarios are limited, as all metastatic patients are grouped together as having Stage IV disease without further incorporation of patient and disease-specific covariates that significantly impact patient outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!