Internal and emergency medicine
-
Clinical Trial
Head-to-head comparison of diagnostic scores for acute heart failure in the emergency department: results from the PARADISE cohort.
BREST and PREDICA scores have recently emerged for the diagnosis of acute heart failure (AHF) in the emergency department (ED). This study aimed to perform a head-to-head comparison in a large contemporary cohort. BREST and PREDICA scores were calculated from, respectively, 11 and 8 routine clinical variables recorded in the ED in 1386 patients from the PArADIsE cohort. ⋯ Our study emphasizes the good diagnostic performance of both BREST and PREDICA scores, albeit with a significantly higher diagnostic performance of the PREDICA score. Yet, more than half of the population was classified within the "gray zone" by these scores; additional diagnostic tools are needed to ascertain AHF diagnosis in the ED in a majority of patients. Clinical trial registration: NCT02800122.
-
Cognitive biases are systematic cognitive distortions, which can affect clinical reasoning. The aim of this study was to unravel the most common cognitive biases encountered in in the peculiar context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Case study research design. ⋯ The pandemic context is a breeding ground for the emergence of cognitive biases, which can influence clinical reasoning and lead to errors. Awareness of these cognitive mechanisms could potentially reduce biases and improve clinical reasoning. Moreover, the analysis of cognitive biases can offer an insight on the functioning of the clinical reasoning process in the midst of the pandemic crisis.
-
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly recognized infectious disease which can lead to acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring ventilatory support and intensive care unit admission. The aim of our study is to evaluate the performance of two non-invasive respiratory function indices (the ROX index and the SatO2/FiO2 ratio), as compared to the traditional PaO2/FiO2 ratio, in predicting a clinically relevant composite outcome (death or intubation) in hospitalized patients for COVID-19 pneumonia. Four hospital centers in Northern Italy conducted an observational retrospective cohort study during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic. ⋯ Regarding sub-intensive wards (Milan and Mantua), none of the three respiratory function indices was significantly associated with the composite outcome. In patients admitted to medical wards for COVID-19 pneumonia, the ROX index and the SatO2/FiO2 ratio demonstrated not only good performance in predicting intubation or death, but their accuracy was comparable to that of the PaO2/FiO2 ratio. In this setting, where repeated arterial blood gas tests are not always feasible, they could be considered a reliable alternative to the invasive PaO2/FiO2 ratio.
-
Extrinsic causes of restrictive lung syndrome in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) patients have been poorly investigated. We aimed to investigate the influence of the anterior chest wall deformity, noninvasively assessed by modified Haller index (MHI), on spirometry parameters and outcome in a consecutive population of patients with mild-to-moderate IPF. Sixty consecutive IPF patients (73.8 ± 6.6 years, 45 males) were included in this retrospective study. ⋯ During follow-up, 13 deaths and 16 pulmonary or cardiovascular hospitalizations were detected. At multivariate Cox regression analysis, concave-shaped chest wall (MHI > 2.5) (HR 4.55, 95% CI 1.02-20.4), increased C-reactive protein (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.08-2.61) and absence of beta-blocker therapy (HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01-0.26) were independently associated to the investigated outcome. MHI assessment and implementation may help the clinician to identify, among IPF patients, those with poorer prognosis over a medium-term follow-up.
-
The 4S-AF scheme [Stroke risk, Symptom severity, Severity of atrial fibrillation (AF) burden, Substrate severity] was recently proposed to characterize AF patients. In this post hoc analysis we evaluated the agreement between the therapeutic strategy (rate or rhythm control, respectively), as suggested by the 4S-AF scheme, and the actual strategy followed in a patients cohort. Outcomes of interest were as follows: all-cause death, a composite of all-cause death/any thromboembolism/acute coronary syndrome, and a composite of all-cause death, any thrombotic/ischemic event, and major bleeding (net clinical outcome). ⋯ When 4S-AF indicated rhythm control, disagreement was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death (HR 7.59; 95% CI 1.65-35.01), and of the composite outcome (HR 2.69; 95% CI 1.19-6.06). The 4S-AF scheme is a useful tool to comprehensively evaluate AF patients and aid the decision-making process. Disagreement with the rhythm control suggestion of the 4S-AF scheme was associated with adverse clinical outcomes.