Nursing Home-Acquired Pneumonia Presenting at the Emergency Department

Nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP) is one of the most common infections arising amongst nursing home residents, and its incidence is expected to increase as population ages. The NHAP recommendation for empiric broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy, arising from the concept of healthcare-associated pneumonia, has been challenged by recent studies reporting low rates of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria. This single center study analyzes the results of NHAP patients admitted through the Emergency Department (ED) at a tertiary center during the year 2010. There were 116 cases, male gender corresponded to 34.5 % of patients and median age was 84 years old (IQR 77-90). Comorbidities were present in 69.8 % of cases and 48.3 % of patients had used healthcare services during the previous 90 days. In-hospital mortality rate was 46.6 % and median length-of-stay was 9 days. Severity assessment at the Emergency Department provided CURB65 index score and respective mortality (%) results: zero: n = 0; one: n = 7 (0 %); two: n = 18 (38.9 %); three: n = 26 (38.5 %); four: n = 30 (53.3 %); and five; n = 22 (68.2 %); and sepsis n = 50 (34.0 %), severe sepsis n = 43 (48.8 %) and septic shock n = 22 (72.7 %). Significant risk factors for in-hospital mortality in multivariate analysis were polypnea (p = 0.001), age ≥ 75 years (p = 0.02), and severe sepsis or shock (p = 0.03) at the ED. Microbiological testing in 78.4 % of cases was positive in 15.4 % (n = 15): methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (26.7 %), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (20.0 %), S. pneumoniae (13.3 %), Escherichia coli (13.3 %), others (26.7 %); the rate of MDR bacteria was 53.3 %. This study reveals high rates of mortality and MDR bacteria among NHAP hospital admissions supporting the use of empirical broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy in these patients.

Perinatal Bacterial Infection: Screenning of Vertical Transmitted Infections

Perinatal bacterial infection may be caused by any microorganism colonizing the vaginal tract. Neonatologists and paediatricians are especially concerned about group B Stretpococcus (GBS). However, Enterobactereacea, mainly E.coli and Proteus, are also responsible for infection. GBS screening may be accomplished in over 90% of pregnant women. In our maternity in 2007-2008, 85% of the mothers had been screened. Screening and prophylaxis were responsible for a decreasing incidence of neonatal infection - from 0.6/1000 to 0.15/1000 live births in Portugal, from 2002 to 2007. However there are some difficulties related to screening. In the second Portuguese study 16/57 NB with early-onset infection (28%) were born to “negative” mothers. Several factors illustrate how difficult is to draw national screening policies: a wide range of carrier’s state rate throughout a country - in Portugal from 12% to 30%. The success of any screening policy may also be affected by additional technical and organizational problems. In countries where home delivery is a tradition or a trend intrapartum GBS prophylaxis requires a very well organized assistance.. Moreover factors usually accepted as protective are not so effective. In the Portuguese study 24/57 infected newborns (42%) were delivery by caesarean section. Another subject deals with the workload in the postnatal ward generated by deficient compliance to the guidelines a problem not confirm by a study of our group. Decreasing the importance of GBS, highlight the importance of E. coli in perinatal infection. From the 16 340 registrations of the National Registry 1676 were newborns with mother-related infection. Applying the same reasoning to E.coli as to GBS and Listeria monocytogenes – that is considering all of them are of maternal origin - 6.7% of these infections were due to E. coli, 4.6% to SGB and 0.5% to Listeria monocytogenes. In conclusion screening and prophylaxis may be not the best way to prevent all GBS neonatal infections but by now it is the only available procedure. The other bacteria continue to demand a high suspicion level and immediate intervention.

Perinatal Death: Epidemiology and Etiology

Perinatal mortality rate is an important mark to evaluate women and perinatal health care. It is of utmost importance to know causes and the evolution of its two components aiming to improve health care in different fields – sanitary conditions, diagnosis and treatment of infectious disease, immunisations, diagnosing and caring for medical diseases induced by pregnancy or directly related to it, providing skilled birth attendance, preventing birth asphyxia, preventing preterm birth complications and infections. In high-income countries the epidemiology varies mainly with social and economic conditions; in low-income countries, paired with poverty, undernutrition, superstition, lack of medical care, deficient basic sanitary conditions are also found. Also, in rich countries, responsible for 1% of deaths, data are published and improvements evaluated, while in low-income countries responsible for 99% of deaths numbers and causes are unknown, making difficult to implement cost effective interventions, a reason why “stillbirth rates in low-income countries are now where they were in high-income countries 50 to 100 years ago”. Knowledge on causes of death are very important as often what is needed are “simple” measures as improvement of sanitary conditions and immunisation programmes rather than high technologies. About four million babies dye each year in the first 28 days of life and another 3 million dye before birth in the third-trimester, with 98% occurring in low-income and middle income countries and more than 1 million occurring during labour and delivery. Classically stillbirths are the major component of perinatal mortality rate. Causes of death are even more difficult to know. In low-income countries a great proportion of women give birth at home. Worldwide the main causes of stillbirth are asphyxia due to obstructed labour, eclampsia, abruption placenta and umbilical cord complications - making valid the assumption that skilled birth attendance would decrease stillbirth; and infection - chorioamnioitis, syphilis and malaria. In high-income countries placental pathology and infection, congenital anomalies, complications of preterm birth and post term delivery, are the most common. If in low-income countries famine and lack of provisions and health care are common, in high-income countries, advanced maternal age and diabetes, obesity, hypertension, smoking, are frequent findings.

Accidental Epinephrine Administration

A administração intravenosa acidental de adrenalina é um erro raro mas potencialmente fatal. Descrevemos um caso de uma mulher de 74 anos que durante uma intervenção cirúrgica a uma Colelitíase recebeu por acidente 4 mg de adrenalina intravenosa em vez de Neostigmina, no despertar da anestesia. A doente apresentou um episódio de Taquicardia Supra Ventricular (TSV) juntamente com uma crise hipertensiva e sinais de perfusão periférica fracos. O tratamento adequado resultou numa recuperação favorável sem sequelas. Discutimos a gestão adequada desta complicação e possíveis mecanismos para evitar erro humano na administração de fármacos durante a anestesia.

Stress-Related Mucosal Disease: Incidence of Bleeding and the Role of Omeprazole in its Prophylaxis

BACKGROUND: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is the severe complication of stress-related mucosal disease in hospitalized patients. In intensive care units (ICU), risk factors are well defined and only mechanical ventilation and coagulopathy proved to be relevant for significant bleeding. On the contrary, in non-ICU settings there is no consensus about this issue. Nevertheless, omeprazole is still widely used in prophylaxis of bleeding. The objective of our study was to evaluate the relevance of stress-related mucosal disease bleeding in patients admitted to an internal medicine ward, and the role of omeprazole in its prophylaxis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in which we analysed consecutive patients who were admitted to our ward over a year. We recorded demographic characteristics of the patients, potential risk factors for stress-related mucosal disease (clinical data, laboratory, and medication), administration of prophylactic omeprazole, and total cost of this prophylaxis. Patients with active gastrointestinal bleeding on the admission were excluded. We recorded every upper gastrointestinal bleeding event with clinical relevance. RESULTS: Five hundred and thirty-five patients, mean age 70 years, mean length of stay 9.6+/-7.7 days; 140 (26.2%) patients were treated with 40 mg of omeprazole intravenously, 193 (36.1%) with 20mg of omeprazole orally, and 202 (37.8%) patients had no prophylaxis. There was only one episode (0.2%) of clinically relevant bleeding. CONCLUSION: In patients admitted to an internal medicine ward, incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding as a complication of stress-related mucosal disease is low. We found that there is no advantage in prophylaxis with omeprazole.