Lipase elevation on admission predicts worse clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19

Background and objectivesHyperlipasemia is highly prevalent among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of lipase activity, measured at the time of admission, on the clinical course and mortality in COVID-19 patients.MethodsThe population of this study comprised 12,139 patients who were hospitalized due to COVID-19 between June 2020 and June 2021 in a pandemic hospital. Of these, 8819 patients were excluded from the study due to missing data, four patients were excluded due to a diagnosis of acute pancreatitis (according to the revised Atlanta criteria), and 72 patients were excluded due to alcohol use or having a history of chronic pancreatitis. The final study sample consisted of the remaining 3244 COVID-19 patients. Laboratory results, intensive care unit (ICU) follow-up periods, the need for mechanical ventilation, and mortality rates were compared between the normal lipase activity and high lipase activity groups.ResultsThere were 968 (29.8%) patients with high lipase activity at the time of admission. The rate of ICU admission was 36.1% vs. 9.9% (p < 0.001), mechanical ventilation requirement rates were 33.7% vs. 8.3% (p < 0.001), and mortality rates were as 24.6% vs. 6.4% (p < 0.001) in the high lipase activity group compared to the normal lipase activity group. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that high lipase activity was an independent factor in predicting mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients (odds ratio [OR]: 3.191, p < 0.001).ConclusionElevated lipase activity without acute pancreatitis at the time of admission in COVID-19 patients was determined as an independent predictor of poor prognosis.     

Rural Midwestern Primary Care Nurse Practitioners’ Transition to Practice

Transition to practice experiences for new primary care nurse practitioners (NPs) is of interest, particularly considering the lack of requirements and options for formal training programs. The purpose of this article is to describe new primary care NPs’ experience and perceived needs of transitioning to practice. New Nebraska NPs were surveyed. The main findings include increased confidence and perceived preparedness after 3 months of practice, as well as challenges and helpful supportive services for transitioning to practice. Additional information on the transition to practice experience was provided and supports developing a formal program.     

Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

Background

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

Methods

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ , http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , www.eudraCT.com , http://centerwatch.com/ , The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Discussion

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.     

Process evaluation of implementation strategies to reduce potentially inappropriate medication prescribing in older population: A scoping review

ObjectivesSeveral implementation strategies can reduce potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) prescribing. Although use of PIMs has declined in recent years, it remains prevalent. Various strategies exist to improve the appropriateness of medication use. However, little is known about the processes of these different implementation strategies. This scoping review aims to investigate how the process evaluation of implementation strategies for reducing PIM prescribing in the older population has been studied.MethodsWe searched for process evaluations of implementation strategies for reducing PIM prescribing in PUBMED, SCOPUS and Web of Science published between January 2000 and November 2019 in English. We applied the following inclusion criteria: patients aged ≥65 years, validated PIM criteria, and implementation process evaluated. The review focuses on decision support for health care professionals. We described the findings of the process evaluations, and compared the authors’ concepts of process evaluation of the included publications to those of Proctor et al.( 2010).ResultOf 9131 publications screened, 29 met our inclusion criteria. Different process evaluation conceptualizations were identified. Most process evaluations took place in the initial stages of the process (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, and feasibility) and sustainability and implementation costs were seldom evaluated. None of the included publications evaluated fidelity.Multifaceted interventions were the most studied implementation strategies. Medication review was more common in acceptability evaluations, multidisciplinary interventions in adoption evaluations, and computerized systems and educational interventions in feasibility evaluations. Process evaluations were studied from the health care professionals’ viewpoint in most of the included publications, but the management viewpoint was missing.DiscussionThe conceptualization of process evaluation in the field of PIM prescribing is indeterminate. There is also a current gap in the knowledge of sustainability and implementation costs. Clarifying the conceptualization of implementation process evaluation is essential in order to effectively translate research knowledge into practice.     

Empowering the Nurse Practitioner With the Reproductive Justice Framework

On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled to strike down Roe v. Wade (1973), a landmark decision that legalized access to abortion under the right to privacy. By overturning Roe, the decision now leaves the regulation of abortion up to each individual state. Consideration of the consequences that will affect vulnerable populations is paramount now that Roe v. Wade is overturned. Nurse practitioners who are impartial toward abortion should be introduced to Reproductive Justice, which can help them better understand the lived experiences of people with the capacity for pregnancy and the complexities surrounding abortion.