Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: Anesthesia & Analgesia, Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), Vol. 132, No. 4 ( 2021-04), p. 930-941
    Abstract: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is associated with hypercoagulability and increased thrombotic risk in critically ill patients. To our knowledge, no studies have evaluated whether aspirin use is associated with reduced risk of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality. METHODS: A retrospective, observational cohort study of adult patients admitted with COVID-19 to multiple hospitals in the United States between March 2020 and July 2020 was performed. The primary outcome was the need for mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes were ICU admission and in-hospital mortality. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for study outcomes were calculated using Cox-proportional hazards models after adjustment for the effects of demographics and comorbid conditions. RESULTS: Four hundred twelve patients were included in the study. Three hundred fourteen patients (76.3%) did not receive aspirin, while 98 patients (23.7%) received aspirin within 24 hours of admission or 7 days before admission. Aspirin use had a crude association with less mechanical ventilation (35.7% aspirin versus 48.4% nonaspirin, P = .03) and ICU admission (38.8% aspirin versus 51.0% nonaspirin, P = .04), but no crude association with in-hospital mortality (26.5% aspirin versus 23.2% nonaspirin, P = .51). After adjusting for 8 confounding variables, aspirin use was independently associated with decreased risk of mechanical ventilation (adjusted HR, 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.85, P = .007), ICU admission (adjusted HR, 0.57, 95% CI, 0.38-0.85, P = .005), and in-hospital mortality (adjusted HR, 0.53, 95% CI, 0.31-0.90, P = .02). There were no differences in major bleeding ( P = .69) or overt thrombosis ( P = .82) between aspirin users and nonaspirin users. CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin use may be associated with improved outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, a sufficiently powered randomized controlled trial is needed to assess whether a causal relationship exists between aspirin use and reduced lung injury and mortality in COVID-19 patients.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0003-2999
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2018275-2
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Cambridge University Press (CUP) ; 2011
    In:  Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting Vol. 105 ( 2011), p. 193-193
    In: Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting, Cambridge University Press (CUP), Vol. 105 ( 2011), p. 193-193
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0272-5037 , 2169-1118
    Language: English
    Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
    Publication Date: 2011
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 220618-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2068140-9
    SSG: 2
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Kluwer Law International BV ; 2015
    In:  BCDR International Arbitration Review Vol. 2, No. Issue 1 ( 2015-06-01), p. 135-152
    In: BCDR International Arbitration Review, Kluwer Law International BV, Vol. 2, No. Issue 1 ( 2015-06-01), p. 135-152
    Abstract: The usual practice in international arbitration of substituting written testimony for oral evidence-in-chief is intended to narrow the issues in dispute, avoid surprise at the hearing, and free up hearing time for the cross-examination of witnesses and experts. What happens, however, when a party elects not to call a witness or expert for cross-examination? Should the party presenting that witness or expert be permitted to request his/her appearance at the hearing? Can a party effectively prevent the appearance of a witness or expert by simply waiving his/her cross-examination? All of these questions ultimately require a delicate balancing exercise between fairness, equality, and the party's right to present its case on the one hand, and procedural efficiency on the other hand. This article evaluates the rules of various arbitral institutions, as well as recent trends in arbitral practice, to offer an approach that preserves both fairness and efficiency.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2352-7374
    Language: English
    Publisher: Kluwer Law International BV
    Publication Date: 2015
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Kluwer Law International BV ; 2018
    In:  BCDR International Arbitration Review Vol. 5, No. Issue 1 ( 2018-09-01), p. 35-52
    In: BCDR International Arbitration Review, Kluwer Law International BV, Vol. 5, No. Issue 1 ( 2018-09-01), p. 35-52
    Abstract: Article 23: Exchange of information 23.1 The arbitral tribunal shall manage the exchange of information between the parties with a view to maintaining time and cost efficiency, and at any time during the proceedings, the arbitral tribunal may order the parties to produce documents, exhibits, or other evidence it deems necessary or appropriate. 23.2 The parties may provide the arbitral tribunal with their views on the appropriate level of information exchange, but the arbitral tribunal retains final authority in this regard. 23.3 The parties shall exchange all documents upon which each intends to rely, in accordance with a timetable set by the arbitral tribunal, insofar as these have not been submitted pursuant to Articles 2, 4, 6 and 17. 23.4 The arbitral tribunal may, upon written application, require a party to make available to all other parties documents in that party’s possession not otherwise available to the party seeking the documents that are reasonably believed to exist and to be relevant and material to the outcome of the arbitration. Requests for documents shall contain a description of specific documents or classes of documents, along with an explanation of their relevance and materiality to the outcome of the arbitration. 23.5 The arbitral tribunal may make any exchange of information that is subject to claims of commercial or technical confidentiality conditional upon appropriate measures to protect such confidentiality. 23.6 When documents to be exchanged are maintained in electronic form, the party in possession of such documents may make them available in the form most convenient and economical for it (including paper copies), unless the arbitral tribunal determines, on written application, that there is a need for access to the documents in a different form. Requests for documents maintained in electronic form should be narrowly focused and structured to make searching for them as economical as possible as to time and cost. 23.7 The arbitral tribunal may, on written application, require a party to permit inspection, on reasonable notice, of relevant premises or objects. 23.8 In resolving any dispute about pre-hearing exchanges of information, the arbitral tribunal shall require a requesting party to justify the time and expense that its request may involve and may make granting such a request conditional upon the payment of part or all of the cost of producing the information by the party seeking the information.The arbitral tribunal may also allocate the costs of providing information among the parties, either in an interim order or in an award. 23.9 Documents or information submitted to the arbitral tribunal by one party shall at the same time be transmitted by that party to all parties and, unless otherwise instructed by the Chamber, to the Chamber. 23.10 The arbitral tribunal shall determine the admissibility, relevance, materiality and weight of any evidence. 23.11 In the event a party fails to comply with an order for information exchange, the arbitral tribunal may draw adverse inferences and may take such failure into account in allocating costs. Article 24: Privilege The arbitral tribunal shall take into account applicable principles of privilege, such as those involving the confidentiality of communications between lawyer and client.When the parties, their counsel, or their documents would be subject to different rules of privilege, the arbitral tribunal shall, to the extent possible, apply the same rule to all parties, giving preference to the rule that provides the highest level of protection.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2352-7374
    Language: English
    Publisher: Kluwer Law International BV
    Publication Date: 2018
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Cambridge University Press (CUP) ; 2011
    In:  Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting Vol. 105 ( 2011), p. 196-214
    In: Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting, Cambridge University Press (CUP), Vol. 105 ( 2011), p. 196-214
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0272-5037 , 2169-1118
    Language: English
    Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
    Publication Date: 2011
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 220618-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2068140-9
    SSG: 2
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. Further information can be found on the KOBV privacy pages