Risk factors and interventions associated with mortality or survival in adult COVID-19 patients admitted to critical care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units have a high mortality rate, which appears to be associated with increasing age, male sex, smoking history, hypertension and diabetes mellitus. Methods: A systematic review to determine risk factors and interventions associated with mortality/survival in adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with confirmed COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 infection. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020181185).Results: The search identified 483 abstracts between 1 January and 7 April 2020, of which nine studies were included in the final review. Only one study was of low bias. Advanced age (odds ratio [OR] 11.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.35­18.62) and a history of hypertension were associated with mortality (OR 4.17, 95% CI 2.90­5.99). Sex was not associated with mortality. There was insufficient data to assess the association between other comorbidities, laboratory results or critical care risk indices and mortality.The critical care interventions of mechanical ventilation (OR 6.25, 95% CI 0.75­51.93), prone positioning during ventilation (OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.20­21.72), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (OR 8.00, 95% CI 0.69, 92.33) were not associated with mortality. The sample size was insufficient to conclusively determine the association between these interventions and ICUmortality. The need for inotropes or vasopressors was associated with mortality (OR 6.36, 95% CI 1.89­21.36). Conclusion: The studies provided little granular data to inform risk stratification or prognostication of patients requiring intensive

A meta-analysis of the efficacy of preoperative surgical safety checklists to improve perioperative outcomes

BACKGROUND:Meta-analyses of the implementation of a surgical safety checklist (SSC) in observational studies have shown a significant decrease in mortality and surgical complications.OBJECTIVE:To determine the efficacy of the SSC using data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS:This meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015017546). A comprehensive search of six databases was conducted using the OvidSP search engine.RESULTS:Four hundred and sixty-four citations revealed three eligible trials conducted in tertiary hospitals and a community hospital; with a total of 6 060 patients. All trials had allocation concealment bias and a lack of blinding of participants and personnel. A single trial that contributed 5 295 of the 6 060 patients to the meta-analysis had no detection; attrition or reporting biases. The SSC was associated with significantly decreased mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 - 0.85; p=0.0004; I2=0%) and surgical complications (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.57 - 0.71; petlt;0.00001; I2=0%). The efficacy of the SSC on specific surgical complications was as follows: respiratory complications RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.21 - 1.70; p=0.33; cardiac complications RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.28 - 1.95; p=0.54; infectious complications RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.29 - 1.27; p=0.18; and perioperative bleeding RR 0.36; 95% CI 0.23 - 0.56; petlt;0.00001.CONCLUSIONS:There is sufficient RCT evidence to suggest that SSCs decrease hospital mortality and surgical outcomes in tertiary and community hospitals. However; randomised evidence of the efficacy of the SSC at rural hospital level is absent