ABSTRACT
Objectives: Mucormycosis is a rare invasive fungal infection with high lethality, affecting mainly patients with hematological neoplasia, decompensated diabetes, and covid-19 infection. The aim was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of liposomal Amphotericin B (standard treatment) versus isavuconazole for treating mucormycosis in the consolidation phase from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified Health System. Method(s): A decision tree model was built. The analysis considered the costs of the treatment over a six-month time horizon. This included hospitalization during the entire course of treatment and the expenditures related to dialysis, complication occurring in 5% (3%-6%) of cases treated with the Amphotericin B. Appointments with specialists were included in the isavuconazole arm, and amphotericin B was used if the patient failed to respond to isavuconazole. The utility of the patient with mucormycosis, cured and with renal failure was estimated. Uncertainties were assessed through probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. Result(s): The average cost of amphotericin B and isavuconazole arm was R$1.054.874,39 and R$522.344,05, respectively. The utility was 0.479 with amphotericin B and 0.480 with isavuconazole. The ICER was R$ -684,494,237 (dominant). In deterministic sensitivity analysis, the probability of dialysis was the variable with the greatest impact. In probabilistic analysis, the ICER is distributed in the right and left lower quadrant, the acceptability curve for all the scenarios analyzed is favorable for isavuconazole. The budget impact suggests a potential savings of between R$ 350 million and R$ 415 million over five years. Conclusion(s): The treatment of mucormycosis during the consolidation phase with isavuconazole represents a lower cost, besides the convenience of oral treatment and reduced incidence of severe adverse events, with mortality similar to the Amphotericin B arm. In Brazil, the formulation of posaconazole approved is inadequate for treating mucormycosis during the consolidation phase, therefore isavuconazole is the single oral drug available.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic significantly impacted on trauma systems, since emergency departments (ED) suddenly were overwhelmed by patients requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Once, trauma volume was supposed to decrease due to lockdown policies, we aimed to describe ICU trauma admissions during this period. Method(s): Retrospective observational study of all trauma patients admitted to the ICU of a Portuguese Trauma Center between January 2020 and December 2021. Data were collected from clinical hospital records. Result(s): 437 trauma patients (15% of all admissions), mostly male (71%), with a median age of 59 years-old (42-74) were included. At least one comorbidity was present in 71% of the patients. Median severity scores were: SAPS II 26 (19-38), SOFA 3 (1-6), ISS 13 (9-22), RTS 8 (6-8) and TRISS 96,75 (81.1-98.6). The most frequent mechanisms of injury were falls (59%) and road traffic accidents (25%). The majority consisted of blunt trauma (88%), 65% of brain trauma and 35% of musculoeskeletal trauma. Trauma Team assessment was started in < 3 min in all cases and median length of stay (LOS) in the ED was 261 min (154-418). Surgical intervention was performed in < 4 h in 56% of surgical brain trauma injuries, in < 6 h in 67% of extremity open fractures and in < 1 h in 6% of a penetrating trauma. Shock, mainly hemorrhagic, was present in 8% of the patients on hospital admission. 38% were submitted to invasive mechanical ventilation and 34% to vasopressors. The most common complication was nosocomial infection (18%). The median LOS in the UCI was 12 days (5-24). Only 8% of the patients died in the ICU and 11% in the hospital. Conclusion(s): During pandemic, trauma persisted a major health problem with a significant consumption of time and critical care resources. The high influx of patients may have influenced the LOS in the ED before ICU admission and the time until the surgical intervention. Despite it, mortality remained low.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Identify lung sequelae of COVID-19 through radiological and pulmonary function assessment. Design(s): Prospective, longitudinal, cohort study from March 2020 to March 2021. Setting(s): Intensive Care Units (ICU) in a tertiary hospital in Portugal. Patient(s): 254 patients with COVID-19 admitted to ICU due to respiratory illness. Intervention(s): A chest computed tomography (CT) scan and pulmonary function tests (PFT) were performed at 3 to 6 months. Main variables of interest: CT-scan;PFT;decreased diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide (DLCO). Result(s): All CT scans revealed improvement in the follow-up, with 72% of patients still showing abnormalities, 58% with ground glass opacities and 62% with evidence of fibrosis. PFT had abnormalities in 94 patients (46%): thirteen patients (7%) had an obstructive pattern, 35 (18%) had a restrictive pattern, and 58 (30%) had decreased DLCO. There was a statistically significant association between abnormalities in the follow-up CT scan and older age, more extended hospital and ICU stay, higher SAPS II and APACHE scores and invasive ventilation. Mechanical ventilation, especially with no lung protective parameters, was associated with abnormalities in PFT. Multivariate regression showed more abnormalities in lung function with more extended ICU hospitalization, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), chronic kidney disease, invasive mechanical ventilation, and ventilation with higher plateau pressure, and more abnormalities in CT-scan with older age, more extended ICU stay, organ solid transplants and ventilation with higher positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Conclusion(s): Most patients with severe COVID-19 still exhibit abnormalities in CT scans or lung function tests three to six months after discharge.Copyright © 2023
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Critical care survivors sustain a variety of sequelae after intensive care medicine (ICM) admission, and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has added further challenges. Specifically, ICM memories play a significant role, and delusional memories are associated with poor outcomes post-discharge including a delayed return to work and sleep problems. Deep sedation has been associated with a greater risk of perceiving delusional memories, bringing a move toward lighter sedation. However, there are limited reports on post-ICM memories in COVID-19, and influence of deep sedation has not been fully defined. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate ICM-memory recall in COVID-19 survivors and their relation with deep sedation. Materials/Methods: Adult COVID-19 ICM survivors admitted to a Portuguese University Hospital between October 2020 and April 2021 (second/third "waves") were evaluated 1 to 2 months post-discharge using "ICU Memory Tool," to assess real, emotional, and delusional memories. Results: The study included 132 patients (67% male; median age = 62 years, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation [APACHE]-II = 15, Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS]-II = 35, ICM stay = 9 days). Approximately 42% received deep sedation (median duration = 19 days). Most participants reported real (87%) and emotional (77%) recalls, with lesser delusional memories (36.4%). Deeply sedated patients reported significantly fewer real memories (78.6% vs 93.4%, P = .012) and increased delusional memories (60.7% vs 18.4%, P < .001), with no difference in emotional memories (75% vs 80.4%, P = .468). In multivariate analysis, deep sedation had a significant, independent association with delusional memories, increasing their likelihood by a factor of approximately 6 (OR = 6.274; 95% confidence interval = 1.165-33.773, P = .032), without influencing real (P = .545) or emotional (P = .133) memories. Conclusions: This study contributes to a better understanding of the potential adverse effects of deep sedation on ICM memories in critical COVID-19 survivors, indicating a significant, independent association with the incidence of delusional recalls. Although further studies are needed to support these findings, they suggest that strategies targeted to minimize sedation should be favored, aiming to improve long-term recovery.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Deep Sedation , Adult , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Female , Intensive Care Units , Deep Sedation/psychology , Aftercare , Patient Discharge , Critical Care/psychology , Survivors/psychologyABSTRACT
Introduction. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is a single-strand ribonucleic acid virus that was first identified in January 2020 in patients with viral pneumonia in Wuhan, China. The virus has since spread rapidly around the world, leading the World Health Organization to declare it a pandemic on 11 March 2020. In Brazil there have been 21.8 million cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and 608,500 deaths. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost utility of the Oxford, CoronaVac, and Janssen vaccines from the perspective of the Brazilian public health system. Methods. Three microsimulation models were constructed using individual data. The simulations contained seven transition states related to the natural history of COVID-19. The model with a daily cycle had a time horizon of one year and used data from 289 days of the pandemic. The analysis considered direct medical costs from the Brazilian health system perspective. Outpatient, hospital, and mortality databases were used for the model inputs and patient data were stratified by age. Effective vaccines reduced the likelihood of patients becoming ill. Information on the quality of life of patients receiving treatment in the outpatient or hospital setting and disease sequelae were extracted from the published literature. The main outcome of the analysis was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results. The vaccines had incremental cost-utility ratios ranging from USD 4,121 (Oxford) to USD 3,160 per QALY (CoronaVac). The older the population, the lower the incremental cost-utility ratio. Given a willingness-to-pay threshold of BRL 3,129 per QALY, all the vaccines were considered cost effective in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio stratified by age ranged from USD 6,327 per QALY in patients older than 75 years (Janssen) to USD 20,993 per QALY in patients younger than 59 years (CoronaVac). Conclusions. The results of this analysis, stratified by patient age, can help in the preparation of a vaccination prioritization plan.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Evidence suggest that critically ill COVID-19 patients are at higher risk of developing anxiety symptoms, which may be related to or exacerbated by patients concerns regarding their health status and recovery. Objective(s): To assess anxiety symptoms in critically ill COVID-19 survivors, 1-2 months after hospital discharge and to analyze its association with concerns reported by patients regarding their own health status and recovery. Method(s): In the framework of MAPA prospective research, this preliminary study included COVID-19 patients admitted in the Intensive Care Medicine Department (ICMD) of a University Hospital. Patients were excluded if they had an ICMD length of stay (LoS) <=24h, terminal illness, major auditory impairment or inability to communicate at the evaluation time. Participants were assessed at a scheduled telephone follow-up appointment, with Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7). Additional questions were asked to assess the survivors' post-discharge concerns regarding discrimination against for COVID-19, infection of a family member, re-infection or sequelae related to COVID-19. Result(s): Eighty-three patients were included (median age=63 years;63% male) and 24% had anxiety symptoms. Anxiety scores were higher in survivors who reported being afraid of being discriminated against for COVID-19 (30% vs 10%;p=0.034), being re-infected (100% vs 79%;p=0.032) and having sequelae (94% vs 44%;p<0.001). Conclusion(s): These findings revealed that anxiety is common in COVID-19 survivors and is associated with post-discharge patients concerns that may limit patient daily living. This study emphasizes the importance of psychological assessment and follow-up of the COVID-19 survivors, in order to support these patients recovery.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Long-term neuropsychiatric consequences of critical illness are well known. Therefore, it is expected that critical COVID-19 patients might also present several psychiatric symptoms such as depression, with inevitable negative effect on healthrelated quality of life (HRQoL), commonly used as an indicator of illness and treatment impact. Objective(s): To identify depressive symptoms in critical COVID-19 survivors and to examine its association with HRQoL domains. Method(s): This preliminary study involved critical COVID-19 patients admitted into the Intensive Care Medicine Department (ICMD) of a University Hospital, between October and December of 2020. Patients with an ICMD length of stay (LoS)<=24h, terminal illness, major auditory loss, or inability to communicate at the follow-up time were excluded. From 1-2 months after discharge, all participants were evaluated by telephone at follow-up appointment, with Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) (depression) and EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level EQ-5D-5L (HRQoL). This study is part of the longitudinal MAPA project. Result(s): Eighty-three patients were included with a median age of 63 years (range: 31-86) and the majority were male (63%). The most reported problems on EQ-5D-5L domains were usual activities (82%) and mobility (76%). About 27% presented depressive symptoms, and with more problems of self-care (68%vs41%;p=0.029), pain/discomfort (86%vs49%;p=0.002), and anxiety/depression (96%vs54%;p<0.001). Conclusion(s): These preliminary results are in line in previous studies in critical COVID-19 survivors, with depression being associated with worse HRQoL. Bearing this in mind, follow-up approaches with an early screening and treatment of these psychiatric symptoms will be fundamental to optimize the recovery of these patients.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Severe COVID-19 survivors experience long-term neuropsychiatric morbidity, particularly those who developed delirium, with a negative impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Objective(s): To identify the cases of delirium in severe COVID-19 patients and to describe its association with post-hospital discharge HRQoL. Method(s): In the context of the longitudinal MAPA project, we included adult patients (>= 18 years old) admitted with COVID-19 to the Intensive Care Medicine Department (ICMD) of a Portuguese University Hospital (October 2020-April 2021). Exclusion criteria were: ICMD length of stay <=24h, terminal illness, major auditory loss, or inability to communicate at the time of assessment. Delirium during ICMD stay was ascertained based on patients' clinical records. HRQoL was evaluated using the 5-Level EQ-5D questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), at a scheduled telephone follow-up appointment on average 1-2 months after hospital discharge. Result(s): Overall, 124 patients were included with a median age of 62 (range: 24-86) years, being mostly male (65%). About 19% had delirium, 42% were deeply sedated and 43% required invasive mechanical ventilation. Most survivors reported problems on the EQ-5D-5L domains: usual activities (85%), mobility (73%) and anxiety/depression (65%). Patients with delirium reported more pain/discomfort (75%vs46%;p=0.011) and considerably anxiety/ depression (83%vs60%;p=0.032). Conclusion(s): These findings pointed that COVID-19 patients who experienced delirium reported worse HRQoL, regarding pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. This study highlights the importance of not only prevention but also early screening of delirium during hospital stay, as well as the crucial role of the timely interventions at discharge, in order to minimize delirium longterm impacts.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: A higher risk of mental health consequences in critical COVID-19 patients is expected due to several reasons, including prolonged mechanical ventilation with exposure to high sedation. In this context, post-discharge depression has been reported in previous COVID-19 studies, with a profound impact on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Objective(s): To identify depressive symptoms in COVID-19 survivors 1-year after hospital discharge and to analyse its association with HRQoL. Method(s): As part of the longitudinal MAPA project, this study enrolled critical COVID-19 patients admitted in the Intensive Care Medicine Department of a University Hospital (March-May 2020). Participants were assessed through telephone by an intensive care nurse and a psychologist, with the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) (depressive symptoms), EuroQol five-dimension fivelevel questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and EQ-Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) (global health status patient record). Result(s): A sample of 55 survivors (median age=66 years;69% males) were included, with 20% showing depressive symptoms. Pain/discomfort (67%) and anxiety/depression (67%) were the most EQ-5D-5L domains reported. Survivors scoring for depression had more problems in all HRQoL areas (mobility:91%vs.48%, p=0.015;self-care:64%vs.27%, p=0.035;usual activities:91%vs.50%, p=0.017;pain/discomfort:100%vs.59%, p=0.010;anxiety/depression:100% vs.59%, p=0.010). Moreover, they had a lower EQ-VAS median, corresponding a worse self-perception of health status (50vs.80, p=0.010). Conclusion(s): Even after 1-year, a significant proportion of survivors presented depressive symptoms with repercussions in all HRQoL dimensions and association with worse self-perception of global quality of life. Taking this in mind, early screening and treatment of depression in COVID-19 survivors will be crucial, minimizing its impact on quality of life.