Nutrition delivery across hospitalisation in critically ill patients with COVID-19: An observational study of the Australian experience.

BACKGROUND: Data on nutrition delivery over the whole hospital admission in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are scarce, particularly in the Australian setting. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to describe nutrition delivery in critically ill patients admitted to Australian intensive care units (ICUs) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with a focus on post-ICU nutrition practices. METHODS: A multicentre observational study conducted at nine sites included adult patients with a positive COVID-19 diagnosis admitted to the ICU for >24 h and discharged to an acute ward over a 12-month recruitment period from 1 March 2020. Data were extracted on baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes. Nutrition practice data from the ICU and weekly in the post-ICU ward (up to week four) included route of feeding, presence of nutrition-impacting symptoms, and nutrition support received. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients were included (71% male, age: 58 ± 14 years, body mass index: 30±7 kg/m2), of whom 41.7% (n = 43) received mechanical ventilation within 14 days of ICU admission. While oral nutrition was received by more patients at any time point in the ICU (n = 93, 91.2% of patients) than enteral nutrition (EN) (n = 43, 42.2%) or parenteral nutrition (PN) (n = 2, 2.0%), EN was delivered for a greater duration of time (69.6% feeding days) than oral and PN (29.7% and 0.7%, respectively). More patients received oral intake than the other modes in the post-ICU ward (n = 95, 95.0%), and 40.0% (n = 38/95) of patients were receiving oral nutrition supplements. In the week after ICU discharge, 51.0% of patients (n = 51) had at least one nutrition-impacting symptom, most commonly a reduced appetite (n = 25; 24.5%) or dysphagia (n = 16; 15.7%). CONCLUSION: Critically ill patients during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia were more likely to receive oral nutrition than artificial nutrition support at any time point both in the ICU and in the post-ICU ward, whereas EN was provided for a greater duration when it was prescribed. Nutrition-impacting symptoms were common.

COVID-19 related ICU admissions in paediatric and young adult patients in Australia: a national case series 2020–2022

Background COVID-19 pandemic research efforts have focused on disease phenotypes in adults. A distinct spectrum of illness has been documented in paediatric populations. We aimed to review paediatric intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in Australia, across differing variant predominant phases of the pandemic. Methods Data reported to the Short PeRiod IncideNce sTudy of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SPRINT-SARI) Australia, across 49 ICUs from February 2020 to June 2022 were extracted. We defined ‘child' as patients aged <12 years, ‘adolescent' as patients aged 12–17 years, and ‘young adult' as patients aged 18–25 years. Findings We identified 226 paediatric ICU admissions with COVID-19, representing 3.9% of ICU admissions across the study period. Comorbidity was present in 34.6% of children, 51.4% of adolescents, and 48.7% of young adults. The need for respiratory support was highest in young adults. While 28.3% of patients <18 years required invasive ventilation, in-hospital mortality in paediatric patients was 3.6%. During the Omicron period, there was an increase in the annualised incidence of age-specific COVID-19 ICU admissions per 100,000 population, albeit a decrease in the incidence per 1000 SARS-CoV-2 notifications. Interpretation This study demonstrated an appreciable burden of COVID-19 in paediatric patients. Adolescent patients presented phenotypically similar to young adults, however, illness severity was lower in younger cohorts. The Omicron phase of the pandemic demonstrated an increased age-specific population incidence of COVID-19 ICU admissions, albeit a reduced incidence when based on SARS-CoV-2 notifications. Funding SPRINT-SARI Australia is supported by the 10.13039/501100003921Department of Health, Commonwealth of Australia [Standing Deed SON60002733].

COVID-19 related ICU admissions in paediatric and young adult patients in Australia: a national case series 2020-2022.

Background: COVID-19 pandemic research efforts have focused on disease phenotypes in adults. A distinct spectrum of illness has been documented in paediatric populations. We aimed to review paediatric intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in Australia, across differing variant predominant phases of the pandemic. Methods: Data reported to the Short PeRiod IncideNce sTudy of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SPRINT-SARI) Australia, across 49 ICUs from February 2020 to June 2022 were extracted. We defined 'child' as patients aged <12 years, 'adolescent' as patients aged 12-17 years, and 'young adult' as patients aged 18-25 years. Findings: We identified 226 paediatric ICU admissions with COVID-19, representing 3.9% of ICU admissions across the study period. Comorbidity was present in 34.6% of children, 51.4% of adolescents, and 48.7% of young adults. The need for respiratory support was highest in young adults. While 28.3% of patients <18 years required invasive ventilation, in-hospital mortality in paediatric patients was 3.6%. During the Omicron period, there was an increase in the annualised incidence of age-specific COVID-19 ICU admissions per 100,000 population, albeit a decrease in the incidence per 1000 SARS-CoV-2 notifications. Interpretation: This study demonstrated an appreciable burden of COVID-19 in paediatric patients. Adolescent patients presented phenotypically similar to young adults, however, illness severity was lower in younger cohorts. The Omicron phase of the pandemic demonstrated an increased age-specific population incidence of COVID-19 ICU admissions, albeit a reduced incidence when based on SARS-CoV-2 notifications. Funding: SPRINT-SARI Australia is supported by the Department of Health, Commonwealth of Australia [Standing Deed SON60002733].

Effect of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Initiation on Organ Support-Free Days in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective: To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non-critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was organ support-free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS: On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support-free days among critically ill patients was 10 (-1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (-1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support-free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.

Inter-hospital transfer and clinical outcomes for people with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units in Australia: an observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between inter-hospital transfer and in-hospital mortality among people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study; analysis of data collected for the Short Period Incidence Study of Severe Acute Respiratory Illness (SPRINT-SARI) Australia study. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: People with COVID-19 admitted to 63 ICUs, 1 January 2020 - 1 April 2022. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome: in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes: ICU and hospital lengths of stay and frequency of selected complications. RESULTS: Of 5207 people with records in the SPRINT-SARI Australia database at 1 April 2022, 328 (6.3%) had been transferred between hospitals, 305 (93%) during the third pandemic wave. Compared with patients not transferred, their median age was lower (53 years; interquartile range [IQR], 45-61 years v 60 years; IQR, 46-70 years), their median body mass index higher (32.5 [IQR, 27.2-39.0] kg/m2 v 30.1 [IQR, 25.7-35.7] kg/m2 ), and fewer had received a COVID-19 vaccine (22% v 44.9%); their median APACHE II scores were similar (14.0; IQR, 12.0-18.0 v 14.0; IQR, 10.0-19.0). Bacterial pneumonia (64.7% v 29.0%) and bacteraemia (27% v 8%) were more frequent in transferred patients, as was the need for more intensive ICU interventions, including invasive mechanical ventilation (71.2% v 38.1%) and extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (26% v 1.7%). Crude ICU (19% v 14.9%) and in-hospital mortality (19% v 18.4%) were similar for patients who were or were not transferred; median lengths of ICU (20.0 [IQR, 11.2-40.3] days v 4.6 [IQR, 2.1-10.1] days) and hospital stay (29.7 [IQR, 18.1-49.6] days v 12.3 [IQR, 7.3-21.0] days) were longer for transferred patients. In the multivariable regression analysis, in-hospital mortality risk was lower for transferred patients (risk difference [RD], -5.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI] -10 to -0.03 percentage points), but not in the propensity score-adjusted analysis (RD, -3.4 [95% CI, -8.9 to 2.1] percentage points). CONCLUSIONS: Among people with COVID-19 admitted to ICUs, patients transferred from another hospital required more intense interventions and remained in hospital longer, but were not at greater risk of dying in hospital than the patients who were not transferred.

Long-term (180-Day) Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19 in the REMAP-CAP Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The longer-term effects of therapies for the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19 are unknown. Objective: To determine the effect of multiple interventions for critically ill adults with COVID-19 on longer-term outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prespecified secondary analysis of an ongoing adaptive platform trial (REMAP-CAP) testing interventions within multiple therapeutic domains in which 4869 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 were enrolled between March 9, 2020, and June 22, 2021, from 197 sites in 14 countries. The final 180-day follow-up was completed on March 2, 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive 1 or more interventions within 6 treatment domains: immune modulators (n = 2274), convalescent plasma (n = 2011), antiplatelet therapy (n = 1557), anticoagulation (n = 1033), antivirals (n = 726), and corticosteroids (n = 401). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was survival through day 180, analyzed using a bayesian piecewise exponential model. A hazard ratio (HR) less than 1 represented improved survival (superiority), while an HR greater than 1 represented worsened survival (harm); futility was represented by a relative improvement less than 20% in outcome, shown by an HR greater than 0.83. Results: Among 4869 randomized patients (mean age, 59.3 years; 1537 [32.1%] women), 4107 (84.3%) had known vital status and 2590 (63.1%) were alive at day 180. IL-6 receptor antagonists had a greater than 99.9% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.61-0.90]) and antiplatelet agents had a 95% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.71-1.03]) compared with the control, while the probability of trial-defined statistical futility (HR >0.83) was high for therapeutic anticoagulation (99.9%; HR, 1.13 [95% CrI, 0.93-1.42]), convalescent plasma (99.2%; HR, 0.99 [95% CrI, 0.86-1.14]), and lopinavir-ritonavir (96.6%; HR, 1.06 [95% CrI, 0.82-1.38]) and the probabilities of harm from hydroxychloroquine (96.9%; HR, 1.51 [95% CrI, 0.98-2.29]) and the combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine (96.8%; HR, 1.61 [95% CrI, 0.97-2.67]) were high. The corticosteroid domain was stopped early prior to reaching a predefined statistical trigger; there was a 57.1% to 61.6% probability of improving 6-month survival across varying hydrocortisone dosing strategies. Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill patients with COVID-19 randomized to receive 1 or more therapeutic interventions, treatment with an IL-6 receptor antagonist had a greater than 99.9% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control, and treatment with an antiplatelet had a 95.0% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control. Overall, when considered with previously reported short-term results, the findings indicate that initial in-hospital treatment effects were consistent for most therapies through 6 months.

Characteristics and outcomes of an international cohort of 600 000 hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: We describe demographic features, treatments and clinical outcomes in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 cohort, one of the world's largest international, standardized data sets concerning hospitalized patients. METHODS: The data set analysed includes COVID-19 patients hospitalized between January 2020 and January 2022 in 52 countries. We investigated how symptoms on admission, co-morbidities, risk factors and treatments varied by age, sex and other characteristics. We used Cox regression models to investigate associations between demographics, symptoms, co-morbidities and other factors with risk of death, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). RESULTS: Data were available for 689 572 patients with laboratory-confirmed (91.1%) or clinically diagnosed (8.9%) SARS-CoV-2 infection from 52 countries. Age [adjusted hazard ratio per 10 years 1.49 (95% CI 1.48, 1.49)] and male sex [1.23 (1.21, 1.24)] were associated with a higher risk of death. Rates of admission to an ICU and use of IMV increased with age up to age 60 years then dropped. Symptoms, co-morbidities and treatments varied by age and had varied associations with clinical outcomes. The case-fatality ratio varied by country partly due to differences in the clinical characteristics of recruited patients and was on average 21.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Age was the strongest determinant of risk of death, with a ∼30-fold difference between the oldest and youngest groups; each of the co-morbidities included was associated with up to an almost 2-fold increase in risk. Smoking and obesity were also associated with a higher risk of death. The size of our international database and the standardized data collection method make this study a comprehensive international description of COVID-19 clinical features. Our findings may inform strategies that involve prioritization of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who have a higher risk of death.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of critically ill patients with one, two and three doses of vaccination against COVID-19 in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination has been shown to be highly effective in preventing death and severe disease from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Currently, few studies have directly compared vaccinated and unvaccinated patients with severe COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). AIMS: To compare the clinical characteristics and outcomes of vaccine recipients and unvaccinated patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to the ICU in a nationwide setting. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Short PeRiod IncideNce sTudy of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Australia, in 57 ICU during Delta and Omicron predominant periods of the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome was inhospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay and ICU mortality. RESULTS:  There were 2970 patients admitted to ICU across participating sites from 26 June 2021 to 8 February 2022; 1134 (38.2%) patients were vaccine recipients, and 1836 (61.8%) patients were unvaccinated. Vaccine recipients were older, more comorbid and less likely to require organ support. Unadjusted inhospital mortality was greater in the vaccinated cohort. After adjusting for age, gender and comorbid status, no statistically significant association between inhospital or ICU mortality, and vaccination status, was apparent. CONCLUSION: We found COVID-19 infection can cause severe disease and death in vaccine recipients, though comorbid status and older age were significant contributors to mortality. Organ support requirements and the number of deaths were highest in the unvaccinated cohort.

The impact of the intensive care unit family liaison nurse role on communication during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative descriptive study of healthcare professionals' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has deeply impacted patient and family communication and patient- and family-centred care in the intensive care unit (ICU). A new role-the ICU Family Liaison Nurse (FLN)-was introduced in an Australian metropolitan hospital ICU to facilitate communication between patient and family and ICU healthcare professionals, although there is limited knowledge about the impact of this from the ICU healthcare professionals' perspectives. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the impact of the ICU FLN role on communication with patients and their family during the COVID-19 pandemic, from the ICU healthcare professionals' perspectives. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted. Seven participants including ICU FLNs, ICU doctors, nurses, and social workers who worked with the ICU FLNs were interviewed. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Two main themes related to the ICU FLN role were identified. First, the COVID-19 pandemic posed challenges to patient and family communication, but it also created opportunities to improve patient and family communication. Second, the ICU FLN role brought beneficial impacts to the ICU healthcare professionals' workflow and work experience, as well as patient and family communication. The ICU FLN role has potential benefits that extend beyond the pandemic. CONCLUSION: We found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the ICU FLN role was acceptable, beneficial, and appreciated from the ICU healthcare professionals' perspectives. Further research should continue the evaluation of the ICU FLN role during and post the pandemic.

Nutrition care processes across hospitalisation in critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Australia: A multicentre prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted major challenges with usual nutrition care processes, leading to reports of malnutrition and nutrition-related issues in these patients. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe nutrition-related service delivery practices across hospitalisation in critically ill patients with COVID-19 admitted to Australian intensive care units (ICUs) in the initial pandemic phase. METHODS: This was a multicentre (nine site) observational study in Australia, linked with a national registry of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Adult patients with COVID-19 who were discharged to an acute ward following ICU admission were included over a 12-month period. Data are presented as n (%), median (interquartile range [IQR]), and odds ratio (OR [95% confidence interval {CI}]). RESULTS: A total of 103 patients were included. Oral nutrition was the most common mode of nutrition (93 [93%]). In the ICU, there were 53 (52%) patients seen by a dietitian (median 4 [2-8] occasions) and malnutrition screening occurred in 51 (50%) patients most commonly with the malnutrition screening tool (50 [98%]). The odds of receiving a higher malnutrition screening tool score increased by 36% for every screening in the ICU (1st to 4th, OR: 1.39 [95% CI: 1.05-1.77] p = 0.018) (indicating increasing risk of malnutrition). On the ward, 51 (50.5%) patients were seen by a dietitian (median time to consult: 44 [22.5-75] hours post ICU discharge). The odds of dietetic consult increased by 39% every week while on the ward (OR: 1.39 [1.03-1.89], p = 0.034). Patients who received mechanical ventilation (MV) were more likely to receive dietetic input than those who never received MV. CONCLUSIONS: During the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, approximately half of the patients included were seen by a dietitian. An increased number of malnutrition screens were associated with a higher risk score in the ICU and likelihood of dietetic consult increased if patients received MV and as length of ward stay increased.

Machine learning predicts the short-term requirement for invasive ventilation among Australian critically ill COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVE(S): To use machine learning (ML) to predict short-term requirements for invasive ventilation in patients with COVID-19 admitted to Australian intensive care units (ICUs). DESIGN: A machine learning study within a national ICU COVID-19 registry in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients who were spontaneously breathing and admitted to participating ICUs with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from 20 February 2020 to 7 March 2021. Patients intubated on day one of their ICU admission were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Six machine learning models predicted the requirement for invasive ventilation by day three of ICU admission from variables recorded on the first calendar day of ICU admission; (1) random forest classifier (RF), (2) decision tree classifier (DT), (3) logistic regression (LR), (4) K neighbours classifier (KNN), (5) support vector machine (SVM), and (6) gradient boosted machine (GBM). Cross-validation was used to assess the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of machine learning models. RESULTS: 300 ICU admissions collected from 53 ICUs across Australia were included. The median [IQR] age of patients was 59 [50-69] years, 109 (36%) were female and 60 (20%) required invasive ventilation on day two or three. Random forest and Gradient boosted machine were the best performing algorithms, achieving mean (SD) AUCs of 0.69 (0.06) and 0.68 (0.07), and mean sensitivities of 77 (19%) and 81 (17%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Machine learning can be used to predict subsequent ventilation in patients with COVID-19 who were spontaneously breathing and admitted to Australian ICUs.

People in intensive care with COVID-19: demographic and clinical features during the first, second, and third pandemic waves in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the demographic and clinical features, management, and outcomes for patients admitted with COVID-19 to intensive care units (ICUs) during the first, second, and third waves of the pandemic in Australia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: People aged 16 years or more admitted with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 to the 78 Australian ICUs participating in the Short Period Incidence Study of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SPRINT-SARI) Australia project during the first (27 February - 30 June 2020), second (1 July 2020 - 25 June 2021), and third COVID-19 waves (26 June - 1 November 2021). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome: in-hospital mortality. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: ICU mortality; ICU and hospital lengths of stay; supportive and disease-specific therapies. RESULTS: 2493 people (1535 men, 62%) were admitted to 59 ICUs: 214 during the first (9%), 296 during the second (12%), and 1983 during the third wave (80%). The median age was 64 (IQR, 54-72) years during the first wave, 58 (IQR, 49-68) years during the second, and 54 (IQR, 41-65) years during the third. The proportion without co-existing illnesses was largest during the third wave (41%; first wave, 32%; second wave, 29%). The proportion of ICU beds occupied by patients with COVID-19 was 2.8% (95% CI, 2.7-2.9%) during the first, 4.6% (95% CI, 4.3-5.1%) during the second, and 19.1% (95% CI, 17.9-20.2%) during the third wave. Non-invasive (42% v 15%) and prone ventilation strategies (63% v 15%) were used more frequently during the third wave than during the first two waves. Thirty patients (14%) died in hospital during the first wave, 35 (12%) during the second, and 281 (17%) during the third. After adjusting for age, illness severity, and other covariates, the risk of in-hospital mortality was similar for the first and second waves, but 9.60 (95% CI, 3.52-16.7) percentage points higher during the third than the first wave. CONCLUSION: The demographic characteristics of patients in intensive care with COVID-19 and the treatments they received during the third pandemic wave differed from those of the first two waves. Adjusted in-hospital mortality was highest during the third wave.

Diabetes mellitus, glycaemic control, and severe COVID-19 in the Australian critical care setting: A nested cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, diabetes mellitus is recognised as a risk factor for severe COVID-19. The relationship between diabetes mellitus and severe COVID-19 has not been reported in the Australian population. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of and outcomes for patients with diabetes admitted to Australian intensive care units (ICUs) with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a nested cohort study of four ICUs in Melbourne participating in the Short Period Incidence Study of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SPRINT-SARI) Australia project. All adult patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 from 20 February 2020 to 27 February 2021 were included. Blood glucose and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) data were retrospectively collected. Diabetes was diagnosed from medical history or an HbA1c ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol). Hospital mortality was assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 136 patients with median age 58 years [48-68] and median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score of 14 [11-19]. Fifty-eight patients had diabetes (43%), 46 patients had stress-induced hyperglycaemia (34%), and 32 patients had normoglycaemia (23%). Patients with diabetes were older, were with higher APACHE II scores, had greater glycaemic variability than patients with normoglycaemia, and had longer hospital length of stay. Overall hospital mortality was 16% (22/136), including nine patients with diabetes, nine patients with stress-induced hyperglycaemia, and two patients with normoglycaemia. CONCLUSION: Diabetes is prevalent in patients admitted to Australian ICUs with severe COVID-19, highlighting the need for prevention strategies in this vulnerable population.

Early short course of neuromuscular blocking agents in patients with COVID-19 ARDS: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: The role of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is not fully elucidated. Therefore, we aimed to investigate in COVID-19 patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS the impact of early use of NMBAs on 90-day mortality, through propensity score (PS) matching analysis. METHODS: We analyzed a convenience sample of patients with COVID-19 and moderate-to-severe ARDS, admitted to 244 intensive care units within the COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium, from February 1, 2020, through October 31, 2021. Patients undergoing at least 2 days and up to 3 consecutive days of NMBAs (NMBA treatment), within 48 h from commencement of IMV were compared with subjects who did not receive NMBAs or only upon commencement of IMV (control). The primary objective in the PS-matched cohort was comparison between groups in 90-day in-hospital mortality, assessed through Cox proportional hazard modeling. Secondary objectives were comparisons in the numbers of ventilator-free days (VFD) between day 1 and day 28 and between day 1 and 90 through competing risk regression. RESULTS: Data from 1953 patients were included. After propensity score matching, 210 cases from each group were well matched. In the PS-matched cohort, mean (± SD) age was 60.3 ± 13.2 years and 296 (70.5%) were male and the most common comorbidities were hypertension (56.9%), obesity (41.1%), and diabetes (30.0%). The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for death at 90 days in the NMBA treatment vs control group was 1.12 (95% CI 0.79, 1.59, p = 0.534). After adjustment for smoking habit and critical therapeutic covariates, the HR was 1.07 (95% CI 0.72, 1.61, p = 0.729). At 28 days, VFD were 16 (IQR 0-25) and 25 (IQR 7-26) in the NMBA treatment and control groups, respectively (sub-hazard ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.67, 1.00, p = 0.055). At 90 days, VFD were 77 (IQR 0-87) and 87 (IQR 0-88) (sub-hazard ratio 0.86 (95% CI 0.69, 1.07; p = 0.177). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 and moderate-to-severe ARDS, short course of NMBA treatment, applied early, did not significantly improve 90-day mortality and VFD. In the absence of definitive data from clinical trials, NMBAs should be indicated cautiously in this setting.

Comparison of 6-Month Outcomes of Survivors of COVID-19 versus Non-COVID-19 Critical Illness.

Rationale: The outcomes of survivors of critical illness due to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) compared with non-COVID-19 are yet to be established. Objectives: We aimed to investigate new disability at 6 months in mechanically ventilated patients admitted to Australian ICUs with COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19. Methods: We included critically ill patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 from two prospective observational studies. Patients were eligible if they were adult (age ⩾ 8 yr) and received ⩾24 hours of mechanical ventilation. In addition, patients with COVID-19 were eligible with a positive laboratory PCR test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Measurements and Main Results: Demographic, intervention, and hospital outcome data were obtained from electronic medical records. Survivors were contacted by telephone for functional outcomes with trained outcome assessors using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Between March 6, 2020, and April 21, 2021, 120 critically ill patients with COVID-19, and between August 2017 and January 2019, 199 critically ill patients without COVID-19, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Patients with COVID-19 were older (median [interquartile range], 62 [55-71] vs. 58 [44-69] yr; P = 0.019) with a lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (17 [13-20] vs. 19 [15-23]; P = 0.011). Although duration of ventilation was longer in patients with COVID-19 than in those without COVID-19 (12 [5-19] vs. 4.8 [2.3-8.8] d; P < 0.001), 180-day mortality was similar between the groups (39/120 [32.5%] vs. 70/199 [35.2%]; P = 0.715). The incidence of death or new disability at 180 days was similar (58/93 [62.4%] vs. 99/150 [66/0%]; P = 0.583). Conclusions: At 6 months, there was no difference in new disability for patients requiring mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04401254).

Nosocomial infections amongst critically ill COVID-19 patients in Australia.

Purpose: To determine the frequency of nosocomial infections including hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and bloodstream infection (BSI), amongst critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection in Australian ICUs and to evaluate associations with mortality and length of stay (LOS). Methods: The effect of nosocomial infections on hospital mortality was evaluated using hierarchical logistic regression models to adjust for illness severity and mechanical ventilation. Results: There were 490 patients admitted to 55 ICUs during the study period. Adjusted odds ratio (OR) for hospital mortality was 1.61 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-4.27, p = 0.3) when considering BSI, and 1.76 (95% CI 0.73-4.21, p = 0.2) for HAP. The average adjusted ICU LOS was significantly longer for patients with BSI (geometric mean 9.0 days vs 6.3 days, p = 0.04) and HAP (geometric mean 13.9 days vs 6.0 days p<0.001). Conclusion: Nosocomial infection rates amongst patients with COVID-19 were low and their development was associated with a significantly longer ICU LOS.

Clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 registered in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium WHO clinical characterisation protocol: a prospective, multinational, multicentre, observational study.

Due to the large number of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many were treated outside the traditional walls of the intensive care unit (ICU), and in many cases, by personnel who were not trained in critical care. The clinical characteristics and the relative impact of caring for severe COVID-19 patients outside the ICU is unknown. This was a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium World Health Organization COVID-19 platform. Severe COVID-19 patients were identified as those admitted to an ICU and/or those treated with one of the following treatments: invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, inotropes or vasopressors. A logistic generalised additive model was used to compare clinical outcomes among patients admitted or not to the ICU. A total of 40 440 patients from 43 countries and six continents were included in this analysis. Severe COVID-19 patients were frequently male (62.9%), older adults (median (interquartile range (IQR), 67 (55-78) years), and with at least one comorbidity (63.2%). The overall median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 10 (5-19) days and was longer in patients admitted to an ICU than in those who were cared for outside the ICU (12 (6-23) days versus 8 (4-15) days, p<0.0001). The 28-day fatality ratio was lower in ICU-admitted patients (30.7% (5797 out of 18 831) versus 39.0% (7532 out of 19 295), p<0.0001). Patients admitted to an ICU had a significantly lower probability of death than those who were not (adjusted OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.65-0.75; p<0.0001). Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an ICU had significantly lower 28-day fatality ratio than those cared for outside an ICU.

Clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 registered in the ISARIC WHO clinical characterisation protocol: a prospective, multinational, multicentre, observational study

Due to the large number of patients with severe COVID-19, many were treated outside of the traditional walls of the ICU, and in many cases, by personnel who were not trained in critical care. The clinical characteristics and the relative impact of caring for severe COVID-19 patients outside of the ICU is unknown. This was a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC WHO COVID-19 platform. Severe COVID-19 patients were identified as those admitted to an ICU and/or those treated with one of the following treatments: invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, inotropes, and vasopressors. A logistic Generalised Additive Model was used to compare clinical outcomes among patients admitted and not to the ICU. A total of 40 440 patients from 43 countries and six continents were included in this analysis. Severe COVID-19 patients were frequently male (62.9%), older adults (median [IQR], 67 years [55, 78]), and with at least one comorbidity (63.2%). The overall median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 10 days (5–19) and was longer in patients admitted to an ICU than in those that were cared for outside of ICU (12 [6–23] versus 8 [4–15] days, p<0.0001). The 28-day fatality ratio was lower in ICU-admitted patients (30.7% [5797/18831] versus 39.0% [7532/19295], p<0.0001). Patients admitted to an ICU had a significantly lower probability of death than those who were not (adjusted OR:0.70, 95%CI: 0.65-0.75, p<0.0001). Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an ICU had significantly lower 28-day fatality ratio than those cared for outside of an ICU.

Assessment of 28-Day In-Hospital Mortality in Mechanically Ventilated Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: An International Cohort Study.

Factors associated with mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 patients on invasive mechanical ventilation are still not fully elucidated. OBJECTIVES: To identify patient-level parameters, readily available at the bedside, associated with the risk of in-hospital mortality within 28 days from commencement of invasive mechanical ventilation or coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective observational cohort study by the global Coronavirus Disease 2019 Critical Care Consortium. Patients with laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation from February 2, 2020, to May 15, 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Patient characteristics and clinical data were assessed upon ICU admission, the commencement of invasive mechanical ventilation and for 28 days thereafter. We primarily aimed to identify time-independent and time-dependent risk factors for 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation mortality. RESULTS: One-thousand five-hundred eighty-seven patients were included in the survival analysis; 588 patients died in hospital within 28 days of commencing invasive mechanical ventilation (37%). Cox-regression analysis identified associations between the hazard of 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation mortality with age (hazard ratio, 1.26 per 10-yr increase in age; 95% CI, 1.16-1.37; p < 0.001), positive end-expiratory pressure upon commencement of invasive mechanical ventilation (hazard ratio, 0.81 per 5 cm H2O increase; 95% CI, 0.67-0.97; p = 0.02). Time-dependent parameters associated with 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation mortality were serum creatinine (hazard ratio, 1.28 per doubling; 95% CI, 1.15-1.41; p < 0.001), lactate (hazard ratio, 1.22 per doubling; 95% CI, 1.11-1.34; p < 0.001), Paco2 (hazard ratio, 1.63 per doubling; 95% CI, 1.19-2.25; p < 0.001), pH (hazard ratio, 0.89 per 0.1 increase; 95% CI, 0.8-14; p = 0.041), Pao2/Fio2 (hazard ratio, 0.58 per doubling; 95% CI, 0.52-0.66; p < 0.001), and mean arterial pressure (hazard ratio, 0.92 per 10 mm Hg increase; 95% CI, 0.88-0.97; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This international study suggests that in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 on invasive mechanical ventilation, older age and clinically relevant variables monitored at baseline or sequentially during the course of invasive mechanical ventilation are associated with 28-day invasive mechanical ventilation mortality hazard. Further investigation is warranted to validate any causative roles these parameters might play in influencing clinical outcomes.