Utility and timing of the ROX index in the prediction of high flow oxygen therapy failure in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure of infective etiology: a prospective observational study.

During and following the COVID-19 pandemic, the world has witnessed a surge in high-flow oxygen therapy (HFOT) use. The ability to provide high oxygenation levels with remarkable comfort levels has been the grounds for the same. Despite the advantages, delay in intubation leading to poor overall outcomes has been noticed in subgroup of patients on HFOT. ROX index has been proposed to be a useful indicator to predict HFOT success. In this study, we have examined the utility of the ROX index prospectively in cases of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) due to infective etiologies. Seventy participants were screened, and 55 were recruited for the study. The majority of participants were males (56.4%), with diabetes mellitus being the most common comorbidity (29.1%). The mean age of the study subjects was 46.27±15.6 years. COVID-19 (70.9%) was the most common etiology for AHRF, followed by scrub typhus (21.8%). Nineteen (34.5%) experienced HFOT failure and 9 (16.4%) subjects died during the study period. Demographic characteristics did not differ between either of the two groups (HFOT success versus failure and survived group versus expired group). ROX index was significantly different between the HFOT success versus failure group at baseline, 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 h. The best cut-off of ROX index at baseline and 2 h were 4.4 (sensitivity 91.7%, specificity 86.7%) and 4.3 (sensitivity 94.4% and specificity 86.7%), respectively. ROX index was found to be an efficient tool in predicting HFOT failure in cases with AHRF with infective etiology.

A Delphi consensus statement for the management of post-COVID interstitial lung disease.

INTRODUCTION: As millions of people worldwide recover from COVID-19, a substantial proportion continue to have persistent symptoms, pulmonary function abnormalities, and radiological findings suggestive of post-COVID interstitial lung disease (ILD). To date, there is limited scientific evidence on the management of post-COVID ILD, necessitating a consensus-based approach. AREAS COVERED: A panel of experts in pulmonology and thoracic radiology was constituted. Key questions regarding the management of post-COVID ILD were identified. A search was performed on PubMed and EMBASE and updated till 1 March 2022. The relevant literature regarding the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of post-COVID ILD was summarized. Subsequently, suggestions regarding the management of these patients were framed, and a consensus was obtained using the Delphi approach. Those suggestions which were approved by over 80% of the panelists were accepted. The final document was approved by all panel members. EXPERT OPINION: Dedicated facilities should be established for the care of patients with post-COVID ILD. Symptom screening, pulmonary function testing, and thoracic imaging have a role in the diagnosis. The pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic options for the management of post-COVID ILD are discussed. Further research into the pathophysiology and management of post-COVID ILD will improve our understanding of this condition.

Definition, diagnosis, and management of COVID-19-associated pulmonary mucormycosis: Delphi consensus statement from the Fungal Infection Study Forum and Academy of Pulmonary Sciences, India.

COVID-19-associated pulmonary mucormycosis (CAPM) remains an underdiagnosed entity. Using a modified Delphi method, we have formulated a consensus statement for the diagnosis and management of CAPM. We selected 26 experts from various disciplines who are involved in managing CAPM. Three rounds of the Delphi process were held to reach consensus (≥70% agreement or disagreement) or dissensus. A consensus was achieved for 84 of the 89 statements. Pulmonary mucormycosis occurring within 3 months of COVID-19 diagnosis was labelled CAPM and classified further as proven, probable, and possible. We recommend flexible bronchoscopy to enable early diagnosis. The experts proposed definitions to categorise dual infections with aspergillosis and mucormycosis in patients with COVID-19. We recommend liposomal amphotericin B (5 mg/kg per day) and early surgery as central to the management of mucormycosis in patients with COVID-19. We recommend response assessment at 4-6 weeks using clinical and imaging parameters. Posaconazole or isavuconazole was recommended as maintenance therapy following initial response, but no consensus was reached for the duration of treatment. In patients with stable or progressive disease, the experts recommended salvage therapy with posaconazole or isavuconazole. CAPM is a rare but under-reported complication of COVID-19. Although we have proposed recommendations for defining, diagnosing, and managing CAPM, more extensive research is required.

In Response to: Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19: Finding Window of Opportunity.

Nasa P, Chaudhry D. In Response to: Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19: Finding Window of Opportunity. Indian J Crit Care 2022;26(3):405.

Perception of healthcare workers towards ethical aspects of responsiveness of COVID 19 outbreak: A cross-sectional study.

Introduction: COVID-19 has spread all over the world and most of the countries are still grappled with the Pandemic. Health-care-workers (HCWs) being the frontlines during such pandemics have different beliefs and faiths with regards to ethical aspects of preparations. Methodology: In order to study the perception of HCW about ethical aspects of COVID-19, a cross-sectional study was done in a tertiary-care-teaching hospital. A pretested questionnaire was circulated among the participants on a digital platform. Results: The HCWs were divided over many statements, like if COVID-19 was more hype than reality (45.77% disagreed and 43.25% agreed). 57.44% of participants either agreed or strongly agreed that the treatment of non-COVID-19 cases suffered due to arrangements made for COVID-19 cases. When the responses received against individual statements were compared with various other socio-demographic variables as a denominator, various interesting results were revealed. There was a significant difference of opinion among the participating HCWs (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Differences of the opinions had their relationships to demographic characteristics of the subjects as well as related to perceived knowledge of COVID-19.

Tocilizumab plus standard care versus standard care in patients in India with moderate to severe COVID-19-associated cytokine release syndrome (COVINTOC): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Global randomised controlled trials of the anti-IL-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 have shown conflicting results but potential decreases in time to discharge and burden on intensive care. Tocilizumab reduced progression to mechanical ventilation and death in a trial population enriched for racial and ethnic minorities. We aimed to investigate whether tocilizumab treatment could prevent COVID-19 progression in the first multicentre randomised controlled trial of tocilizumab done entirely in a lower-middle-income country. METHODS: COVINTOC is an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial done at 12 public and private hospitals across India. Adults (aged ≥18 years) admitted to hospital with moderate to severe COVID-19 (Indian Ministry of Health grading) confirmed by positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR result were randomly assigned (1:1 block randomisation) to receive tocilizumab 6 mg/kg plus standard care (the tocilizumab group) or standard care alone (the standard care group). The primary endpoint was progression of COVID-19 (from moderate to severe or from severe to death) up to day 14 in the modified intention-to-treat population of all participants who had at least one post-baseline assessment for the primary endpoint. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients. The trial is completed and registered with the Clinical Trials Registry India (CTRI/2020/05/025369). FINDINGS: 180 patients were recruited between May 30, 2020, and Aug 31, 2020, and randomly assigned to the tocilizumab group (n=90) or the standard care group (n=90). One patient randomly assigned to the standard care group inadvertently received tocilizumab at baseline and was included in the tocilizumab group for all analyses. One patient randomly assigned to the standard care group withdrew consent after the baseline visit and did not receive any study medication and was not included in the modified intention-to-treat population but was still included in safety analyses. 75 (82%) of 91 in the tocilizumab group and 68 (76%) of 89 in the standard care group completed 28 days of follow-up. Progression of COVID-19 up to day 14 occurred in eight (9%) of 91 patients in the tocilizumab group and 11 (13%) of 88 in the standard care group (difference -3·71 [95% CI -18·23 to 11·19]; p=0·42). 33 (36%) of 91 patients in the tocilizumab group and 22 (25%) of 89 patients in the standard care group had adverse events; 18 (20%) and 15 (17%) had serious adverse events. The most common adverse event was acute respiratory distress syndrome, reported in seven (8%) patients in each group. Grade 3 adverse events were reported in two (2%) patients in the tocilizumab group and five (6%) patients in the standard care group. There were no grade 4 adverse events. Serious adverse events were reported in 18 (20%) patients in the tocilizumab group and 15 (17%) in the standard care group; 13 (14%) and 15 (17%) patients died during the study. INTERPRETATION: Routine use of tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with moderate to severe COVID-19 is not supported. However, post-hoc evidence from this study suggests tocilizumab might still be effective in patients with severe COVID-19 and so should be investigated further in future studies. FUNDING: Medanta Institute of Education and Research, Roche India, Cipla India, and Action COVID-19 India.

Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: There is strong evidence for the use of corticosteroid in the management of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, there is still uncertainty about the timing of corticosteroids. We undertook a modified Delphi study to develop expert consensus statements on the early identification of a subset of patients from non-severe COVID-19 who may benefit from using corticosteroids. METHODS: A modified Delphi was conducted with two anonymous surveys between April 30, 2021, and May 3, 2021. An expert panel of 35 experts was selected and invited to participate through e-mail. The consensus was defined as >70% votes in multiple-choice questions (MCQ) on Likert-scale type statements, while strong consensus as >90% votes in MCQ or >50% votes for "very important" on Likert-scale questions in the final round. RESULTS: Twenty experts completed two rounds of the survey. There was strong consensus for the increased work of breathing (95%), a positive six-minute walk test (90%), thorax computed tomography severity score of >14/25 (85%), new-onset organ dysfunction (using clinical or biochemical criteria) (80%), and C-reactive protein >5 times the upper limit of normal (70%) as the criteria for patients' selection. The experts recommended using oral or intravenous (IV) low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days and monitoring of oxygen saturation, body temperature, clinical scoring system, blood sugar, and inflammatory markers for any "red-flag" signs. CONCLUSION: The experts recommended against indiscriminate use of corticosteroids in mild to moderate COVID-19 without the signs of clinical worsening. Oral or IV low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days are recommended for patients with features of disease progression based on clinical, biochemical, or radiological criteria after 5 days from symptom onset under close monitoring. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: How to cite this article: Nasa P, Chaudhry D, Govil D, Daga MK, Jain R, Chhallani AA, et al. Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(11):1280-1285.

Assessment of knowledge of COVID-19 among health care workers-a questionnaire-based cross-sectional study in a tertiary care hospital of India.

BACKGROUND: Health Care Workers (HCW) are among the primary stakeholders and front liners in the fight against COVID-19. They are in direct contact with the patients as primary caregivers and, therefore, are at a higher risk of infection. This Pandemic offers a unique opportunity to explore the level of knowledge among ground-level HCWs during this global health crisis. OBJECTIVE: We conducted this study to assess the knowledge and awareness among HCW regarding the COVID-19 Pandemic in a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: It was a cross-sectional study done on HCW comprising faculty, senior residents, junior residents, demonstrators, and nursing staff of various specialties directly involved in the care of suspected/confirmed COVID-19 patients. A pretested questionnaire consisting of 20 questions was used as a study tool and was circulated through the digital platform. RESULTS: There were a total of 437 respondents. In the subgroup analysis, the respondents in the age group of 55-64 years had a higher mean knowledge score, followed by the respondents in the age group of 18-24 years. For years of experience, the mean knowledge score varied from 13.89 (10-20 years of experience) to 13.83 (5-10 years of experience). The mean knowledge score was the highest for consultants (14.10), followed by Resident Doctors (13.96). CONCLUSIONS: This study has shed some critical clues for further research and interventions. Firstly, as health care workers are probably learning about COVID-19 from their practical exposure rather than formal teaching, it is pertinent to address this issue through well-planned formal sessions of training workshops and lectures.

Tofacitinib Associated with Reduced Intubation Rates in the Management of Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Preliminary Experience.

BACKGROUND: The second wave of COVID-19 pandemic was not only associated with a rapid and severe surge in the number of cases but also limited availability of recommended medicines. Baricitinib has been known to reduce recovery time in COVID-19 pneumonia in association with remdesivir. Tofacitinib, with limited evidence, was used in severe COVID-19 pneumonia based on its similarity of action with baricitinib. METHODS: Data of all patients admitted to the COVID-19 intensive care unit in the month of April were accessed and analyzed. Data of patients who were on other immunomodulators, invasive ventilation, or suffering from end-stage organ diseases were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: Out of 73 patients, data of 50 were analyzed. Twenty-five received tofacitinib and the other 25 were managed with standard of care. Age, comorbidities, and gender distribution between the two groups were similar. On day 7 of admission, the change in SpO2/FiO2 ratio was 1.26 ± 1 and 0.72 ± 1 in the tofacitinib group and control group, respectively. Similarly, a higher number of subjects in the control group showed worsening in the World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale (36 vs 12%, p = 0.01). The clinical objective improvement was similar in the two groups. The intubation rates in the tofacitinib group were significantly lower than that in the control group (32% vs 8%, p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: Tofacitinib, in this retrospective single-center experience, was found to be associated with reduced intubation rates and reduced worsening in the WHO ordinal scale. There was no difference in mortality in the two groups. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Singh PK, Lalwani LK, Govindagoudar MB, Aggarwal R, Chaudhry D, Kumar P, et al. Tofacitinib Associated with Reduced Intubation Rates in the Management of Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Preliminary Experience. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(10):1108-1112.

Assessment of pandemic (COVID-19) preparedness in a teaching hospital in northern India using available (CDC-Atlanta) checklist.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals are at the forefront of dealing infectious public health emergencies. Recently, COVID-19 has been declared as pandemic by the World Health Organization. Dealing with COVID-19 pandemic requires high intensity of administrative activity. OBJECTIVE: We conducted this study to assess and compare, objectively, hospital preparedness with available Centre of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) standards. METHODS: CDC has issued checklist for the assessment of hospital preparedness for COVID-19 pandemic, globally. This list contains 10 elements with sub-sections. We objectified the same and scored the hospital preparations accordingly. Various financial efforts made by the hospital to procure COVID19-specified items was also recorded. RESULTS: As per the CDC checklist, the hospital scored 197 points (72.06%) out of 270 points with highest points in element two and eight. Element two is for the development for written COVID-19 plan. Element eight consists of addressing the occupational health of healthcare workers. Lowest scoring was in the element seven represented visitor access and movement within facility. During the study period, the hospital procured items of approximately 55 lakhs. In the study period, doctors, nursing staff, housekeeping staff, and security staff were channelized for doing COVID-19 duties. CONCLUSIONS: We obtained a score above 70% (good) which is quite encouraging, and we concluded that pandemic preparations in hospitals are necessary and it can be assessed objectively against prevailing standards. It is important in poor countries like India where spending on healthcare is minimal compared to other countries. Additionally, this assessment can be used to guide us further changes in policies and identifying the gaps in pandemic preparedness in hospitals which require special attention.

Airway Management and Related Procedures in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: Position Statement of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has affected nearly all nations globally. The highly contagious nature of the disease puts the healthcare workers at high risk of acquiring infection, especially while handling airway and performing aerosol-generating procedures. The Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, through this position paper, aims to provide guidance for safe airway management to all healthcare workers dealing with airway in COVID-19 patients. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Praveen Kumar G, Kulkarni AP, Govil D, Dixit SB, Chaudhry D, Samavedam S, et al. Airway Management and Related Procedures in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: Position Statement of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(8):630-642.

COVID-19: Winter is COMING!

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has battered the healthcare system of India recently. Though the mortality rate is low but the mortality itself is high. In this issue, dedicated to COVID-19, the authors have presented a concise and directed look at the pieces of evidence for COVID-19. Today, there is a plethora of information available on COVID-19 but the same does not translate into true knowledge. This issue serves as the one-point reference for pieces of evidence on various critical aspects of COVID-19. As winters are approaching and air pollution will again be bothering the healthcare system, these times are vital for preparing ourselves and resources for a long and exhaustive battle. How to cite this article: Chaudhry D, Kumar P, Singh PK, Govindagoudar MB. COVID-19: Winter is COMING! Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 5):S223-S224.

Basic Critical Care for Management of COVID-19 Patients: Position Paper of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, Part-I.

With more than 23 million infections and more than 814,000 deaths worldwide, the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is still far from over. Several classes of drugs including antivirals, antiretrovirals, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, and antibiotics have been tried with varying levels of success. Still, there is lack of any specific therapy to deal with this infection. Although less than 30% of these patients require intensive care unit admission, morbidity and mortality in this subgroup of patients remain high. Hence, it becomes imperative to have general principles to guide intensivists managing these patients. However, as the literature emerges, these recommendations may change and hence, frequent updates may be required. How to cite this article: Juneja D, Savio RD, Srinivasan S, Pandit RA, Ramasubban S, Reddy PK, et al. Basic Critical Care for Management of COVID-19 Patients: Position Paper of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, Part-I. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 5):S244-S253.

Critical Care for COVID-19 Affected Patients: Updated Position Statement of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine.

The management of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is witnessing a change as we learn more about the pathophysiology and the severity of the disease. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analysis have been published over the last few months. Several interventions and therapies which showed promise in the initial days of the pandemic have subsequently failed to show benefit in well-designed trials. Understanding of the methods of oxygen delivery and ventilation have also evolved over the past few months. The Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine (ISCCM) has reviewed the evidence that has emerged since the publication of its position statement in May and has put together an addendum of updated evidence. How to cite this article: Mehta Y, Chaudhry D, Abraham OC, Chacko J, Divatia J, Jagiasi B, et al. Critical Care for COVID-19 Affected Patients: Position Statement of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 5):S225-S230.

Procedures in COVID-19 Patients: Part-II.

Critical care in the era of novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection has multiple challenges including management of the patient, underlying comorbidities, and the complications. With no end in sight to the pandemic, intensive care unit (ICU) practitioners and hospital administrators have to join hands to prepare for the long battle ahead. Critically ill COVID-19 patients need imaging or image-guided interventions in one form or the other including X-rays, ultrasonography (USG), echocardiography (ECHO), and CT scan. These patients often require renal replacement therapy (RRT) for either the preexisting chronic renal insufficiency or acutely developing kidney injury. Another important component of care is transfer of the patient to and fro from the ICU or to higher care centers. Most of the ICUs are equipped with modern facilities but with increasing number of patients a large number of makeshift arrangements are being made for managing these patients. This position paper outlines important tips to formulate protocols and procedures for critically ill patients, who are managed in the ICU. How to cite this article: Pande RK, Bhalla A, Myatra SN, Yaddanpuddi LN, Gupta S, Sahoo TK, et al. Procedures in COVID-19 Patients: Part-II. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 5):S272-S279.

Procedures in COVID-19 Patients: Part-I.

The number of cases with novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) infection is increasing every day in the world, and India contributes a substantial proportion of this burden. Critical care specialists have accepted the challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and are frontline warriors in this war. They have worked hard in streamlining workflow isolation of positive patients, clinical management of critically ill patients, and infection prevention practices. With no end in sight for this pandemic, intensive care unit (ICU) practitioners, hospital administrators, and policy makers have to join hands to prepare for the surge in critical care bed capacity. In this position article, we offer several suggestions on important interventions to the ICU practitioners for better management of critically ill patients. This position article highlights key interventions for COVID-19 treatment and covers several important issues such as endotracheal intubation and tracheostomy (surgical vs PCT), nebulization, bronchoscopy, and invasive procedures such as central venous catheters, arterial lines, and HD catheters. How to cite this article: Pande RK, Bhalla A, SN Myatra, Yaddanpuddi LN, Gupta S, Sahoo TK, et al. Procedures in COVID-19 Patients: Part-I. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 5):S263-S271.

Basic Critical Care for Management of COVID-19 Patients: Position Paper of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, Part II.

In a resource-limited country like India, rationing of scarce critical care resources might be required to ensure appropriate delivery of care to the critically ill patients suffering from COVID-19 infection. Most of these patients require critical care support because of respiratory failure or presence of multiorgan dysfunction syndrome. As there is no pharmacological therapy available, respiratory support in the form of supplemental oxygen, noninvasive ventilation, and invasive mechanical ventilation remains mainstay of care in intensive care units. As there is still dearth of direct evidence, most of the data are extrapolated from the experience gained from the management of general critical care patients. How to cite this article: Juneja D, Savio RD, Srinivasan S, Pandit RA, Ramasubban S, Reddy PK, et al. Basic Critical Care for Management of COVID-19 Patients: Position Paper of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, Part II. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 5):S254-S262.

Modified Barrier Enclosure for Noninvasive Respiratory Support in COVID-19 Outbreak.

AIM: To develop a device that can reduce the exposure of aerosols to healthcare workers (HCWs) who are working in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) critical units. BACKGROUND: Barrier enclosure has recently been proposed for use during intubations where the risk of aerosolization is high. In COVID-19 outbreak, use of noninvasive respiratory support is increasing. But at the same time, it is associated with high risk of aerosol generation, leading to infections among HCWs. We have made a modification in the intubation box and hence expanded its use with an aim to reduce COVID-19 exposure. TECHNIQUE: Vacuum suction tubing was attached to wall mount, and the other end of tubing was fixed, using adhesive surgical tapes, to the inside of the roof of barrier enclosure. Keeping the vacuum suction switched-on inside the box created a negative pressure while overall air flow is into the box from outside. This led us to believe that aerosols if generated are not contaminating patient's vicinity. Currently, we are using barrier enclosure boxes on all patients who are on noninvasive support (noninvasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen therapy). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: We believe that adding barrier enclosure with the above-mentioned negative-pressure modification will provide an opportunity to use noninvasive support widely, while at the same time, HCW's exposure to aerosols will be reduced. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Kumar P, Chaudhry D, Lalwani LK, Singh PK. Modified Barrier Enclosure for Noninvasive Respiratory Support in COVID-19 Outbreak. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(9):835-837.

Tocilizumab and COVID-19.

The number of cases in COVID-19 pandemic is rising rapidly. There has not been a single effective proven medication for COVID-19 disease. Highest mortality has been reported among subjects who develop acute respiratory disease (ARDS). The histopathological analysis of lung specimens has given rise to theories that propose the major role of cytokine release syndrome in the development of ARDS. IL-6 has often been found to be raised in subjects having severe disease. Tocilizumab is a selective inhibitor of the IL-6 pathway and has been approved for various rheumatological diseases. Its use in COVID-19 has been evaluated following the success of other immunosuppressive drugs like steroids. The data in support of against its use in COVID19 are lacking. Similarly, the risk of early- and late-onset infections after tocilizumab in COVID-19 remains unknown. The study by Nasa et al. is a valuable addition to the evidence concerning its use. Despite multiple articles, its safety and efficacy in COVID-19 remain unknown. Caution must be used about its timing and role of IL-6 levels for disease monitoring. How to cite this article: Chaudhry D, Singh PK. Tocilizumab and COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(9):741-743.

Current Approaches to COVID-19: Therapy and Prevention.

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected millions of people worldwide. As our understanding of the disease is evolving, our approach to the patient management is also changing swiftly. Available new evidence is helping us take radical decisions in COVID-19 management. We searched for inclusion of the published literature on treatment of COVID-19 from around the globe. All relevant evidences available till the time of submission of this article were briefly discussed. Once advised as blanket therapy for all patients, recent reports of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin indicated no potential benefit and use of such combination may increase the risk of arrhythmias. Clinical evidence with newer antivirals such as remdesivir and favipiravir is promising that can hasten the patient recovery and reduce the mortality. With steroids, evidence is much clear in that it should be used in low dose and for short period not extending beyond 7 days in moderate to severe hospitalized patients. Low-molecular-weight heparin should be initiated in all hospitalized COVID-19 patients and dose should be based on the coagulation profile and risk of thromboembolism. Immunomodulatory drugs such tocilizumab may be considered for severe and critically ill patients to improve the outcomes. Though ulinastatin can be a potential alternative immunomodulator, there is lack of clinical evidence on its usage in COVID-19. Convalescent plasma therapy can be potentially lifesaving in critically ill patients. However, there is need to generate further evidence with various such therapies. Though availability of a potent vaccine is awaited, current treatment of COVID-19 is based on available therapies, which is guided by the evidence. In this review, we discuss the potential treatments available around the globe with current evidence on each of such treatments. How to cite this article: Dixit SB, Zirpe KG, Kulkarni AP, Chaudhry D, Govil D, Mehta Y, et al. Current Approaches to COVID-19: Therapy and Prevention. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(9):838-846.