ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral illness caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. With the increasing number of improved and discharged patients with COVID-19, the definition of an adequate follow-up strategy is needed. The purpose of this study was to assess whether lung ultrasound (LUS) is an effective indicator of subclinical residual lung damage in patients with COVID-19 who meet discharge criteria. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 70 consecutive patients with COVID-19 who had a prolonged hospitalization with inpatient rehabilitation between April 6 and May 22, 2020. All of the patients underwent an LUS evaluation at discharge. Data of patients with more severe disease during the acute phase (ie, required ventilatory support) were compared to those of patients with milder disease. RESULTS: Among the 70 patients with COVID-19 (22 women and 48 men; mean age ± SD, 68 ± 13 years), the LUS score before discharge was still frankly pathologic and higher in patients who had more severe disease during the acute phase compared to patients with milder disease (median [interquartile range], 8.0 [5.5-13.5] versus 2.0 [1.0-7.0]; P < .001), even when both categories met internationally defined discharge criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Lung ultrasound can identify the persistence of subclinical residual lung damage in patients with severe COVID-19 even if they meet discharge criteria. Considering the low cost, easy application, and lack of radiation exposure, LUS seems the ideal tool to be adopted in outpatient and primary care settings for the follow-up of patients with COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography/methods , Aged , Chronic Disease , Female , Humans , Male , Prospective Studies , Reproducibility of Results , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant motor, cognitive, psychological, neurological and cardiological disabilities in many infected patients. Functional rehabilitation of infectious COVID-19 patients has been implemented in the acute care wards and in appropriate, ad hoc, multidisciplinary COVID-19 rehabilitation units. However, because COVID-19 rehabilitation units are a clinical novelty, clinical and organizational benchmarks are not yet available. The aim of this study is to describe the organizational needs and operational costs of such a unit, by comparing its activity, organization, and costs with 2 other functional rehabilitation units, in San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy. METHODS: The 2-month activity of the COVID-19 Rehabilitation Unit at San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy, which was created in response to the emergency need for rehabilitation of COVID-19 patients, was compared with the previous year's activity of the Cardiac Rehabilitation and Motor Rehabilitation Units of the same institute. RESULTS: The COVID-19 Rehabilitation Unit had the same number of care beds as the other units, but required twice the amount of staff and instrumental equipment, leading to a deficit in costs. DISCUSSION: The COVID-19 Rehabilitation Unit was twice as expensive as the 2 other units studied. World health systems are organizing to respond to the pandemic by expanding capacity in acute intensive care and sub-intensive care units. This study shows that COVID-19 rehabilitation units must be organized and equiped according to the clinical and rehabilitative needs of patients, following specific measures to prevent the spread of infection amongs patients and workers.