Respiratory rehabilitation for patients with COVID-19 infection and chronic respiratory failure: a real-life retrospective study by a Lombard network.

The Lombardy region has been one of the areas most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic since the first months of 2020, providing real-life experiences in the acute phase. It is unclear how the respiratory rehabilitation network responded to this emergency. The aims of this retrospective study were: i) to analyze clinical, functional, and disability data at admission; ii) describe assessment tools and rehabilitative programs; iii) evaluate improvement after rehabilitation. The study was conducted on data collected from ten pulmonary rehabilitation centers in Lombardy, between the period of March 1st 2020 to March 1st 2021, in patients with respiratory failure recovering from COVID-19 both at admission and discharge. The study included demographics, comorbidities, nutritional status, risk of falls, disability status (Barthel index; Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB); 6 minutes walking test (6MWT), symptoms (dyspnoea with Barthel Dyspnoea and MRC Dyspnoea Scale), length of stay, discharge destination, need for mechanical ventilation, respiratory function, assessment/outcomes indices, and prescribed rehabilitative programs. 413 patients were analyzed. Length of stay in acute and rehabilitative units was less than 30 days. Fifty % of patients used non-invasive ventilation during their stay. Functional status was mildly compromised for forced volumes and oxygenation, while severely compromised for diffusion capacity. Independency was low while physical performance status very low.  At discharge, 318 (77%) patients were sent home, 83 (20.1%) were transferred to an acute unit and 12 (2.9%) passed away. Barthel Index and 6MWT were the most used, while MRC score was the least used outcome parameter. The 5 main rehabilitative activities were walking (90.8 %), transfer from bed to armchair (77.5%), limb mobilization in bed (76%), balance (71.2%), and cycle-ergometer or treadmill (43.1%). A huge difference was found in admission, discharge, and delta change among different rehabilitative centers. When available, all outcomes showed a significant improvement. With the limitation of a retrospective study with a clear amount of missing data, COVID-19 subjects admitted to rehabilitative centers presented a reduced physical performance, symptoms of dyspnoea, and severe disability. The 6MWT and Barthel index were the most used measurement.

Prevalence of exercise-induced oxygen desaturation after recovery from SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and use of lung ultrasound to predict need for pulmonary rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Persistence of breathlessness after recovery from SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is frequent. Recovery from acute respiratory failure (ARF) is usually determined by normalized arterial blood gases (ABGs), but the prevalence of persistent exercise-induced desaturation (EID) and dyspnea is still unknown. METHODS: We investigated the prevalence of EID in 70 patients with normal arterial oxygen at rest after recovery from ARF due to COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients underwent a 6-min walking test (6MWT) before discharge from hospital. We recorded dyspnea score and heart rate during 6MWT. We also investigated the possible role of lung ultrasound (LU) in predicting EID. Patients underwent a LU scan and scores for each explored area were summed to give a total LU score. RESULTS: In 30 patients (43%), oxygen desaturation was >4% during 6MWT. These patients had significantly higher dyspnea and heart rate compared to non-desaturators. LU score >8.5 was significantly able to discriminate patients with EID. CONCLUSION: In SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, ABGs at discharge cannot predict the persistence of EID, which is frequent. LU may be useful to identify patients at risk who could benefit from a rehabilitation program.

Italian suggestions for pulmonary rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients recovering from acute respiratory failure: results of a Delphi process.

There is a need of consensus about the pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in patients with COVID-19 after discharge from acute care. To facilitate the knowledge of the evidence and its translation into practice, we developed suggestions based on experts' opinion. A steering committee identified areas and questions sent to experts. Other international experts participated to a RAND Delphi method in reaching consensus and proposing further suggestions. Strong agreement in suggestions was defined when the mean agreement was >7 (1 = no agreement and 9 = maximal agreement). Panelists response rate was >95%. Twenty-three questions from 4 areas: Personnel protection equipment, phenotypes, assessments, interventions, were identified and experts answered with 121 suggestions, 119 of which received high level of concordance. The evidence-based suggestions provide the clinicians with current evidence and clinical experts opinion. This framework can be used to facilitate clinical decision making within the context of the individual patient. Further studies will evaluate the clinical usefulness of these suggestions.