Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
J Bras Pneumol ; 49(3): e20230056, 2023.
Article in English, Portuguese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235727

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 has been associated with a significant burden to those who survive the acute phase. We aimed to describe the quality of life and symptoms of anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at 90 days after hospital discharge of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 admitted to a private hospital in the city of São Paulo, Brazil, between April of 2020 and April of 2021 were interviewed by telephone at 30 and 90 days after discharge to assess the quality of life and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and PTSD. RESULTS: A total of 2,138 patients were included. The mean age was 58.6 ± 15.8 years, and the median length of hospital stay was 9.0 (5.0-15.8) days. Between the two time points, depression increased from 3.1% to 7.2% (p < 0.001), anxiety increased from 3.2% to 6.2% (p < 0.001), and PTSD increased from 2.3% to 5.0% (p < 0.001). At least one physical symptom related to COVID-19 diagnosis persisted in 32% of patients at day 90. CONCLUSIONS: Persistence of physical symptoms was high even at 90 days after discharge. Although the prevalence of symptoms of anxiety, depression, and PTSD was low, these symptoms persisted for three months, with a significant increase between the time points. This finding indicates the need to identify at-risk patients so that they can be given an appropriate referral at discharge.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Quality of Life , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/etiology , Depression/epidemiology
2.
BMJ Open ; 13(1): e066623, 2023 01 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2193796

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), the clot play a role in gas exchange abnormalities. Fibrinolytic therapy can improve alveolar ventilation by restoring blood flow. In this systematic review and meta-analysis protocol, we aim to assess the safety and efficacy of fibrinolytic therapy in such a population. METHODS: We will perform a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and LILACS databases without language restrictions for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs. Two review authors will independently perform data extraction and quality assessments of data from included studies. In case of divergence, a third author will be contacted. The Cochrane handbook will be used for guidance. If the results are not appropriate for a meta-analysis, a descriptive analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will provide current evidence about the safety and efficacy of fibrinolytic therapy in patients with COVID-19 and ARDS. These findings will provide if fibrinolytic therapy might be an option for a desperate clinical setting, where all medical efforts have been used. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42020187482. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics committee approval is not necessary. We intend to update the public registry, report any protocol amendments and publish the results in a widely accessible journal.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , Thrombolytic Therapy
3.
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva ; 34(3): 335-341, 2022.
Article in Portuguese, English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2110721

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare the lung mechanics and outcomes between COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome. METHODS: We combined data from two randomized trials in acute respiratory distress syndrome, one including only COVID-19 patients and the other including only patients without COVID-19, to determine whether COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with higher 28-day mortality than non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome and to examine the differences in lung mechanics between these two types of acute respiratory distress syndrome. RESULTS: A total of 299 patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome and 1,010 patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome were included in the main analysis. The results showed that non-COVID-19 patients used higher positive end-expiratory pressure (12.5cmH2O; SD 3.2 versus 11.7cmH2O SD 2.8; p < 0.001), were ventilated with lower tidal volumes (5.8mL/kg; SD 1.0 versus 6.5mL/kg; SD 1.2; p < 0.001) and had lower static respiratory compliance adjusted for ideal body weight (0.5mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3 versus 0.6mL/cmH2O/kg; SD 0.3; p = 0.01). There was no difference between groups in 28-day mortality (52.3% versus 58.9%; p = 0.52) or mechanical ventilation duration in the first 28 days among survivors (13 [IQR 5 - 22] versus 12 [IQR 6 - 26], p = 0.46). CONCLUSION: This analysis showed that patients with non-COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome have different lung mechanics but similar outcomes to COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in lung mechanics or outcomes between groups.


OBJETIVO: Comparar a mecânica pulmonar e os desfechos entre a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 e a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Combinamos dados de dois ensaios randomizados sobre a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo, um incluindo apenas pacientes com COVID-19 e o outro incluindo apenas pacientes sem COVID-19, para determinar se a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 está associada à maior mortalidade aos 28 dias do que a síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19 e também examinar as diferenças na mecânica pulmonar entre esses dois tipos de síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos na análise principal 299 pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19 e 1.010 pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19. Os resultados mostraram que os pacientes sem COVID-19 utilizaram pressão positiva expiratória final mais alta (12,5cmH2O; DP 3,2 versus 11,7cmH2O; DP 2,8; p < 0,001), foram ventilados com volumes correntes mais baixos (5,8mL/kg; DP 1,0 versus 6,5mL/kg; DP 1,2; p < 0,001) e apresentaram menor complacência respiratória estática ajustada para o peso ideal (0,5mL/cmH2O/kg; DP 0,3 versus 0,6mL/cmH2O/kg; DP 0,3; p = 0,01). Não houve diferença entre os grupos quanto à mortalidade aos 28 dias (52,3% versus 58,9%; p = 0,52) ou à duração da ventilação mecânica nos primeiros 28 dias entre os sobreviventes (13 [IQ 5 - 22] dias versus 12 [IQ 6 - 26] dias; p = 0,46). CONCLUSÃO: Esta análise mostrou que os pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não associada à COVID-19 têm mecânica pulmonar diferente, mas desfechos semelhantes aos dos pacientes com síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo associada à COVID-19. Após pareamento por escore de propensão, não houve diferença na mecânica pulmonar e nem nos desfechos entre os grupos.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Propensity Score , COVID-19/complications , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Lung , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Mechanics
4.
BMJ Open ; 12(4): e057272, 2022 04 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1807411

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of burnout syndrome among intensive care physicians working in a tertiary private hospital as well as their perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their life. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study. SETTING: Intensive care units dedicated to the care of COVID-19 in Hospital Sirio-Libanes, Sao Paulo, Southeastern part of Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: Intensive care physicians. INTERVENTIONS: Each participant received an envelope with a questionnaire composed of demographic and occupational variables, information related to their personal and professional experiences facing the COVID-19 pandemic and the Maslach Burnout Inventory questionnaire. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES: The primary outcome was to assess the prevalence of burnout syndrome among physicians working in an intensive care unit dedicated to the care of COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 51 from the universe of 63 (82%) intensive care physicians participated in the study. Nineteen (37.2%) met the criteria for burnout syndrome. In the three domains that characterise burnout syndrome, we found a low level of personal achievement in 96.1% of physicians interviewed, a high level of depersonalisation in 51.0% and 51.0% with a high level of emotional exhaustion. Decision-making conflicts between the intensive care unit team and other attending physicians were frequent (50% of all conflicts). A third of the participants had been diagnosed with COVID-19, 22 (43.1%) reported having a family member infected and 8 (15.7%) lost someone close to the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants felt that fear of infecting their loved ones was the aspect of their lives that changed most as compared with the prepandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: Burnout syndrome was frequent among intensive care unit physicians treating patients with COVID-19 in a large tertiary private hospital. Future studies should expand our results to other private and public hospitals and test strategies to promote intensive care unit physicians' mental health.


Subject(s)
Burnout, Professional , COVID-19 , Physicians , Brazil/epidemiology , Burnout, Professional/epidemiology , Burnout, Professional/psychology , Burnout, Psychological/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Care , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Pandemics , Physicians/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
Front Oncol ; 11: 746431, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1581259

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coexistence of cancer and COVID-19 is associated with worse outcomes. However, the studies on cancer-related characteristics associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes have shown controversial results. The objective of the study was to evaluate cancer-related characteristics associated with invasive mechanical ventilation use or in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We designed a cohort multicenter study including adults with active cancer admitted to ICU due to COVID-19. Seven cancer-related characteristics (cancer status, type of cancer, metastasis occurrence, recent chemotherapy, recent immunotherapy, lung tumor, and performance status) were introduced in a multilevel logistic regression model as first-level variables and hospital was introduced as second-level variable (random effect). Confounders were identified using directed acyclic graphs. RESULTS: We included 274 patients. Required to undergo invasive mechanical ventilation were 176 patients (64.2%) and none of the cancer-related characteristics were associated with mechanical ventilation use. Approximately 155 patients died in hospital (56.6%) and poor performance status, measured with the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score was associated with increased in-hospital mortality, with odds ratio = 3.54 (1.60-7.88, 95% CI) for ECOG =2 and odds ratio = 3.40 (1.60-7.22, 95% CI) for ECOG = 3 to 4. Cancer status, cancer type, metastatic tumor, lung cancer, and recent chemotherapy or immunotherapy were not associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with active cancer and COVID-19 admitted to ICU, poor performance status was associated with in-hospital mortality but not with mechanical ventilation use. Cancer status, cancer type, metastatic tumor, lung cancer, and recent chemotherapy or immunotherapy were not associated with invasive mechanical ventilation use or in-hospital mortality.

6.
Ann Intensive Care ; 11(1): 92, 2021 Jun 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1259216

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Approximately 5% of COVID-19 patients develop respiratory failure and need ventilatory support, yet little is known about the impact of mechanical ventilation strategy in COVID-19. Our objective was to describe baseline characteristics, ventilatory parameters, and outcomes of critically ill patients in the largest referral center for COVID-19 in Sao Paulo, Brazil, during the first surge of the pandemic. METHODS: This cohort included COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) of an academic hospital with 94 ICU beds, a number expanded to 300 during the pandemic as part of a state preparedness plan. Data included demographics, advanced life support therapies, and ventilator parameters. The main outcome was 28-day survival. We used a multivariate Cox model to test the association between protective ventilation and survival, adjusting for PF ratio, pH, compliance, and PEEP. RESULTS: We included 1503 patients from March 30 to June 30, 2020. The mean age was 60 ± 15 years, and 59% were male. During 28-day follow-up, 1180 (79%) patients needed invasive ventilation and 666 (44%) died. For the 984 patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation in the first 24 h of ICU stay, mean tidal volume was 6.5 ± 1.3 mL/kg of ideal body weight, plateau pressure was 24 ± 5 cmH2O, respiratory system compliance was 31.9 (24.4-40.9) mL/cmH2O, and 82% of patients were ventilated with protective ventilation. Noninvasive ventilation was used in 21% of patients, and prone, in 36%. Compliance was associated with survival and did not show a bimodal pattern that would support the presence of two phenotypes. In the multivariable model, protective ventilation (aHR 0.73 [95%CI 0.57-0.94]), adjusted for PF ratio, compliance, PEEP, and arterial pH, was independently associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: During the peak of the epidemic in Sao Paulo, critically ill patients with COVID-19 often required mechanical ventilation and mortality was high. Our findings revealed an association between mechanical ventilation strategy and mortality, highlighting the importance of protective ventilation for patients with COVID-19.

7.
PLoS One ; 15(12): e0243269, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1004450

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has brought significant challenges worldwide, with high mortality, increased use of hospital resources, and the collapse of healthcare systems. We aimed to describe the clinical outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients and assess the impact on the use of hospital resources and compare with critically ill medical patients without COVID-19. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this retrospective cohort study, we included patients diagnosed with COVID-19 admitted to a private ICU in Sao Paulo, Brazil from March to June 2020. We compared these patients with those admitted to the unit in the same period of the previous year. A total of 212 consecutive patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were compared with 185 medical patients from the previous year. Patients with COVID-19 were more frequently males (76% vs. 56%, p<0.001) and morbidly obese (7.5% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.027), and had lower SAPS 3 (49.65 (12.19) vs. 55.63 (11.94), p<0.001) and SOFA scores (3.78 (3.53) vs. 4.48 (3.11), p = 0.039). COVID-19 patients had a longer ICU stay (median of 7 vs. 3 days, p<0.001), longer duration of mechanical ventilation (median of 9 vs. 4 days, p = 0.003), and more frequent tracheostomies (10.8 vs. 1.1%, p<0.001). Survival rates until 28 days were not statistically different (91% vs. 85.4%, p = 0.111). After multivariable adjustment for age, gender, SAPS 3, and Charlson Comorbidity Index, COVID-19 remained not associated with survival at 28 days (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33-1.06, p = 0.076). Among patients who underwent invasive mechanical ventilation, the observed mortality at 28-days was 16.2% in COVID-19 patients compared to 34.6% in the previous year. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 required more hospital resources, including invasive and non-invasive ventilation, had a longer duration of mechanical ventilation, and a more prolonged ICU and hospital length of stay. There was no difference in all-cause mortality at 28 and 60 days, suggesting that health systems preparedness be an important determinant of clinical outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Critical Illness , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Mortality/trends , Respiration, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome
8.
Ferreira, Juliana C.; Ho, Yeh-Li, Besen, Bruno A. M. P.; Malbuisson, Luiz M. S.; Taniguchi, Leandro U.; Mendes, Pedro V.; Costa, Eduardo L. V.; Park, Marcelo, Daltro-Oliveira, Renato, Roepke, Roberta M. L.; Silva Jr, João M.; Carmona, Maria José C.; Carvalho, Carlos Roberto Ribeiro, Hirota, Adriana, Kanasiro, Alberto Kendy, Crescenzi, Alessandra, Fernandes, Amanda Coelho, Miethke-Morais, Anna, Bellintani, Arthur Petrillo, Canasiro, Artur Ribeiro, Carneiro, Bárbara Vieira, Zanbon, Beatriz Keiko, Batista, Bernardo Pinheiro De Senna Nogueira, Nicolao, Bianca Ruiz, Besen, Bruno Adler Maccagnan Pinheiro, Biselli, Bruno, Macedo, Bruno Rocha De, Toledo, Caio Machado Gomes De, Pompilio, Carlos Eduardo, Carvalho, Carlos Roberto Ribeiro De, Mol, Caroline Gomes, Stipanich, Cassio, Bueno, Caue Gasparotto, Garzillo, Cibele, Tanaka, Clarice, Forte, Daniel Neves, Joelsons, Daniel, Robira, Daniele, Costa, Eduardo Leite Vieira, Silva Júnior, Elson Mendes Da, Regalio, Fabiane Aliotti, Segura, Gabriela Cardoso, Marcelino, Gustavo Brasil, Louro, Giulia Sefrin, Ho, Yeh-Li, Ferreira, Isabela Argollo, Gois, Jeison de Oliveira, Silva Junior, Joao Manoel Da, Reusing Junior, Jose Otto, Ribeiro, Julia Fray, Ferreira, Juliana Carvalho, Galleti, Karine Vusberg, Silva, Katia Regina, Isensee, Larissa Padrao, Oliveira, Larissa dos Santos, Taniguchi, Leandro Utino, Letaif, Leila Suemi, Lima, Lígia Trombetta, Park, Lucas Yongsoo, Chaves Netto, Lucas, Nobrega, Luciana Cassimiro, Haddad, Luciana, Hajjar, Ludhmila, Malbouisson, Luiz Marcelo, Pandolfi, Manuela Cristina Adsuara, Park, Marcelo, Carmona, Maria José Carvalho, Andrade, Maria Castilho Prandini H. De, Santos, Mariana Moreira, Bateloche, Matheus Pereira, Suiama, Mayra Akimi, Oliveira, Mayron Faria de, Sousa, Mayson Laercio, Louvaes, Michelle, Huemer, Natassja, Mendes, Pedro, Lins, Paulo Ricardo Gessolo, Santos, Pedro Gaspar Dos, Moreira, Pedro Ferreira Paiva, Guazzelli, Renata Mello, Reis, Renato Batista Dos, Oliveira, Renato Daltro De, Roepke, Roberta Muriel Longo, Pedro, Rodolpho Augusto De Moura, Kondo, Rodrigo, Rached, Samia Zahi, Fonseca, Sergio Roberto Silveira Da, Borges, Thais Sousa, Ferreira, Thalissa, Cobello Junior, Vilson, Sales, Vivian Vieira Tenório, Ferreira, Willaby Serafim Cassa, Group, E. PICCoV Study.
Clinics ; 75:e2294-e2294, 2020.
Article in English | LILACS (Americas) | ID: grc-742344

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We designed a cohort study to describe characteristics and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in the largest public hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil, as Latin America becomes the epicenter of the pandemic. METHODS: This is the protocol for a study being conducted at an academic hospital in Brazil with 300 adult ICU beds dedicated to COVID-19 patients. We will include adult patients admitted to the ICU with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during the study period. The main outcome is ICU survival at 28 days. Data will be collected prospectively and retrospectively by trained investigators from the hospital's electronic medical records, using an electronic data capture tool. We will collect data on demographics, comorbidities, severity of disease, and laboratorial test results at admission. Information on the need for advanced life support and ventilator parameters will be collected during ICU stay. Patients will be followed up for 28 days in the ICU and 60 days in the hospital. We will plot Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate ICU and hospital survival and perform survival analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model to identify the main risk factors for mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04378582. RESULTS: We expect to include a large sample of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and to be able to provide data on admission characteristics, use of advanced life support, ICU survival at 28 days, and hospital survival at 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide epidemiological data about critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Brazil, which could inform health policy and resource allocation in low- and middle-income countries.

9.
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva ; 32(3): 354-362, 2020.
Article in Portuguese, English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-983019

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The infection caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spreads worldwide and is considered a pandemic. The most common manifestation of SARS-CoV-2 infection (coronavirus disease 2019 - COVID-19) is viral pneumonia with varying degrees of respiratory compromise and up to 40% of hospitalized patients might develop acute respiratory distress syndrome. Several clinical trials evaluated the role of corticosteroids in non-COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome with conflicting results. We designed a trial to evaluate the effectiveness of early intravenous dexamethasone administration on the number of days alive and free of mechanical ventilation within 28 days after randomization in adult patients with moderate or severe acute respiratory distress syndrome due to confirmed or probable COVID-19. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, prospective, randomized, stratified, multicenter, open-label, controlled trial including 350 patients with early-onset (less than 48 hours before randomization) moderate or severe acute respiratory distress syndrome, defined by the Berlin criteria, due to COVID-19. Eligible patients will be randomly allocated to either standard treatment plus dexamethasone (Intervention Group) or standard treatment without dexamethasone (Control Group). Patients in the intervention group will receive dexamethasone 20mg intravenous once daily for 5 days, followed by dexamethasone 10mg IV once daily for additional 5 days or until intensive care unit discharge, whichever occurs first. The primary outcome is ventilator-free days within 28 days after randomization, defined as days alive and free from invasive mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes are all-cause mortality rates at day 28, evaluation of the clinical status at day 15 assessed with a 6-level ordinal scale, mechanical ventilation duration from randomization to day 28, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score evaluation at 48 hours, 72 hours and 7 days and intensive care unit -free days within 28.


OBJETIVO: A infecção causada pelo coronavírus da síndrome respiratória aguda grave 2 (SARS-CoV-2) disseminou-se por todo o mundo e foi categorizada como pandemia. As manifestações mais comuns da infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2 (doença pelo coronavírus 2019 - COVID-19) se referem a uma pneumonia viral com graus variáveis de comprometimento respiratório e até 40% dos pacientes hospitalizados, que podem desenvolver uma síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo. Diferentes ensaios clínicos avaliaram o papel dos corticosteroides na síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo não relacionada com COVID-19, obtendo resultados conflitantes. Delineamos o presente estudo para avaliar a eficácia da administração endovenosa precoce de dexametasona no número de dias vivo e sem ventilação mecânica nos 28 dias após a randomização, em pacientes adultos com quadro moderado ou grave de síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo causada por COVID-19 provável ou confirmada. MÉTODOS: Este é um ensaio pragmático, prospectivo, randomizado, estratificado, multicêntrico, aberto e controlado que incluirá 350 pacientes com quadro inicial (menos de 48 horas antes da randomização) de síndrome do desconforto respiratório agudo moderada ou grave, definida segundo os critérios de Berlim, causada por COVID-19. Os pacientes elegíveis serão alocados de forma aleatória para tratamento padrão mais dexametasona (Grupo Intervenção) ou tratamento padrão sem dexametasona (Grupo Controle). Os pacientes no Grupo Intervenção receberão dexametasona 20mg por via endovenosa uma vez ao dia, por 5 dias, e, a seguir, dexametasona por via endovenosa 10mg ao dia por mais 5 dias, ou até receber alta da unidade de terapia intensiva, o que ocorrer antes. O desfecho primário será o número de dias livres de ventilação mecânica nos 28 dias após a randomização, definido como o número de dias vivo e livres de ventilação mecânica invasiva. Os desfechos secundários serão a taxa de mortalidade por todas as causas no dia 28, a condição clínica no dia 15 avaliada com utilização de uma escala ordinal de seis níveis, a duração da ventilação mecânica desde a randomização até o dia 28, a avaliação com o Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score após 48 horas, 72 horas e 7 dias, e o número de dias fora da unidade de terapia intensiva nos 28 dias após a randomização.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , Adult , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Organ Dysfunction Scores , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , Time Factors , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
10.
Clinics (Sao Paulo) ; 75: e2294, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-769762

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We designed a cohort study to describe characteristics and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in the largest public hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil, as Latin America becomes the epicenter of the pandemic. METHODS: This is the protocol for a study being conducted at an academic hospital in Brazil with 300 adult ICU beds dedicated to COVID-19 patients. We will include adult patients admitted to the ICU with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during the study period. The main outcome is ICU survival at 28 days. Data will be collected prospectively and retrospectively by trained investigators from the hospital's electronic medical records, using an electronic data capture tool. We will collect data on demographics, comorbidities, severity of disease, and laboratorial test results at admission. Information on the need for advanced life support and ventilator parameters will be collected during ICU stay. Patients will be followed up for 28 days in the ICU and 60 days in the hospital. We will plot Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate ICU and hospital survival and perform survival analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model to identify the main risk factors for mortality. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04378582. RESULTS: We expect to include a large sample of patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU and to be able to provide data on admission characteristics, use of advanced life support, ICU survival at 28 days, and hospital survival at 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide epidemiological data about critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Brazil, which could inform health policy and resource allocation in low- and middle-income countries.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Betacoronavirus , Brazil , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals, University , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Observational Studies as Topic , Pandemics , Research Design , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL