The rapid development and deployment of a new multidisciplinary CPAP service outside of a critical care environment during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a dramatic increase in patients presenting with type 1 respiratory failure. In order to protect our limited critical care capacity, we rapidly developed a new ward-based inpatient continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) service with direct input from the respiratory, infectious diseases and critical care teams. Close collaboration between these specialties and new innovative solutions were required to facilitate this. CPAP equipment (normally reserved for domiciliary care) was adapted to reduce the pressure on our strained oxygen infrastructure. Side rooms on the infectious diseases ward were swiftly converted into new negative pressure areas using temporary installed ventilatory equipment, reducing the viral aerosol risk for staff. Novel patient monitoring solutions were used to protect staff while also ensuring patient safety. Staff training and specialist oversight was organised within days. The resulting service was successful, with over half (17/26 (65%)) of patients avoiding invasive ventilation.

Utility of established prognostic scores in COVID-19 hospital admissions: multicentre prospective evaluation of CURB-65, NEWS2 and qSOFA.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing, yet, due to the lack of a COVID-19-specific tool, clinicians must use pre-existing illness severity scores for initial prognostication. However, the validity of such scores in COVID-19 is unknown. METHODS: The North West Collaborative Organisation for Respiratory Research performed a multicentre prospective evaluation of adult patients admitted to the hospital with confirmed COVID-19 during a 2-week period in April 2020. Clinical variables measured as part of usual care at presentation to the hospital were recorded, including the Confusion, Urea, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure and Age Above or Below 65 Years (CURB-65), National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) and Quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) scores. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Data were collected for 830 people with COVID-19 admitted across seven hospitals. By 30 days, a total of 300 (36.1%) had died and 142 (17.1%) had been in the intensive care unit. All scores underestimated mortality compared with pre-COVID-19 cohorts, and overall prognostic performance was generally poor. Among the 'low-risk' categories (CURB-65 score<2, NEWS2<5 and qSOFA score<2), 30-day mortality was 16.7%, 32.9% and 21.4%, respectively. NEWS2≥5 had a negative predictive value of 98% for early mortality. Multivariable logistic regression identified features of respiratory compromise rather than circulatory collapse as most relevant prognostic variables. CONCLUSION: In the setting of COVID-19, existing prognostic scores underestimated risk. The design of new prognostic tools should focus on features of respiratory compromise rather than circulatory collapse. We provide a baseline set of variables which are relevant to COVID-19 outcomes and may be used as a basis for developing a bespoke COVID-19 prognostication tool.