Influence of socioeconomic status on functional recovery after ARDS caused by SARS-CoV-2: a multicentre, observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Prognosis of patients with COVID-19 depends on the severity of the pulmonary affection. The most severe cases may progress to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which is associated with a risk of long-term repercussions on respiratory function and neuromuscular outcomes. The functional repercussions of severe forms of COVID-19 may have a major impact on quality of life, and impair the ability to return to work or exercise. Social inequalities in healthcare may influence prognosis, with socially vulnerable individuals more likely to develop severe forms of disease. We describe here the protocol for a prospective, multicentre study that aims to investigate the influence of social vulnerability on functional recovery in patients who were hospitalised in intensive care for ARDS caused by COVID-19. This study will also include an embedded qualitative study that aims to describe facilitators and barriers to compliance with rehabilitation, describe patients' health practices and identify social representations of health, disease and care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The "Functional Recovery From Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Due to COVID-19: Influence of Socio-Economic Status" (RECOVIDS) study is a mixed-methods, observational, multicentre cohort study performed during the routine follow-up of post-intensive care unit (ICU) functional recovery after ARDS. All patients admitted to a participating ICU for PCR-proven SARS-CoV-2 infection and who underwent chest CT scan at the initial phase AND who received respiratory support (mechanical or not) or high-flow nasal oxygen, AND had ARDS diagnosed by the Berlin criteria will be eligible. The primary outcome is the presence of lung sequelae at 6 months after ICU discharge, defined either by alterations on pulmonary function tests, oxygen desaturation during a standardised 6 min walk test or fibrosis-like pulmonary findings on chest CT. Patients will be considered to be socially disadvantaged if they have an "Evaluation de la Précarité et des Inégalités de santé dans les Centres d'Examen de Santé" (EPICES) score ≥30.17 at inclusion. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol and the informed consent form were approved by an independent ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud Méditerranée II) on 10 July 2020 (2020-A02014-35). All patients will provide informed consent before participation. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international congresses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04556513.

High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygenation in Older Patients with SARS-CoV-2-Related Acute Respiratory Failure.

We aimed to compare the mortality and comfort associated with high-flow nasal cannula oxygenation (HFNCO) and high-concentration mask (HCM) in older SARS-CoV-2 infected patients who were hospitalized in non-intensive care units. In this retrospective cohort study, we included all consecutive patients aged 75 years and older who were hospitalized for acute respiratory failure (ARF) in either an acute geriatric unit or an acute pulmonary care unit, and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We compared the in-hospital prognosis between patients treated with HFNCO and patients treated with HCM. To account for confounders, we created a propensity score for HFNCO, and stabilizing inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) was applied. From March 2020 to January 2021, 67 patients (median age 87 years, 41 men) were hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2-related ARF, of whom 41 (61%) received HFNCO and 26 (39%) did not. Age and comorbidities did not significantly differ in the two groups, whereas clinical presentation was more severe in the HFNCO group (NEW2 score: 8 (5-11) vs. 7 (5-8), p = 0.02, and Sp02/Fi02: 88 (98-120) vs. 117 (114-148), p = 0.03). Seven (17%) vs. two (5%) patients survived at 30 days in the HFNCO and HCM group, respectively. Overall, after SIPTW, HFNCO was significantly associated with greater survival (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 0.57, 95% CI 0.33-0.99; p = 0.04). HFNCO use was associated with a lower need for morphine (AHR 0.39, 95% CI 0.21-0.71; p = 0.005), but not for midazolam (AHR 0.66, 95% CI 0.37-1.19; p = 0.17). In conclusion, HFNCO use in non-intensive care units may reduce mortality and discomfort in older inpatients with SARS-CoV-2-related ARF.

Mental health and stress among ICU healthcare professionals in France according to intensity of the COVID-19 epidemic.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on mental health of professionals working in the intensive care unit (ICU) according to the intensity of the epidemic in France. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted in 77 French hospitals from April 22 to May 13 2020. All ICU frontline healthcare workers were eligible. The primary endpoint was the mental health, assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire. Sources of stress during the crisis were assessed using the Perceived Stressors in Intensive Care Units (PS-ICU) scale. Epidemic intensity was defined as high or low for each region based on publicly available data from Santé Publique France. Effects were assessed using linear mixed models, moderation and mediation analyses. RESULTS: In total, 2643 health professionals participated; 64.36% in high-intensity zones. Professionals in areas with greater epidemic intensity were at higher risk of mental health issues (p < 0.001), and higher levels of overall perceived stress (p < 0.001), compared to low-intensity zones. Factors associated with higher overall perceived stress were female sex (B = 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.08-0.17), having a relative at risk of COVID-19 (B = 0.14; 95%-CI = 0.09-0.18) and working in high-intensity zones (B = 0.11; 95%-CI = 0.02-0.20). Perceived stress mediated the impact of the crisis context on mental health (B = 0.23, 95%-CI = 0.05, 0.41) and the impact of stress on mental health was moderated by positive thinking, b = - 0.32, 95% CI = - 0.54, - 0.11. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 negatively impacted the mental health of ICU professionals. Professionals working in zones where the epidemic was of high intensity were significantly more affected, with higher levels of perceived stress. This study is supported by a grant from the French Ministry of Health (PHRC-COVID 2020).

Chronic respiratory diseases are predictors of severe outcome in COVID-19 hospitalised patients: a nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: Influenza epidemics were initially considered to be a suitable model for the COVID-19 epidemic, but there is a lack of data concerning patients with chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs), who were supposed to be at risk of severe forms of COVID-19. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study describes patients with prior lung disease hospitalised for COVID-19 (March-April 2020) or influenza (2018-2019 influenza outbreak). We compared the resulting pulmonary complications, need for intensive care and in-hospital mortality depending on respiratory history and virus. RESULTS: In the 89 530 COVID-19 cases, 16.03% had at least one CRD, which was significantly less frequently than in the 45 819 seasonal influenza patients. Patients suffering from chronic respiratory failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, cystic fibrosis and pulmonary hypertension were under-represented, contrary to those with lung cancer, sleep apnoea, emphysema and interstitial lung diseases. COVID-19 patients with CRDs developed significantly more ventilator-associated pneumonia and pulmonary embolism than influenza patients. They needed intensive care significantly more often and had a higher mortality rate (except for asthma) when compared with patients with COVID-19 but without CRDs or patients with influenza. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with prior respiratory diseases were globally less likely to be hospitalised for COVID-19 than for influenza, but were at higher risk of developing severe COVID-19 and had a higher mortality rate compared with influenza patients and patients without a history of respiratory illness.

The dysregulated innate immune response in severe COVID-19 pneumonia that could drive poorer outcome.

BACKGROUND: Although immune modulation is a promising therapeutic avenue in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the most relevant targets remain to be found. COVID-19 has peculiar characteristics and outcomes, suggesting a unique immunopathogenesis. METHODS: Thirty-six immunocompetent non-COVID-19 and 27 COVID-19 patients with severe pneumonia were prospectively enrolled in a single center, most requiring intensive care. Clinical and biological characteristics (including T cell phenotype and function and plasma concentrations of 30 cytokines) and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: At similar baseline respiratory severity, COVID-19 patients required mechanical ventilation for significantly longer than non-COVID-19 patients (15 [7-22] vs. 4 (0-15) days; p = 0.0049). COVID-19 patients had lower levels of most classical inflammatory cytokines (G-CSF, CCL20, IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, IL-15, TNF-α, TGF-ß), but higher plasma concentrations of CXCL10, GM-CSF and CCL5, compared to non-COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 patients displayed similar T-cell exhaustion to non-COVID-19 patients, but with a more unbalanced inflammatory/anti-inflammatory cytokine response (IL-6/IL-10 and TNF-α/IL-10 ratios). Principal component analysis identified two main patterns, with a clear distinction between non-COVID-19 and COVID-19 patients. Multivariate regression analysis confirmed that GM-CSF, CXCL10 and IL-10 levels were independently associated with the duration of mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSION: We identified a unique cytokine response, with higher plasma GM-CSF and CXCL10 in COVID-19 patients that were independently associated with the longer duration of mechanical ventilation. These cytokines could represent the dysregulated immune response in severe COVID-19, as well as promising therapeutic targets. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03505281.