Long-term physical impairments in survivors of COVID-19-associated ARDS compared with classic ARDS: A two-center study.

PURPOSE: This work aimed to compare physical impairment in survivors of classic ARDS compared with COVID-19-associated ARDS (CARDS) survivors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective observational cohort study on 248 patients with CARDS and compared them with a historical cohort of 48 patients with classic ARDS. Physical performance was evaluated at 6 and 12 months after ICU discharge, using the Medical Research Council Scale (MRCss), 6-min walk test (6MWT), handgrip dynamometry (HGD), and fatigue severity score (FSS). We also assessed activities of daily living (ADLs) using the Barthel index. RESULTS: At 6 months, patients with classic ARDS had lower HGD (estimated difference [ED]: 11.71 kg, p < 0.001; ED 31.9% of predicted value, p < 0.001), 6MWT distance (ED: 89.11 m, p < 0.001; ED 12.96% of predicted value, p = 0.032), and more frequent significant fatigue (OR 0.35, p = 0.046). At 12 months, patients with classic ARDS had lower HGD (ED: 9.08 kg, p = 0.0014; ED 25.9% of predicted value, p < 0.001) and no difference in terms of 6MWT and fatigue. At 12 months, patients with classic ARDS improved their MRCss (ED 2.50, p = 0.006) and HGD (ED: 4.13 kg, p = 0.002; ED 9.45% of predicted value, p = 0.005), while those with CARDS did not. Most patients in both groups regained independence in ADLs at 6 months. COVID-19 diagnosis was a significant independent predictor of better HGD (p < 0.0001) and 6MWT performance (p = 0.001), and lower prevalence of fatigue (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Both classic ARDS and CARDS survivors experienced long-term impairments in physical functioning, confirming that post-intensive care syndrome remains a major legacy of critical illness. Surprisingly, however, persisting disability was more common in survivors of classic ARDS than in CARDS survivors. In fact, muscle strength measured with HGD was reduced in survivors of classic ARDS compared to CARDS patients at both 6 and 12 months. The 6MWT was reduced and fatigue was more common in classic ARDS compared to CARDS at 6 months but differences were no longer significant at 12 months. Most patients in both groups regained independent function in ADLs at 6 months.

Teaching Ultrasound at the Point of Care in Times of Social Distancing.

Point-of-care ultrasound has become an integral aspect of critical care training. The Bedside Assessment by Sonography In Critical Care Medicine Curriculum was established at the University of Toronto to train critical care trainees in basic echocardiography and general critical care ultrasound. During the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, our program needed to adapt quickly to ensure staff safety and adherence to infection-control protocols. In this article, we share our experience and reflect on the challenges and benefits of shifting from a primarily in-person teaching model to a hybrid model of remote and in-person teaching. Curricular changes were threefold: the transition to entirely web-based interactive didactic teaching and online imaging interpretation modules, the recruitment of sonographers at multiple academic sites as instructors to facilitate in-person practices with lower instructor to trainee ratio, and the use of a mobile application for informal group case-based discussions. Challenges included lost opportunities for scanning healthy volunteers, variability in attendance at online lectures, and a lower number of study submissions for review. However, curricular changes enabled maintenance of directly observed practice, high levels of engagement with recorded content, and an expansion of our reach to a global audience. We believe that future curricula should combine high-quality online curriculum and resources with the ongoing in-person delivery of key elements of curriculum to allow for direct observation and feedback as well as the maintenance of self-directed point-of-care ultrasound portfolios.

Acute Cardiac Injury in Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Other Viral Infections-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-2 binds and inhibits angiotensin-converting enzyme-2. The frequency of acute cardiac injury in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 is unknown. The objective was to compare the rates of cardiac injury by angiotensin-converting enzyme-2-binding viruses from viruses that do not bind to angiotensin-converting enzyme-2. DATA SOURCES: We performed a systematic review of coronavirus disease 2019 literature on PubMed and EMBASE. STUDY SELECTION: We included studies with ten or more hospitalized adults with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 or other viral pathogens that described the occurrence of acute cardiac injury. This was defined by the original publication authors or by: 1) myocardial ischemia, 2) new cardiac arrhythmia on echocardiogram, or 3) new or worsening heart failure on echocardiogram. DATA EXTRACTION: We compared the rates of cardiac injury among patients with respiratory infections with viruses that down-regulate angiotensin-converting enzyme-2, including H1N1, H5N1, H7N9, and severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus-1, to those with respiratory infections from other influenza viruses that do not bind angiotensin-converting enzyme-2, including Influenza H3N2 and influenza B. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 57 studies including 34,072 patients, acute cardiac injury occurred in 50% (95% CI, 44-57%) of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019. The overall risk of acute cardiac injury was 21% (95% CI, 18-26%) among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. In comparison, 37% (95% CI, 26-49%) of critically ill patients with other respiratory viruses that bind angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (p = 0.061) and 12% (95% CI, 7-22%) of critically ill patients with other respiratory viruses that do not bind angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (p < 0.001) experienced a cardiac injury. CONCLUSIONS: Acute cardiac injury may be associated with whether the virus binds angiotensin-converting enzyme-2. Acute cardiac injury occurs in half of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients, but only 12% of patients infected by viruses that do not bind to angiotensin-converting enzyme-2.

Lung Ultrasonography for the Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia in the Emergency Department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Accurate diagnostic testing to identify severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is critical. Although highly specific, SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been shown in clinical practice to be affected by a noninsignificant proportion of false-negative results. This study seeks to explore whether the integration of lung ultrasonography with clinical evaluation is associated with increased sensitivity for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia, and therefore may facilitate the identification of false-negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results. METHODS: This prospective cohort study enrolled consecutive adult patients with symptoms potentially related to SARS-CoV-2 infection who were admitted to the emergency department (ED) of an Italian academic hospital. Immediately after the initial assessment, a lung ultrasonographic evaluation was performed and the likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection, based on both clinical and lung ultrasonographic findings ("integrated" assessment), was recorded. RT-PCR SARS-CoV-2 detection was subsequently performed. RESULTS: We enrolled 228 patients; 107 (46.9%) had SARS-CoV-2 infection. Sensitivity and negative predictive value of the clinical-lung ultrasonographic integrated assessment were higher than first RT-PCR result (94.4% [95% confidence interval {CI} 88.2% to 97.9%] versus 80.4% [95% CI 71.6% to 87.4%] and 95% [95% CI 89.5% to 98.2%] versus 85.2% [95% CI 78.3% to 90.6%], respectively). Among the 142 patients who initially had negative RT-PCR results, 21 tested positive at a subsequent molecular test performed within 72 hours. All these false-negative cases were correctly identified by the integrated assessment. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that, in patients presenting to the ED with symptoms commonly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, the integration of lung ultrasonography with clinical evaluation has high sensitivity and specificity for coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia and it may help to identify false-negative results occurring with RT-PCR.

Multi-organ point-of-care ultrasound for COVID-19 (PoCUS4COVID): international expert consensus.

COVID-19 has caused great devastation in the past year. Multi-organ point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) including lung ultrasound (LUS) and focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) as a clinical adjunct has played a significant role in triaging, diagnosis and medical management of COVID-19 patients. The expert panel from 27 countries and 6 continents with considerable experience of direct application of PoCUS on COVID-19 patients presents evidence-based consensus using GRADE methodology for the quality of evidence and an expedited, modified-Delphi process for the strength of expert consensus. The use of ultrasound is suggested in many clinical situations related to respiratory, cardiovascular and thromboembolic aspects of COVID-19, comparing well with other imaging modalities. The limitations due to insufficient data are highlighted as opportunities for future research.

Lessons learned in preparing for and responding to the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: one simulation's program experience adapting to the new normal.

Use of simulation to ensure an organization is ready for significant events, like COVID-19 pandemic, has shifted from a "backburner" training tool to a "first choice" strategy for ensuring individual, team, and system readiness. In this report, we summarize our simulation program's response during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the associated challenges and lessons learned. We also reflect on anticipated changes within our program as we adapt to a "new normal" following this pandemic. We intend for this report to function as a guide for other simulation programs to consult as this COVID-19 crisis continues to unfold, and during future challenges within global healthcare systems. We argue that this pandemic has cemented simulation programs as fundamental for any healthcare organization interested in ensuring its workforce can adapt in times of crisis. With the right team and set of partners, we believe that sustained investments in a simulation program will amplify into immeasurable impacts across a healthcare system.

Critical Care Transesophageal Echocardiography in Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed an extraordinary strain on healthcare systems across North America. Defining the optimal approach for managing a critically ill COVID-19 patient is rapidly changing. Goal-directed transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is frequently used by physicians caring for intubated critically ill patients as a reliable imaging modality that is well suited to answer questions at bedside. METHODS: A multidisciplinary (intensive care, critical care cardiology, and emergency medicine) group of experts in point-of-care echocardiography and TEE from the United States and Canada convened to review the available evidence, share experiences, and produce a consensus statement aiming to provide clinicians with a framework to maximize the safety of patients and healthcare providers when considering focused point-of-care TEE in critically ill patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Although transthoracic echocardiography can provide the information needed in most patients, there are specific scenarios in which TEE represents the modality of choice. TEE provides acute care clinicians with a goal-directed framework to guide clinical care and represents an ideal modality to evaluate hemodynamic instability during prone ventilation, perform serial evaluations of the lungs, support cardiac arrest resuscitation, and guide veno-venous ECMO cannulation. To aid other clinicians in performing TEE during the COVID-19 pandemic, we describe a set of principles and practical aspects for performing examinations with a focus on the logistics, personnel, and equipment required before, during, and after an examination. CONCLUSIONS: In the right clinical scenario, TEE is a tool that can provide the information needed to deliver the best and safest possible care for the critically ill patients.