ABSTRACT
As the global coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2 continues to cause higher mortality and hospitalization rates among older adults, strategies such as frailty screening have been suggested for resource allocation and clinical management. Frailty is a physiologic condition characterized by a decreased reserve to stressors and is associated with disability, hospitalization, and death. Measuring frailty can be a useful tool to determine the risk and prognosis of COVID-19 patients in the acute setting, and to provide higher quality of care for vulnerable individuals in the outpatient setting. A literature review was conducted to examine current research regarding frailty and COVID-19. Frailty can inform holistic care of COVID-19 patients, and further investigation is needed to elucidate how measuring frailty should guide treatment and prevention of COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Frailty/epidemiology , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Mortality , Activities of Daily Living , COVID-19/mortality , Comorbidity , Frailty/physiopathology , Hospitalization , Humans , Mass Screening , Prognosis , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Corticosteroid dosing in the range of 0.5-2 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone equivalents has become a standard part of the management of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 pneumonia based on positive results of randomized trials and a meta-analysis. Alongside such conventional dosing, administration of 1 gm of methylprednisolone daily (pulse dosing) has also been reported in the literature with claims of favorable outcomes. Comparisons between such disparate approaches to corticosteroids for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia are lacking. In this retrospective study of patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 pneumonia, we compared patients treated with 0.5-2 mg/kg/day in methylprednisolone equivalents (high-dose corticosteroids) and patients treated with 1 gm of methylprednisolone (pulse-dose corticosteroids) to those who did not receive any corticosteroids. The endpoints of interest were hospital mortality, ICU-free days at Day 28, and complications potentially attributable to corticosteroids. Pulse-dose corticosteroid therapy was associated with a significant increase in ICU-free days at Day 28 compared to no receipt: adjusted relative risk (aRR): 1.45 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-2.02; p = 0.03) and compared with high-dose corticosteroid administration (p = 0.003). Nonetheless, receipt of high-dose corticosteroids-but not of pulse-dose corticosteroids-significantly reduced the odds of hospital mortality compared to no receipt: adjusted Odds ratio (aOR) 0.31 (95% CI: 0.12-0.77; p = 0.01). High-dose corticosteroids reduced mortality compared to pulse-dose corticosteroids (p = 0.04). Pulse-dose corticosteroids-but not high-dose corticosteroids-significantly increased the odds of acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy compared to no receipt: aOR 3.53 (95% CI: 1.27-9.82; p = 0.02). The odds of this complication were also significantly higher in the pulse-dose group when compared to the high-dose group (p = 0.05 for the comparison). In this single-center study, pulse-dose corticosteroid therapy for COVID-19 pneumonia in the ICU was associated with an increase in ICU-free days but failed to impact hospital mortality, perhaps because of its association with development of severe renal failure. In line with existing trial data, the effect of high-dose corticosteroids on mortality was favorable.