ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Amid the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the benefits and risks of bronchoscopy remain uncertain. This study was designed to characterize bronchoscopy-related practice patterns, diagnostic yields, and adverse events involving patients with known or suspected COVID-19. METHODS: An online survey tool retrospectively queried bronchoscopists about their experiences with patients with known or suspected COVID-19 between March 20 and August 20, 2020. Collected data comprised the Global Pandemic SARS-CoV-2 Bronchoscopy Database (GPS-BD). All bronchoscopists and patients were anonymous with no direct investigator-to-respondent contact. RESULTS: Bronchoscopy procedures involving 289 patients from 26 countries were analyzed. One-half of patients had known COVID-19. Most (82%) had at least 1 pre-existing comorbidity, 80% had at least 1 organ failure, 51% were critically ill, and 37% were intubated at the time of the procedure. Bronchoscopy was performed with diagnostic intent in 166 (57%) patients, yielding a diagnosis in 86 (52%). and management changes in 80 (48%). Bronchoscopy was performed with therapeutic intent in 71 (25%) patients, mostly for secretion clearance (87%). Complications attributed to bronchoscopy or significant clinical decline within 12 hours of the procedure occurred in 24 (8%) cases, with 1 death. CONCLUSION: Results from this international database provide a widely generalizable characterization of the benefits and risks of bronchoscopy in patients with known or suspected COVID-19. Bronchoscopy in this setting has reasonable clinical benefit, with diagnosis and/or management change resulting from about half of the diagnostic cases. However, it is not without risk, especially in patients with limited physiological reserve.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Bronchoscopy/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Background: The impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic extends beyond the realms of patient care and healthcare resource use to include medical education; however, the repercussions of COVID-19 on the quality of training and trainee perceptions have yet to be explored. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of interventional pulmonology (IP) fellows' involvement in the care of COVID-19 and its impact on fellows' clinical education, procedure skills, and postgraduation employment search. Methods: An internet-based survey was validated and distributed among IP fellows in North American fellowship training programs. Results: Of 40 eligible fellows, 38 (95%) completed the survey. A majority of fellows (76%) reported involvement in the care of patients with COVID-19. Fellows training in the Northeast United States reported involvement in the care of a higher number of patients with COVID-19 than in other regions (median, 30 [interquartile range, 20-50] vs. 10 [5-13], respectively; P < 0.01). Fifty-two percent of fellows reported redeployment outside IP during COVID-19, mostly into intensive care units. IP procedure volume decreased by 21% during COVID-19 compared with pre-COVID-19 volume. This decrease was mainly accounted for by a reduction in bronchoscopies. A majority of fellows (82%) reported retainment of outpatient clinics during COVID-19 with the transition from face-to-face to telehealth-predominant format. Continuation of academic and research activities during COVID-19 was reported by 86% and 82% of fellows, respectively. After graduation, all fellows reported having secured employment positions. Conclusion: Although IP fellows were extensively involved in the care of patients with COVID-19, most IP programs retained educational activities through the COVID-19 outbreak. The impact of the decrease in procedure volume on trainee competency would be best addressed individually within each training program. These data may assist in focusing efforts regarding the education of medical trainees during the current and future healthcare crises.