Body mass index and clinical outcome of severe COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure: Unravelling the "obesity paradox" phenomenon.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although obesity have been generally shown to be an independent risk factor for poor outcomes in COVID-19 infection, some studies demonstrate a paradoxical protective effect ("obesity paradox"). This study examines the influence of obesity categories on clinical outcomes of severe COVID-19 patients admitted to an intensive care unit with acute hypoxic respiratory failure requiring either non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This is a single centre, retrospective study of consecutive COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit between 03/2020 to 03/2021. Patients were grouped according to the NICE Body Mass Index (BMI) category. Admission variables including age, sex, comorbidities, and ICU severity indices (APACHE-II, SOFA and PaO2/FiO2) were collected. Data were compared between BMI groups for outcomes such as need for invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), renal replacement therapy (RRT) and 28-day and overall hospital mortality. RESULTS: 340 patients were identified and of those 333 patients had their BMI documented. Just over half of patients (53%) had obesity. Those with extreme obesity (obesity groups II and III) were younger with fewer comorbidities, but were more hypoxaemic at presentation, than the healthy BMI group. Although non-significant, obesity groups II and III paradoxically showed a lower in-hospital mortality than the healthy weight group. However, adjusted (age, sex, APACHE-II and CCI) competing risk regression analysis showed three-times higher mortality in obese category I (sub-distribution hazard ratio = 3.32 (95% CI 1.30-8.46), p = 0.01) and a trend to higher mortality across all obesity groups compared to the healthy weight group. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, those with obesity were at higher risk of mortality after adjustment for confounders. We did not identify an "obesity paradox" in this cohort. The obesity paradox may be explained by confounding factors such as younger age, fewer comorbidities, and less severe organ failures. The impact of obesity on indicators of morbidity including likelihood of requirement for organ support measures was not conclusively demonstrated and requires further scrutiny.

Transitioning from Intravenous to Subcutaneous Vedolizumab in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease [TRAVELESS].

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subcutaneous [SC] vedolizumab presents the opportunity for inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] patients to manage their treatment at home. There are currently no data on the process of transitioning patients established on intravenous [IV] to SC vedolizumab as part of routine clinical care. The aim of this programme is to evaluate the clinical and biochemical outcomes of switching a cohort of IBD patients established on IV vedolizumab to SC, at 12 weeks following the transition. METHODS: In all, 178 adult patients were offered the opportunity to transition to SC vedolizumab. Patients who agreed were reviewed prior to switching and at Week 12 [W12] after their first SC dose. Evaluation outcomes included disease activity scores, the IBD-Control Patient-Reported Outcome Measures [PROMs], and faecal calprotectin [FCP]. Reasons for patients declining or accepting transitioning, pharmacokinetics, adverse drug reactions, and risk factors for a poor outcome in SARS-CoV-2 infection were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients agreed to transition, of whom 106 patients had been on IV vedolizumab for at least 4 months. There were no statistically significant differences in disease activity scores or IBD-Control PROMs between baseline and W12. A statistically significant increase in FCP was observed [31 µg/g vs. 47 µg/g; p = 0.008], although this was unlikely to be clinically relevant. The most common adverse drug reaction reported was injection site reactions [15%]. Based on this cohort of patients, an expected reduction of £572,000 per annum is likely to be achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Transitioning patients established on IV vedolizumab to SC appears to be safe and effective, with high patient satisfaction and multiple benefits for the health service.

Transitioning from intravenous to subcutaneous vedolizumab in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (TRAVELESS)

IntroductionIn May 2020, subcutaneous (SC) vedolizumab was approved for use in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). Patients with IBD have a number of risk factors for a poor outcome from SARS-CoV-2 infection and managing this risk by reducing hospital visits is crucial. Currently there is no information on the process or outcomes of transitioning patients established on intravenous (IV) vedolizumab to SC.MethodsThis is a prospective service evaluation of adult patients who are either stable on IV vedolizumab or have been newly started and opted for SC administration. Between October and December 2020, all suitable patients attending our infusion centre for vedolizumab were offered the option to switch to SC. Initially, the aim was to offer a SC dose to patients in place of their IV infusion with injection training by IBD specialists. This proved to be a challenge as it left a narrow window of time for homecare deliveries to be arranged for subsequent doses. Therefore, the remaining patients who agreed to the switch received an IV infusion at their baseline review, with the aim of administering the first SC dose in place of the next scheduled IV dose.Outcomes include reasons for consenting or declining to switch, patient experience with using SC injections and time saved by not needing to travel to the infusion centre. Data on factors associated with poor outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection were collected, including co-morbidities, smoking status, concomitant medication and age.Clinical baseline data collected as part of routine care included disease activity (modified Harvey-Bradshaw Index or Simple Clinical Colitis Activity Index), biochemical results including C-reactive protein, albumin, haemoglobin and platelet count, faecal calprotectin and quality of life using IBD-Control. Trough vedolizumab levels were measured in patients who had had at least 3 IV doses previously. Patients will be reviewed after 12 weeks as part of the switching programme.Results179 patients were offered the opportunity to change to SC vedolizumab (54.2% CD, 44.1% UC, 1.7% IBDU), of which 125 (70%) (64 (51.2%) CD, 58 (46.4%) UC and 3 (2.4%) IBDU) agreed to the switch. The mean age (SD) was 55 (19.4). 11 patients were new to vedolizumab or reloading. The median time taken by patients (leaving home to returning home) to receive their infusions was 180 minutes (IQR 45 to 360).The main reasons for agreeing to switch were patient preference to manage their treatment at home (70.4%), concerns about contracting an infection at the infusion centre (15.7%) and difficulty attending the infusion centre (15.7%). Reasons for patients declining included not wanting to self-inject (28.3%), needle phobia (15.2%), and current instability of symptoms (15.2%). There have been no major adverse events to date.ConclusionsThis is a description of a service evaluation design to monitor outcomes in patients who have consented to transition from IV to SC vedolizumab at one IBD tertiary referral centre.

Psychological impact of caring for critically ill patients during the Covid-19 pandemic and recommendations for staff support.

BACKGROUND: Reports of significant psychological stress among frontline healthcare workers are emerging from the Covid-19 outbreak in China. Concerningly, these match findings from previous infective outbreaks, which resulted in long-term psychological pathology. METHODS: During the Covid-19 pandemic, a multi-disciplinary cohort of Intensive Care staff completed an online survey of psychological well-being and rated the perceived usefulness of supportive interventions. RESULTS: Sixty per cent of invited staff responded. Seventy-seven per cent reported normal/high level of resilience. Thirty-two staff (35%) reported anxiety of a level at which formal psychological assessment is recommended. Sixteen (14%) staff members reported symptomology suggestive of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Multiple regression analysis revealed a significant relationship between job-related well-being, anxiety (p = 0.003) and PTSD (p = 0.005). Nurses were seven times more likely than doctors to score higher anxiety (OR = 6.8; p = 0.01). Preferred supportive interventions were adequate personal protective equipment, rest facilities and regular breaks. In the subgroup with high anxiety, psychological support was perceived as significantly more useful, with significant reductions reported for rest facilities and PPE. DISCUSSION: We report concerning levels of anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptomology among intensive care staff during the Covid-19 crisis, significantly impacting job-related well-being. Nurses are disproportionately affected. Overall, physiologically protective supportive interventions were preferred by staff; however, staff with established anxiety desire professional psychological help. Our findings match reports from SARS 2003 and China 2019. To mitigate long-term psychological consequences of caring for patients during a pandemic, easily deliverable protective strategies should be instigated, supported by formal and longer-term psychological support. Particular attention should be paid to developing strategies which support nursing staff.