Perioral pressure ulcers in patients with COVID-19 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Facial pressure ulcers are a rare yet significant complication. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines recommend that patients should be risk-assessed for pressure ulcers and measures instated to prevent such complication. In this study, we report case series of perioral pressure ulcers developed following the use of two devices to secure endotracheal tubes in COVID-19 positive patients managed in the intensive care setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on sixteen patients identified to have perioral pressure ulcers by using the institutional risk management system. Data parameters included patient demographics (age, gender, comorbidities, smoking history and body mass index (BMI)). Data collection included the indication of admission to ITU, duration of intubation, types of medical devices utilised to secure the endotracheal tube, requirement of vasopressor agents and renal replacement therapy, presence of other associated ulcers, duration of proning and mortality. RESULTS: Sixteen patients developed different patterns of perioral pressure ulcers related to the use of two medical devices (Insight, AnchorFast). The mean age was 58.6 years. The average length of intubation was 18.8 days. Fourteen patients required proning, with an average duration of 5.2 days. CONCLUSIONS: The two devices utilised to secure endotracheal tubes are associated with unique patterns of facial pressure ulcers. Measures should be taken to assess the skin regularly and avoid utilising devices that are associated with a high risk of facial pressure ulcers. Awareness and training should be provided to prevent such significant complication.Level of evidence: Level IV, risk/prognostic study.

A prospective, observational, cohort study of airway management of patients with COVID-19 by specialist tracheal intubation teams.

PURPOSE: Because of the anticipated surge in cases requiring intensive care unit admission, the high aerosol-generating risk of tracheal intubation, and the specific requirements in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients, a dedicated Mobile Endotracheal Rapid Intubation Team (MERIT) was formed to ensure that a highly skilled team would be deployed to manage the airways of this cohort of patients. Here, we report our intubation team experience and activity as well as patient outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The MERIT members followed a protocolized early tracheal intubation model. Over a seven-week period during the peak of the pandemic, prospective data were collected on MERIT activity, COVID-19 symptoms or diagnosis in the team members, and demographic, procedural, and clinical outcomes of patients. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 150 primary tracheal intubation episodes, with 101 (67.3%) of those occurring in men, and with a mean (standard deviation) age of 55.7 (13.8) yr. Black, Asian, and minority ethnic groups accounted for 55.7% of patients. 91.3% of tracheal intubations were performed with videolaryngoscopy, and the first pass success rate was 88.0%. The 30-day survival was 69.2%, and the median [interquartile range] length of critical care stay was 11 [6-20] days and of hospital stay was 12 [7-22] days. Seven (11.1%) MERIT healthcare professionals self-isolated because of COVID-19 symptoms, with a total 41 days of clinical work lost. There was one reported incident of a breach of personal protective equipment and multiple anecdotal reports of doffing breaches. CONCLUSION: We have shown that a highly skilled designated intubation team, following a protocolized, early tracheal intubation model may be beneficial in improving patient and staff safety, and could be considered by other institutions in future pandemic surges.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: En raison de l'augmentation anticipée du nombre de cas nécessitant une admission à l'unité de soins intensifs, du risque élevé de génération d'aérosols de l'intubation trachéale et des exigences spécifiques aux patients atteints du coronavirus (COVID-19), nous avons créé une équipe mobile dédiée pour l'intubation trachéale rapide (MERIT - Mobile Endotracheal Rapid Intubation Team) afin de garantir qu'une équipe hautement qualifiée puisse être déployée pour prendre en charge les voies aériennes de cette cohorte de patients. Notre objectif était de rapporter l'expérience et l'activité de notre équipe d'intubation ainsi que les devenirs des patients pendant la pandémie de COVID-19. MéTHODE: Les membres de l'équipe MERIT ont suivi un modèle d'intubation trachéale précoce basé sur un protocole. Pendant sept semaines autour du pic de la pandémie, des données prospectives ont été colligées concernant l'activité de la MERIT, les symptômes et diagnostics de COVID-19 parmi les membres de l'équipe, ainsi que les données démographiques, procédurales et les devenirs cliniques des patients. RéSULTATS: Nous avons analysé les données de 150 épisodes d'intubations trachéales initiales, dont 101 (67,3 %) survenus chez des hommes, avec un âge moyen (écart type) de 55,7 (13,8) ans. Les personnes noires, asiatiques et de minorités ethniques représentaient 55,7 % des patients. Au total, 91,3 % des intubations trachéales ont été réalisées par vidéolaryngoscopie, et le taux de réussite au premier essai était de 88,0 %. Le taux de survie à 30 jours était de 69,2 %, et la durée médiane (écart interquartile) de séjour aux soins intensifs était de 11 (6-20) jours et de 12 (7-22) jours à l'hôpital. Sept (11,1 %) professionnels de la santé de l'équipe MERIT se sont mis en auto-isolement en raison de symptômes de la COVID-19, pour un total de 41 jours de travail clinique perdus. Un incident de bris de stérilité de l'équipement de protection individuelle a été rapporté, et de multiples bris lors du déshabillage ont également été rapportés de façon anecdotique. CONCLUSION: Nous avons démontré qu'une équipe d'intubation désignée et hautement qualifiée, respectant un modèle d'intubation trachéale précoce basé sur un protocole, pourrait contribuer à améliorer la sécurité des patients et du personnel. La création d'une telle équipe est envisageable dans d'autres établissements lors de futurs épisodes pandémiques.

A Cohort Study of Emergency Surgery Caseload and Regional Anesthesia Provision at a Tertiary UK Hospital During the Initial COVID-19 Pandemic.

Study objective  Analysis of emergency cases performed during initial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the proportion completed under regional anesthesia (RA). Design Cohort study comparing surgical caseload during initial seven-week COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Comparison was made with pre-COVID-19 caseload over the corresponding seven-week timeframe in 2019. Setting The setting of the study was emergency surgery theaters at Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. Patients All patients requiring emergency surgery over the defined study period were reviewed with the exception of obstetric and pediatric populations. Interventions Surgical caseload for 2020 and 2019 cohorts established using the Galaxy IT system used to log all operations. All relevant anesthetic charts for the 2020 cohort were subsequently reviewed to ascertain perioperative use of RA. Measurements The type of block, mode of approach, experience of the operator, personal protective equipment (PPE) worn, block complications, type of sedation and complications were entered into database. Main results A total of 338 emergency surgical cases were performed during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, compared to 603 cases over the corresponding period in 2019. This showed a 44% decrease in emergency surgical workload. There was a marked disparity in reduction of surgical caseload by surgical subspecialty. Trauma (137 vs 66 cases), a 52% decrease, and general surgery (193 vs 64 cases), a 66% decrease, were the most pronounced, and explanations for this are explored. RA was performed in 34% (26% as primary technique) of cases during the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of RA as the primary anesthesia technique was noticeably higher than previous UK data (11%), and was prominent in specialties such as general surgery, gynecology and urology, not traditionally completed under RA. Conclusions Surgical RA (and general anesthesia avoidance) has a significant role in the future to ensure high-quality perioperative care for patients whilst minimizing exposure to staff and utilization of scarce resources (PPE).