Demographic and risk characteristics of healthcare workers infected with SARS-CoV-2 from two tertiary care hospitals in the United Arab Emirates.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the transmission dynamics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare workers (HCWs) and their social contacts is crucial to plan appropriate risk-reduction measures. AIM: To analyze the socio-demographic risk factors and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs in two tertiary care hospitals in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. METHODS: The demographic and clinical characteristics were available for all HCWs in both facilities from the human resources department. A cross-sectional survey was conducted from January-April 2022 among HCWs who tested positive through Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction of the nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 between March 2020 and August 2021 in two tertiary-level hospitals. The survey included questions on demographics, work profile, characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and infection among their household or co-workers. The survey also checked the knowledge and perception of participants on the infection prevention measures related to SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Out of a total of 346 HCWs infected with SARS-CoV-2, 286 (82.7%) HCWs consented to participate in this study. From the sample population, 150 (52.5%) of participants were female, and a majority (230, 80.4%) were frontline HCWs, including 121 nurses (121, 42.4%). Only 48 (16.8%) participants were fully vaccinated at the time of infection. Most infected HCWs (85%) were unaware of any unprotected exposure and were symptomatic at the time of testing (225, 78.7%). Nearly half of the participants (140, 49%) had co-infection among household, and nearly one-third (29.5%) had co-infection among three or more household. Another 108 (37.8%) participants reported cross-infection among co-workers. The frontline HCWs were significantly more infected (25.1% vs 8.6%, P < 0.001) compared to non-frontline HCWs. Another significant risk factor for a high infection rate was male sex (P < 0.001). Among the infected frontline HCWs, a significantly higher proportion were male and shared accommodation with family (P < 0.001). COVID-19 vaccination significantly reduced the infection rate (83.2% vs 16.8, P < 0.001) among HCWs. Most participants (99.3%) were aware about importance of appropriate use of personal protective equipment. However, only 70% agreed with the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccination in preventing an infection and severe disease. CONCLUSION: The risk profiling of the HCWs infected with SARS-CoV-2 found that working at frontline and being male increase the rate of infection. COVID-19 vaccination can effectively reduce the rate of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among HCWs.

Awake proning in patients with COVID-19-related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: A rapid practice guideline.

This rapid practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the use of awake proning in adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The panel included 20 experts from 12 countries, including one patient representative, and used a strict conflict of interest policy for potential financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the guidelines in intensive care, development, and evaluation (GUIDE) group. Based on an updated systematic review, and the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. We conducted an electronic vote, requiring >80% agreement amongst the panel for a recommendation to be adopted. The panel made a strong recommendation for a trial of awake proning in adult patients with COVID-19 related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure who are not invasively ventilated. Awake proning appears to reduce the risk of tracheal intubation, although it may not reduce mortality. The panel judged that most patients would want a trial of awake proning, although this may not be feasible in some patients and some patients may not tolerate it. However, given the high risk of clinical deterioration amongst these patients, awake proning should be conducted in an area where patients can be monitored by staff experienced in rapidly detecting and managing clinical deterioration. This RPG panel recommends a trial of awake prone positioning in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

COVID-19 and hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and thrombocytopenia syndrome in pregnant women - association or causation?

Pregnant women are among the high-risk population for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with unfavorable peripartum outcomes and increased incidence of preterm births. Hemolysis, the elevation of liver enzymes, and low platelet count (HELLP) syndrome and severe preeclampsia are among the leading causes of maternal mortality. Evidence supports a higher odd of pre-eclampsia in women with COVID-19, given overlapping pathophysiology. Involvement of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for the entry to the host cells and its downregulation cause dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. The overexpression of Angiotensin II mediated via p38 Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase pathways can cause vasoconstriction and uninhibited platelet aggregation, which may be another common link between COVID-19 and HELLP syndrome. On PubMed search from January 1, 2020, to July 30, 2022, we found 18 studies on of SARS-COV-2 infection with HELLP Syndrome. Most of these studies are case reports or series, did not perform histopathology analysis of the placenta, or measured biomarkers linked to pre-eclampsia/HELLP syndrome. Hence, the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 infection and HELLP syndrome is inconclusive in these studies. We intend to perform a mini-review of the published literature on HELLP syndrome and COVID-19 to test the hypothesis on association vs causation, and gaps in the current evidence and propose an area of future research.

Intravenous fluid therapy in perioperative and critical care setting-Knowledge test and practice: An international cross-sectional survey.

PURPOSE: In the absence of recent international recommendations supported by scientific societies like Anesthesiology or Intensive Care Medicine, healthcare professionals (HCP) knowledge on IV fluid is expected to vary. We undertook a cross-sectional survey, aiming to assess prescription patterns and test the knowledge of HCP for IV fluid use in the operating room (OR) and intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: An online international cross-sectional survey was conducted between October 20, 2019, and November 27, 2021. The survey included multiple-choice questions on demographics, practice patterns and knowledge of IV fluids, and a hemodynamically unstable patient assessment. RESULTS: 1045 HCP, from 97 countries responded to the survey. Nearly three-quarters reported the non-existence of internal hospital or ICU-based guidelines on IV fluids. The respondents' mean score on the knowledge assessment questions was 46.4 ± 14.4. The cumulative mean scores were significantly higher among those supervising trainees (p = 0.02), specialists (p < 0.001) and those working in high-income (p < 0.001) countries. Overall performance of respondents on the knowledge testing for IV fluid was unsatisfactory with only 6.5% respondents performed above average. CONCLUSION: There is a wide difference in the knowledge and prescription of IV fluids among the HCP surveyed. These findings reflect the urgent need for education on IV fluids.

In Response to: Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19: Finding Window of Opportunity.

Nasa P, Chaudhry D. In Response to: Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19: Finding Window of Opportunity. Indian J Crit Care 2022;26(3):405.

Visiting and Communication Policy in Intensive Care Units during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-sectional Survey from South Asia and the Middle East.

Purpose: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had affected the visiting or communicating policies for family members. We surveyed the intensive care units (ICUs) in South Asia and the Middle East to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on visiting and communication policies. Materials and method: A web-based cross-sectional survey was used to collect data between March 22, 2021, and April 7, 2021, from healthcare professionals (HCP) working in COVID and non-COVID ICUs (one response per ICU). The topics of the questionnaire included current and pre-pandemic policies on visiting, communication, informed consent, and end-of-life care in ICUs. Results: A total of 292 ICUs (73% of COVID ICUs) from 18 countries were included in the final analysis. Most (92%) of ICUs restricted their visiting hours, and nearly one-third (32.3%) followed a "no-visitor" policy. There was a significant change in the daily visiting duration in COVID ICUs compared to the pre-pandemic times (p = 0.011). There was also a significant change (p <0.001) in the process of informed consent and end-of-life discussions during the ongoing pandemic compared to pre-pandemic times. Conclusion: Visiting and communication policies of the ICUs had significantly changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Future studies are needed to understand the sociopsychological and medicolegal implications of revised policies. How to cite this article: Chanchalani G, Arora N, Nasa P, Sodhi K, Al Bahrani MJ, Al Tayar A, et al. Visiting and Communication Policy in Intensive Care Units during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-sectional Survey from South Asia and the Middle East. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(3):268-275.

Thrombotic Microangiopathy Causing Acute Kidney Injury in a COVID-19 Patient.

Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) in COVID-19 patients is common and independently associated with higher mortality. The pathophysiology of AKI is multifactorial and may be either direct viral trophism or immune mediated injury and hypercoagulability. This case highlights AKI in a young female with severe COVID-19 due to complement-3 mediated thrombotic microangiopathy with pre-existing chronic kidney disease likely because of IgA nephropathy.

Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: There is strong evidence for the use of corticosteroid in the management of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, there is still uncertainty about the timing of corticosteroids. We undertook a modified Delphi study to develop expert consensus statements on the early identification of a subset of patients from non-severe COVID-19 who may benefit from using corticosteroids. METHODS: A modified Delphi was conducted with two anonymous surveys between April 30, 2021, and May 3, 2021. An expert panel of 35 experts was selected and invited to participate through e-mail. The consensus was defined as >70% votes in multiple-choice questions (MCQ) on Likert-scale type statements, while strong consensus as >90% votes in MCQ or >50% votes for "very important" on Likert-scale questions in the final round. RESULTS: Twenty experts completed two rounds of the survey. There was strong consensus for the increased work of breathing (95%), a positive six-minute walk test (90%), thorax computed tomography severity score of >14/25 (85%), new-onset organ dysfunction (using clinical or biochemical criteria) (80%), and C-reactive protein >5 times the upper limit of normal (70%) as the criteria for patients' selection. The experts recommended using oral or intravenous (IV) low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days and monitoring of oxygen saturation, body temperature, clinical scoring system, blood sugar, and inflammatory markers for any "red-flag" signs. CONCLUSION: The experts recommended against indiscriminate use of corticosteroids in mild to moderate COVID-19 without the signs of clinical worsening. Oral or IV low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days are recommended for patients with features of disease progression based on clinical, biochemical, or radiological criteria after 5 days from symptom onset under close monitoring. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: How to cite this article: Nasa P, Chaudhry D, Govil D, Daga MK, Jain R, Chhallani AA, et al. Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(11):1280-1285.

Infection control in the intensive care unit: expert consensus statements for SARS-CoV-2 using a Delphi method.

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers and uninfected patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 as a result of transmission from infected patients and health-care workers. In the absence of high-quality evidence on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, clinical practice of infection control and prevention in ICUs varies widely. Using a Delphi process, international experts in intensive care, infectious diseases, and infection control developed consensus statements on infection control for SARS-CoV-2 in an ICU. Consensus was achieved for 31 (94%) of 33 statements, from which 25 clinical practice statements were issued. These statements include guidance on ICU design and engineering, health-care worker safety, visiting policy, personal protective equipment, patients and procedures, disinfection, and sterilisation. Consensus was not reached on optimal return to work criteria for health-care workers who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or the acceptable disinfection strategy for heat-sensitive instruments used for airway management of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Well designed studies are needed to assess the effects of these practice statements and address the remaining uncertainties.

Delphi methodology in healthcare research: How to decide its appropriateness.

The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members. The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine. The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited, ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting. However, the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance, and details of the process followed are usually unclear. We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology; identification of problem area of research, selection of panel, anonymity of panelists, controlled feedback, iterative Delphi rounds, consensus criteria, analysis of consensus, closing criteria, and stability of the results. Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points, we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019. There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members, defining consensus, closing criteria for rounds, and presenting the results. We propose our evaluation points for researchers, medical journal editorial boards, and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.

Air leak with COVID-19 - A meta-summary.

INTRODUCTION: There are various reports of air leaks with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We undertook a systematic review of all published case reports and series to analyse the types of air leaks in COVID-19 and their outcomes. METHODS: The literature search from PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases was performed from the start of the pandemic till 31 March 2021. The inclusion criteria were case reports or series on (1) laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, (2) with the individual patient details, and (3) reported diagnosis of one or more air leak syndrome (pneumothorax, subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastinum, pneumoperitoneum, pneumopericardium). RESULTS: A total of 105 studies with 188 patients were included in the final analysis. The median age was 56.02 (SD 15.53) years, 80% males, 11% had previous respiratory disease, and 8% were smokers. Severe or critical COVID-19 was present in 50.6% of the patients. Pneumothorax (68%) was the most common type of air leak. Most patients (56.7%) required intervention with lower mortality (29.1% vs. 44.1%, p = 0.07) and intercostal drain (95.9%) was the preferred interventional management. More than half of the patients developed air leak on spontaneous breathing. The mortality was significantly higher in patients who developed air leak with positive pressure ventilation (49%, p < 0.001) and required escalation of respiratory support (39%, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Air leak in COVID-19 can occur spontaneously without positive pressure ventilation, higher transpulmonary pressures, and other risk factors like previous respiratory disease or smoking. The mortality is significantly higher if associated with positive pressure ventilation and escalation of respiratory support.

Psychological distress among survivors of moderate-to-critical COVID-19 illness: A multicentric prospective cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is predicted to have long-term sequelae on the physical and mental health of survivors. We aim to calculate the prevalence of psychological distress in moderate-to-critical survivors of COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients discharged from the hospital after moderate-to-critical COVID-19 were interviewed using e-mail at 30 and 60 days for anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) using Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and PTSD Check List-5 questionnaire, respectively. RESULTS: In 103 patients (96% were immigrant workers), the prevalence rate of clinically significant anxiety, depression, and PTSD was 21.4%, 12.7%, and 8.7% at day 30 and 9.5%, 7.1%, and 4.7% at day 60, respectively. There was significantly higher anxiety in patients of Indian nationality and depression with preexisting chronic illness. CONCLUSION: There is a high prevalence rate of clinically significant psychological distress among COVID-19 survivors, and we propose a formal psychiatric assessment and long-term follow-up.

Variation in therapeutic strategies for the management of severe COVID-19 in India: A nationwide cross-sectional survey.

AIM: During the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the physicians are using various off-label therapeutics to manage COVID-19. We undertook a cross-sectional survey to study the current variation in therapeutic strategies for managing severe COVID-19 in India. METHODS: From January 4 to January 18, 2021, an online cross-sectional survey was conducted among physicians involved in the management of severe COVID-19. The survey had three sections: 1. Antiviral agents, 2. Immunomodulators, and 3. Adjuvant therapies. RESULTS: 1055 respondents (from 24 states and five union territories), of which 64.2% were consultants, 54.3% working in private hospitals, and 39.1% were from critical care medicine completed the survey. Remdesivir (95.2%), antithrombotics (94.2%), corticosteroids (90.3%), vitamins (89.7%) and empirical antibiotics (85.6%) were the commonly used therapeutics. Ivermectin (33%), convalescent plasma (28.6%) and favipiravir (17.6%) were other antiviral agents used. Methylprednisolone (50.2%) and dexamethasone (44.1%) were preferred corticosteroids and at a dose equivalent of 8 mg of dexamethasone phosphate (70.2%). There was significant variation among physicians from different medical specialities in the use of favipiravir, corticosteroids, empirical antibiotics and vitamins. CONCLUSION: There is a considerable variation in the physicians' choice of therapeutic strategies for the management of severe COVID-19 in India, as compared with the available evidence.

COVID-19 and the liver: What do we know so far?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on public health and healthcare. The pandemic surge and resultant lockdown have affected the standard-of-care of many medical conditions and diseases. The initial uncertainty and fear of cross transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have changed the routine management of patients with pre-existing liver diseases, hepatocellular carcinoma, and patients either listed for or received a liver transplant. COVID-19 is best described as a multisystem disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, and it can cause acute liver injury or decompensation of the pre-existing liver disease. There has been considerable research on the pathophysiology, infection transmission, and treatment of COVID-19 in the last few months. The pathogenesis of liver involvement in COVID-19 includes viral cytotoxicity, the secondary effect of immune dysregulation, hypoxia resulting from respiratory failure, ischemic damage caused by vascular endotheliitis, congestion because of right heart failure, or drug-induced liver injury. Patients with chronic liver diseases, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma are at high risk for severe COVID-19 and mortality. The phase III trials of recently approved vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 did not include enough patients with pre-existing liver diseases and excluded immunocompromised patients or those on immunomodulators. This article reviews the currently published research on the effect of COVID-19 on the liver and the management of patients with pre-existing liver disease, including SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Emotional Well-being of Healthcare Workers: A Multinational Cross-sectional Survey.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in the last few months has disrupted the healthcare system globally. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychological and emotional well-being of healthcare workers (HCWs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an online, cross-sectional, multinational survey, assessing the anxiety (using Generalized Anxiety Disorder [GAD-2] and GAD-7), depression (using Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression), and insomnia (using Insomnia Severity Index), among HCWs across India, the Middle East, and North America. We used univariate and bivariate logistic regression to identify risk factors for psychological distress. RESULTS: The prevalence of clinically significant anxiety, depression, and insomnia were 41.4, 48.0, and 31.3%, respectively. On bivariate logistic regression, lack of social or emotional support to HCWs was independently associated with anxiety [odds ratio (OR), 3.81 (2.84-3.90)], depression [OR, 6.29 (4.50-8.79)], and insomnia [OR, 3.79 (2.81-5.110)]. Female gender and self-COVID-19 were independent risk factors for anxiety [OR, 3.71 (1.53-9.03) and 1.71 (1.23-2.38)] and depression [OR, 1.72 (1.27-2.31) and 1.62 (1.14-2.30)], respectively. Frontliners were independently associated with insomnia [OR, 1.68 (1.23-2.29)]. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 pandemic has a high prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia among HCWs. Female gender, frontliners, self-COVID-19, and absence of social or emotional support are the independent risk factors for psychological distress. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Jagiasi BG, Chanchalani G, Nasa P, Tekwani S. Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Emotional Well-being of Healthcare Workers: A Multinational Cross-sectional Survey. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(5):499-506.

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. METHODS: Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable). RESULTS: Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. CONCLUSION: Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Therapeutic plasma exchange followed by convalescent plasma transfusion in critical COVID-19-An exploratory study.

The pathophysiology of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is primarily a host immune interplay to virus invasion. The therapeutic options have been explored either against hyperinflammation from dysregulated adaptive immunity or direct virus neutralization using antibodies from convalescent plasma (CP) of a recovered patient. The therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) for removal of excessive inflammatory cytokines has been tried with success in COVID-19. We undertook this exploratory study to evaluate safety and efficacy of TPE followed by CP transfusion in 14 patients with critical COVID-19 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). All patients showed improvement in symptoms and decrease of inflammatory markers especially CRP (p = 0.03). 10 patients were liberated from IMV after a median of 5.5 (3-36) days, post sequential therapy. Day 7 and Day 28 mortality was 21.4% and 28.6% respectively. The median duration ICU and hospital LOS were 12 (5-42) days and 18 (12-47) days respectively. No patient developed transfusion-associated complications, but three patients developed secondary bacterial sepsis within 14 days of therapy, and one died. This case series demonstrated the sequential use of TPE followed by CP transfusion as a therapeutic option in critical COVID-19.

Infection Prevention and Control for ICU during COVID-19 Pandemic: Position Paper of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has very high rates of hospital-related transmission among healthcare workers (HCWs), mandating the need for careful intensive care unit (ICU) designing, optimization of staff resources, implementation of vigorous infection control practices, environmental disinfection, meticulous sample collection, and criteria for staff quarantine. Most of the ICUs are not designed to deal with airborne viral infections and require redesigning for the safety of HCWs and patients. Infection control practices related to the prevention of spread of COVD-19 are unique and are well described. The training of staff on infection control practices reduces the infection rate among HCWs significantly. Adequate staffing not only helps in infection control but also prevents burnout of the staff. In case of infection to HCW, the staff must be assessed systematically, and institute's infection control committee should guide for isolation period as well as return to work based upon standard recommendations. This article focuses on infection control and prevention measures required in ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic. How to cite this article: Sharma J, Nasa P, Reddy KS, Kuragayala SD, Sahi S, Gopal P, et al. Infection Prevention and Control for ICU during COVID-19 Pandemic: Position Paper of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 5):S280-S289.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Treatment: It is Time for Stewardship!

How to cite this article: Nasa P. Coronavirus Disease 2019 Treatment: It is Time for Stewardship! Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(10):895-896.