Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Future Healthc J ; 9(3): 335-342, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2203503

ABSTRACT

In response to the first COVID-19 surge in 2020, secondary care outpatient services were rapidly reconfigured to provide specialist review for disease sequelae. At our institution, comprising hospitals across three sites in London, we initially implemented a COVID-19 follow-up pathway that was in line with expert opinion at the time but more intensive than initial clinical guidelines suggested. We retrospectively evaluated the resource requirements for this service, which supported 526 patients from April 2020 to October 2020. At the 6-week review, 193/403 (47.9%) patients reported persistent breathlessness, 46/336 (13.7%) desaturated on exercise testing, 167/403 (41.4%) were discharged from COVID-19-related secondary care services and 190/403 (47.1%) needed 12-week follow-up. At the 12-week review, 113/309 (36.6%) patients reported persistent breathlessness, 30/266 (11.3%) desaturated on exercise testing and 150/309 (48.5%) were discharged from COVID-19-related secondary care services. Referrals were generated to multiple medical specialties, particularly respiratory subspecialties. Our analysis allowed us to justify rationalising and streamlining provisions for subsequent COVID-19 waves while reassured that opportunities for early intervention were not being missed.

2.
JAMA ; 327(6): 546-558, 2022 02 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1711978

ABSTRACT

Importance: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) have been recommended for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19. Uncertainty exists regarding the effectiveness and safety of these noninvasive respiratory strategies. Objective: To determine whether either CPAP or HFNO, compared with conventional oxygen therapy, improves clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: A parallel group, adaptive, randomized clinical trial of 1273 hospitalized adults with COVID-19-related acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. The trial was conducted between April 6, 2020, and May 3, 2021, across 48 acute care hospitals in the UK and Jersey. Final follow-up occurred on June 20, 2021. Interventions: Adult patients were randomized to receive CPAP (n = 380), HFNO (n = 418), or conventional oxygen therapy (n = 475). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of tracheal intubation or mortality within 30 days. Results: The trial was stopped prematurely due to declining COVID-19 case numbers in the UK and the end of the funded recruitment period. Of the 1273 randomized patients (mean age, 57.4 [95% CI, 56.7 to 58.1] years; 66% male; 65% White race), primary outcome data were available for 1260. Crossover between interventions occurred in 17.1% of participants (15.3% in the CPAP group, 11.5% in the HFNO group, and 23.6% in the conventional oxygen therapy group). The requirement for tracheal intubation or mortality within 30 days was significantly lower with CPAP (36.3%; 137 of 377 participants) vs conventional oxygen therapy (44.4%; 158 of 356 participants) (absolute difference, -8% [95% CI, -15% to -1%], P = .03), but was not significantly different with HFNO (44.3%; 184 of 415 participants) vs conventional oxygen therapy (45.1%; 166 of 368 participants) (absolute difference, -1% [95% CI, -8% to 6%], P = .83). Adverse events occurred in 34.2% (130/380) of participants in the CPAP group, 20.6% (86/418) in the HFNO group, and 13.9% (66/475) in the conventional oxygen therapy group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19, an initial strategy of CPAP significantly reduced the risk of tracheal intubation or mortality compared with conventional oxygen therapy, but there was no significant difference between an initial strategy of HFNO compared with conventional oxygen therapy. The study may have been underpowered for the comparison of HFNO vs conventional oxygen therapy, and early study termination and crossover among the groups should be considered when interpreting the findings. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN16912075.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Intubation, Intratracheal , Noninvasive Ventilation/methods , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Adult , COVID-19/mortality , Cannula , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology
3.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 8(1)2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1172762

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The symptoms, radiography, biochemistry and healthcare utilisation of patients with COVID-19 following discharge from hospital have not been well described. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 401 adult patients attending a clinic following an index hospital admission or emergency department attendance with COVID-19. Regression models were used to assess the association between characteristics and persistent abnormal chest radiographs or breathlessness. RESULTS: 75.1% of patients were symptomatic at a median of 53 days post discharge and 72 days after symptom onset and chest radiographs were abnormal in 47.4%. Symptoms and radiographic abnormalities were similar in PCR-positive and PCR-negative patients. Severity of COVID-19 was significantly associated with persistent radiographic abnormalities and breathlessness. 18.5% of patients had unscheduled healthcare visits in the 30 days post discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COVID-19 experience persistent symptoms and abnormal blood biomarkers with a gradual resolution of radiological abnormalities over time. These findings can inform patients and clinicians about expected recovery times and plan services for follow-up of patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Aftercare , Biomarkers/analysis , COVID-19 , Patient Discharge/standards , Radiography, Thoracic , Symptom Assessment , Aftercare/methods , Aftercare/organization & administration , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/physiopathology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Radiography, Thoracic/methods , Radiography, Thoracic/statistics & numerical data , Recovery of Function , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Symptom Assessment/methods , Symptom Assessment/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors , United Kingdom/epidemiology
4.
J Med Internet Res ; 22(8): e21486, 2020 08 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-725035

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has led to rapid acceleration in the deployment of new digital technologies to improve both accessibility to and quality of care, and to protect staff. Mixed-reality (MR) technology is the latest iteration of telemedicine innovation; it is a logical next step in the move toward the provision of digitally supported clinical care and medical education. This technology has the potential to revolutionize care both during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This pilot project sought to deploy the HoloLens2 MR device to support the delivery of remote care in COVID-19 hospital environments. METHODS: A prospective, observational, nested cohort evaluation of the HoloLens2 was undertaken across three distinct clinical clusters in a teaching hospital in the United Kingdom. Data pertaining to staff exposure to high-risk COVID-19 environments and personal protective equipment (PPE) use by clinical staff (N=28) were collected, and assessments of acceptability and feasibility were conducted. RESULTS: The deployment of the HoloLens2 led to a 51.5% reduction in time exposed to harm for staff looking after COVID-19 patients (3.32 vs 1.63 hours/day/staff member; P=.002), and an 83.1% reduction in the amount of PPE used (178 vs 30 items/round/day; P=.02). This represents 222.98 hours of reduced staff exposure to COVID-19, and 3100 fewer PPE items used each week across the three clusters evaluated. The majority of staff using the device agreed it was easy to set up and comfortable to wear, improved the quality of care and decision making, and led to better teamwork and communication. In total, 89.3% (25/28) of users felt that their clinical team was safer when using the HoloLens2. CONCLUSIONS: New technologies have a role in minimizing exposure to nosocomial infection, optimizing the use of PPE, and enhancing aspects of care. Deploying such technologies at pace requires context-specific information security, infection control, user experience, and workflow integration to be addressed at the outset and led by clinical end-users. The deployment of new telemedicine technology must be supported with objective evidence for its safety and effectiveness to ensure maximum impact.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Academic Medical Centers , Adult , Augmented Reality , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Pilot Projects , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine , United Kingdom
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL