The impact of healthcare-associated infections on COVID-19 mortality: a cohort study from a Brazilian public hospital.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze the risk factors for in-hospital mortality in a cohort of patients admitted to a newly adapted intensive care unit in a public hospital in Rio de Janeiro. METHODS: This was an observational, retrospective, and descriptive study. Data were obtained from electronic medical records. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was diagnosed by detecting viral ribonucleic acid using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Factors associated with the risk/protection from death were determined using the odds ratio and adjusted odds ratio. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were admitted to the hospital. The median age of the patients was 63 years, 60% were male patients, and 54% were white patients. Sixty-seven percent of the patients were diagnosed with COVID-19. Sepsis at admission increased the chance of in-hospital death by 21 times (adjusted odds ratio=21.06 [0.79-555.2]; p=0.06). The strongest risk factor for death was the development of septic shock during hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio=98.56 [2.75-352.5]; p=0.01), and one in four patients had multidrug-resistant bacteria. Mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, neuromuscular blockers, and sedatives were also the risk factors for in-hospital mortality. The in-hospital mortality rate was 41%, and the mortality rate of patients on mechanical ventilation was 60%. The diagnosis of COVID-19 was not statistically related to the adverse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, the strongest risk factor for in-hospital death was the development of nosocomial septic shock. Healthcare-associated infections have a significant impact on mortality rates. Therefore, to have a better outcome, it is important to consider not only the availability of beds but also the way healthcare is delivered.

Impulse Oscillometry Findings and Their Associations With Lung Ultrasound Signs in COVID-19 Survivors.

BACKGROUND: Because impulse oscillometry (IOS) can detect changes in the small airways and is safer to perform during the COVID-19 pandemic than other pulmonary function tests, it may have value in investigating pulmonary sequelae in COVID-19 survivors. This study evaluated the performance of IOS in detecting lung abnormalities in COVID-19 survivors and investigated the associations of the findings with those of lung ultrasound (LUS) and spirometry. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 117 subjects underwent IOS at a frequency range of 4-20 Hz 2 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. They also underwent spirometry and LUS, and their aeration scores were calculated. RESULTS: On IOS, the resonance frequency was > 12 Hz, and the area under the reactance curve was > 3.60 cm H2O/L/s in 70 (59.8%) and 55 (47.0%) subjects, respectively. A heterogeneity of resistance between R4 and R20 (R4-R20) > 20% was observed in 60 (51.3%) participants. Based on their abnormalities in resistive and reactive parameters, 76 (65.0%) participants had abnormal IOS. Spirometry abnormalities were detected in 40 (34.2%) cases. LUS was abnormal in 51 (43.6%) participants, and the median aeration score was 0 (0-8) points. Abnormal IOS was associated with abnormal LUS (P < .001) and abnormal spirometry (P = .002). Abnormal spirometry had a significant but weaker association with abnormal LUS (P = .031). In participants who reported hospitalization, abnormal IOS was associated with both abnormal LUS (P = .001) and abnormal spirometry (P = .006). In participants who did not report hospitalization, abnormal IOS was associated with abnormal LUS (P < .001) but not abnormal spirometry (P = .063). CONCLUSIONS: In COVID-19 survivors, IOS detected changes even when spirometry was normal. In these individuals, IOS parameters were more strongly associated with abnormalities on LUS than with abnormalities on spirometry.

One-month outcomes of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and their relationships with lung ultrasound signs.

BACKGROUND: The role of lung ultrasound (LUS) in evaluating the mid- and long-term prognoses of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia is not yet known. The objectives of this study were to evaluate associations between LUS signs at the time of screening and clinical outcomes 1 month after LUS and to assess LUS signs at the time of presentation with known risk factors for COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of data prospectively collected 1 month after LUS screening of 447 adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 pneumonia. Sonographic examination was performed in screening tents with the participants seated. The LUS signs (B-lines > 2, coalescent B-lines, and subpleural consolidations) were captured in six areas of each hemithorax and a LUS aeration score was calculated; in addition, the categories of disease probability based on patterns of LUS findings (high-probability, intermediate-probability, alternate, and low-probability patterns) were evaluated. The LUS signs at patients' initial evaluation were related to the following outcomes: symptomatology, the need for hospitalization or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and COVID-19-related death. RESULTS: According to the evaluations performed 1 month after LUS screening, 36 patients were hospitalised, eight of whom required intensive care unit (ICU) admission and three of whom died. The presence of coalescent B-lines was associated with the need for hospitalization (p = 0.008). The presence of subpleural consolidations was associated with dyspnoea (p < 0.0001), cough (p = 0.003), the need for hospitalization (p < 0.0001), the need for ICU admission (p < 0.0001), and death (p = 0.002). A higher aeration score was associated with dyspnoea (p < 0.0001), the need for hospitalization (p < 0.0001), the need for ICU admission (p < 0.0001), and death (p = 0.003). In addition, patients with a high-probability LUS pattern had a higher aeration score (p < 0.0001) and more dyspnoea (p = 0.024) and more often required hospitalization (p < 0.0001) and ICU admission (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, LUS signs were related to respiratory symptoms 1 month after LUS screening. Strong relationships were identified between LUS signs and the need for hospitalization and death.

Clinical and laboratory characteristics in outpatient diagnosis of COVID-19 in healthcare professionals in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

AIMS: This study aimed to identify the symptoms associated with early stage SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infections in healthcare professionals (HCPs) using both clinical and laboratory data. METHODS: A total of 1297 patients, admitted between 18 March and 8 April 2020, were stratified according to their risk of developing COVID-19 using their responses to a questionnaire designed to evaluate symptoms and risk conditions. RESULTS: Anosmia/hyposmia (p<0.0001), fever (p<0.0001), body pain (p<0.0001) and chills (p=0.001) were all independent predictors for COVID-19, with a 72% estimated probability for detecting COVID-19 in nasopharyngeal swab samples. Leucopenia, relative monocytosis, decreased eosinophil values, C reactive protein (CRP) and platelets were also shown to be significant independent predictors for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The significant clinical features for COVID-19 were identified as anosmia, fever, chills and body pain. Elevated CRP, leucocytes under 5400×109/L and relative monocytosis (>9%) were common among patients with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. These variables may help, in the absence of reverse transcriptase PCR tests, to identify possible COVID-19 infections during pandemic outbreaks. SUMMARY: From 19 March to 8 April 2020, 1297 patients attended the Polyclinic Piquet Carneiro for COVID-19 detection. HCP data were analysed, and significant clinical features were anosmia, fever, chills and body pain. Elevated CRP, leucopenia and monocytosis were common in COVID-19.

Comparison Between Lung Ultrasound and Computed Tomographic Findings in Patients With COVID-19 Pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to describe findings from lung ultrasound (LUS) and computed tomography (CT) in health professionals with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia and to evaluate the associations of the findings of both tests. METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study evaluated 45 health professionals who were initially seen in screening tents and had a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 as confirmed by a reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and lung involvement diagnosed by LUS. Subsequently, these individuals were admitted to the hospital, where chest CT was performed. Aeration scores were obtained for the LUS examinations based on the following findings: more than 2 B-lines, coalescent B-lines, and subpleural consolidations. A subjective assessment of the extent of lung disease on CT was performed on the basis of the percentage of lung parenchyma involvement as follows: 25% or less, 25% to 50%, and greater than 50%. RESULTS: Regarding LUS signs, more than 2 B-lines, coalescent B-lines, and subpleural consolidations were present in 73.3%, 68.2%, and 24.4% of cases, respectively. The main findings on CT were ground glass opacities, a crazy-paving pattern, and consolidations (66.7%, 20%, and 20% of cases); 17.8% of cases had examinations without abnormalities. Patients with more than 2 B-lines on LUS had more ground glass opacity areas on CT (P = .0007), whereas patients with subpleural consolidations on LUS had more consolidations on CT (P < .0001). In addition, patients with higher LUS aeration scores had more extensive disease on CT (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Lung ultrasound can detect lung injury even in the presence of normal CT results. There are associations between the abnormalities detected by both methods, and a relationship also exists between LUS aeration scores and the disease extent on CT.

Changes in lung ultrasound of symptomatic healthcare professionals with COVID-19 pneumonia and their association with clinical findings.

PURPOSE: To evaluate ultrasound signs of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pneumonia in symptomatic healthcare professionals and to correlate those changes with clinical findings. METHODS: All patients underwent real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), lung ultrasound (LUS) and clinical evaluation on the same day. In each of the 12 areas evaluated in the LUS, the LUS signs were scored to generate the aeration score. RESULTS: A total of 409 participants had positive PCR, with a median age of 41 (35-51) years. All participants had clinical symptoms, with cough in 84.1%, fever in 69.7%, and dyspnea in 36.2% of cases. In the LUS, 72.6% of participants had B-lines >2, 36.2% had coalescent B-lines, and 8.06% had subpleural consolidations. The median aeration score was 3 (2-7). The aeration score differed significantly regarding the presence of cough (P = .002), fever (P = .001), and dyspnea (P < .0001). The finding of subpleural consolidations in the LUS showed significant differences between participants with or without dyspnea (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In healthcare professionals with COVID-19, LUS plays a key role in the characterization of lung involvement. Although B-lines are the most common ultrasound sign, subpleural consolidations are those that most impact the respiratory condition.