Early Warning Scores at Time of ICU Admission to Predict Mortality in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess ability of National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2), systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and CRB-65 calculated at the time of intensive care unit (ICU) admission for predicting ICU mortality in patients of laboratory confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. METHODS: This prospective data analysis was based on chart reviews for laboratory confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs over a 1-mo period. The NEWS2, CRB-65, qSOFA, and SIRS were calculated from the first recorded vital signs upon admission to ICU and assessed for predicting mortality. RESULTS: Total of 140 patients aged between 18 and 95 y were included in the analysis of whom majority were >60 y (47.8%), with evidence of pre-existing comorbidities (67.1%). The most common symptom at presentation was dyspnea (86.4%). Based upon the receiver operating characteristics area under the curve (AUC), the best discriminatory power to predict ICU mortality was for the CRB-65 (AUC: 0.720 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.630-0.811]) followed closely by NEWS2 (AUC: 0.712 [95% CI: 0.622-0.803]). Additionally, a multivariate Cox regression model showed Glasgow Coma Scale score at time of admission (P < 0.001; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.808 [95% CI: 0.715-0.911]) to be the only significant predictor of ICU mortality. CONCLUSIONS: CRB-65 and NEWS2 scores assessed at the time of ICU admission offer only a fair discriminatory value for predicting mortality. Further evaluation after adding laboratory markers such as C-reactive protein and D-dimer may yield a more useful prediction model. Much of the earlier data is from developed countries and uses scoring at time of hospital admission. This study was from a developing country, with the scores assessed at time of ICU admission, rather than the emergency department as with existing data from developed countries, for patients with moderate/severe COVID-19 disease. Because the scores showed some utility for predicting ICU mortality even when measured at time of ICU admission, their use in allocation of limited ICU resources in a developing country merits further research.

Retention of Knowledge and Efficacy of a Hands-on Training Session in Oxygen Therapy for COVID-19 among Healthcare Workers.

Introduction: We conducted basic hands-on training in oxygen therapy and ventilatory management of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients to health care workers (HCWs) at our tertiary care hospital. We designed this study aiming to find out the impact of hands-on training in oxygen therapy for COVID-19 patients on the knowledge and degree of retention of this gained knowledge 6 weeks after the training session among HCWs. Materials and methods: The study was conducted after obtaining approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee. A structured questionnaire consisting of 15 multiple-choice questions was given to the individual HCW. This was followed by a structured 1-hour training session on "Oxygen therapy in COVID-19", following which the same questionnaire was given to the HCWs with the questions in a different order. After 6 weeks, the same questionnaire with questions in a different format was sent to the participants as a Google form. Results: A total of 256 responses were obtained for the pre-training test and post-training test. The median [IQR] pre-training test scores and post-training test scores were 8 [7-10] and 12 [10-13], respectively. The median retention score was 11 [9-12]. The retention scores were significantly higher than the pre-test scores. Conclusion: About 89% of the HCWs had a significant gain of knowledge. About 76% of the HCWs were able to retain knowledge, which also means the training program was successful. A definitive improvement in baseline knowledge was observed after 6 weeks of training. We propose conducting reinforcement training after 6 weeks of primary training to further augment retention. How to cite this article: Singh A, Salhotra R, Bajaj M, Saxena AK, Sharma SK, Singh D, et al. Retention of Knowledge and Efficacy of a Hands-on Training Session in Oxygen Therapy for COVID-19 among Healthcare Workers. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(2):127-131.

Awake Prone-Positioning in Patients on Non-Invasive Ventilation for Management of SARS-CoV-2 Pneumonia: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19)-induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) are often on non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and use of awake prone positioning (PP) may pose concern in terms of feasibility, efficacy and side effects. This systematic review was undertaken to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of awake PP along with NIV in them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted from the inception of COVID-19 until 15 August 2021. Various factors including feasibility, interface used, outcome, efficacy, side effects and limitations in both intensive care unit (ICU) and Non-ICU setups were noted. RESULTS: A total of 12 original articles and six case series including 359 patients were involved. Out of it, 40% (n = 122) of patients were in ICU and 60% (n = 237) in Non-ICU areas. Four clinical studies and four case series including 114 patients had evaluated PP along with helmet continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). All had found PP with helmet CPAP to be feasible and efficacious; however, only one study documented the sustained improvement in oxygenation i.e., 12 h after PP. CONCLUSIONS: The present systematic review observed moderate to serious risk of bias amongst the included studies along with heterogeneity in terms of varied respiratory support amongst patients. However, the use of awake PP in patients on NIV has been found to be feasible and efficacious with no adverse events.

Effect of convalescent plasma therapy on mortality in moderate-to-severely Ill COVID-19 patients.

INTRODUCTION: The role of plasma therapy in the management of the COVID-19, pandemic has been speculated. However, in view of the varied response regarding its effectiveness from various multicenter studies, there is a need to conduct more single center population-specific studies. We, thus, aimed to assess the role of convalescent plasma therapy in COVID-19 patient management in a single -center. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted using records of all COVID-19 patients who received plasma therapy over a period of 6 months in a dedicated COVID-19 hospital in Delhi. Information pertaining to transfusion, disease severity, associated comorbidities, the treatment given and patient outcome were recorded. Data was analyzed using SPSSv23. RESULTS: Of the141 patients who received plasma therapy, 62% were discharged after treatment. Mortality was found to be significantly higher in patients > 60 years of age (p < 0.001), those with severe COVID-19 infection (p < 0.05) and pre-existing renal disease (p < 0.05). The admission-transfusion interval was significantly correlated to mortality and was a sensitive parameter for predicting outcome at cut off value of < 5 days (p < 0.001). There was no significant association of mortality with patient blood group, plasma antibody levels or donor hemoglobin levels. CONCLUSIONS: We report improvement and recovery in a large number of patients who received convalescent plasma within the first 5 days of hospitalization with moderate to severe disease. Further research to compare dosage and administration protocols to delineate role of CCP in survival of COVID-19 patients is needed before it is prematurely shelved.