RESEARCH STAFF COVID-19 PANDEMIC RESPONSE SURVEY: RESULTS FROM THE NHLBI PETAL NETWORK

Respondents, regardless of these logistical challenges, indicated their willingness to enroll COVID-19 patients, however,12% of respondents would refuse to enroll COVID-19 research patients. B Conclusion: b Despite numerous stressors, including exposure and infection of research staff, members of the PETAL Network were heavily engaged in COVID-19 clinical trials and research. B Background: b During the COVID-19 pandemic, the initial understandings of disease pathogenesis and treatment interventions were limited. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Critical Care Medicine is the property of Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

COVID-19 in the hotspot of Metropolitan Detroit: A multi-faceted health system experience.

Health systems were abruptly plunged into a crisis as SARS-CoV-2 exploded into a pandemic in spring 2020. In March-April 2020, Metropolitan Detroit was a US "hotspot." As a large health system with five hospitals and two behavioural health inpatient facilities, a health insurance company, a medical group and physician network, and 41 ambulatory clinics normally hosting over 10,000 daily patient encounters, the Henry Ford Health System deployed numerous strategies in the management of this upheaval. As hospitals and Emergency Departments were inundated with COVID-19 patients, other services and activities needed to shut down as state-mandated policies were promulgated, new internal and external communication networks established, and management of employees and resources such as ventilators, ICU beds, personal protective equipment, and laboratory supplies became critical challenges. We describe herein the system-wide strategies implemented and lessons learned in the operation of a health system in the initial throes of a global pandemic.

Mechanical Ventilation and Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Case-Control Analysis of Clinical Characteristics, Lung Mechanics, and Mortality.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the differences in clinical course, ventilator mechanics, and outcomes of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome infection compared with a historical cohort of acute respiratory distress syndrome. DESIGN: Comparative case-control study. SETTING: Multicenter, comprehensive tertiary healthcare facility in Detroit, MI. PATIENTS/SUBJECTS: Adult patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome infection were compared with patients hospitalized with acute respiratory distress syndrome prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic (control). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We included 384 patients in the analysis. Inpatient mortality was significantly higher in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome infection compared with controls (64% vs 49%; p = 0.007). Despite both groups demonstrating similar ventilatory function and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score on day 1 of intubation, with similar lung compliance throughout the study period, patients with coronavirus disease 2019 secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome infection demonstrated progressive hypoxia compared with controls across the study period. Similarly, higher positive end-expiratory pressure levels and increased use of paralytics were observed in the patients with coronavirus disease 2019 secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome infection group. On univariate analysis of the entire cohort, significant risk factors for inpatient mortality included coronavirus disease 2019 infection (p = 0.007), older age (p < 0.001), high Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (p = 0.003), vasopressor use (p = 0.039), paralytic use (p < 0.001), higher positive end-expiratory pressure levels on day 3 (p = 0.027) and day 7 (p < 0.001), in addition to acute respiratory distress syndrome severity on both days 3 (p = 0.008) and 7 (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis identified coronavirus disease 2019 infection (odds ratio, 1.939; p = 0.021), older age (odds ratio, 1.042; p < 0.001), paralytic use (odds ratio, 3.366; p < 0.001), and higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (odds ratio, 1.152; p = 0.027) as significant predictors of mortality across the entire cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 secondary to acute respiratory distress syndrome infection demonstrated higher mortality compared with control patients hospitalized with acute respiratory distress syndrome prior to the pandemic, with progressive hypoxia throughout the study period, despite similar lung mechanics and initial Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. Coronavirus disease 2019 infection, older age, paralytic use, and higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were independent risk factors for 28-day mortality across the entire cohort.

Racial Differences in a Detroit, MI, ICU Population of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the potential influence of racial differences in outcomes of patients infected by coronavirus disease 2019-positive patients who require intensive care in an urban hospital. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Henry Ford Health System Multidisciplinary ICU, a total of 156 beds spread throughout the hospital in Detroit, MI. PATIENTS: We obtained data from the electronic medical record of all adult severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2-positive patients managed in the ICU of Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, MI, between March 13, 2020, and July 31, 2020. Included patients were divided into two groups: people of color (including Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, and Arab) and White. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 365 patients were evaluated: 219 were Black (60.0%), 129 were White (35.3%), two were Asian (0.6%), eight were Hispanic/Latino (2.2%), and seven were Arab (1.9%). People of color were younger (62.8 vs 67.1; p = 0.007), with equal distribution of sex. People of color had less coronary artery disease (34 [14.4%] vs 35 [27.1%]; p =0.003) and less self-reported use of regular alcohol consumption (50 [21.2%] vs 12 [9.3%]; p = 0.004) than Whites, with no differences in diabetes (125 [53.0%] vs 66 [51.2%]; p = 0.742), hypertension (188 [79.7%] vs 99 [76.8%]; p = 0.516), congestive heart failure (41 [17.4%] vs 32 [24.8%]; p = 0.090), or chronic kidney disease (123 [54.1%] vs 55 [42.6%]; p = 0.083).There was no difference in ICU length of stay between people of color (18 d [CI, 7-47 d]) and Whites (18 d [CI, 6-48 d]; p = 0. 0.979). Neither frequency (72.5% vs 71.3%; p = ns) nor median time to mechanical ventilation between people of color (9 d [CI, 6-15 d]) and Whites (10 d [CI, 5-16 d]; p = 0.733) was different. Overall, 188 patients (51.5 %) died in the hospital. The 28-day mortality was lower in people of color (107/236; 45.3%) versus Whites (73/129; 56.6%) (adjusted odds ratio 0.60; p = 0.034), and there was an increased median survival time in people of color (20 d) versus Whites (13.5 d; hazard ratio 0.62; p = 0.002). The inhospital mortality was lower in people of color versus White, but the difference was not statistically significant (113 [47.9%] vs 75 [58.1%], respectively; p = 0.061). Finally, there was no significant difference in days of symptoms prior to admission, frequency of presenting symptoms, or frequency or severity of acute respiratory distress syndrome between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019, people of color had a lower 28-day mortality than Whites with no difference in hospital mortality, ICU length of stay, or rates of intubation. These findings are contrary to previously held beliefs surrounding the pandemic.

Clinical characteristics and predictors of survival in adults with coronavirus disease 2019 receiving tocilizumab.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can progress to cytokine storm that is associated with organ dysfunction and death. The purpose of the present study is to determine clinical characteristics associated with 28 day in-hospital survival in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that received tocilizumab. This was a retrospective observational cohort study conducted at a five hospital health system in Michigan, United States. Adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 that were admitted to the hospital and received tocilizumab for cytokine storm from March 1, 2020 through April 3, 2020 were included. Patients were grouped into survivors and non-survivors based on 28 day in-hospital mortality. Study day 0 was defined as the day tocilizumab was administered. Factors independently associated with in-hospital survival at 28 days after tocilizumab administration were assessed. Epidemiologic, demographic, laboratory, prognostic scores, treatment, and outcome data were collected and analyzed. Clinical response was collected and defined as a decline of two levels on a six-point ordinal scale of clinical status or discharged alive from the hospital. Of the 81 patients included, the median age was 64 (58-71) years and 56 (69.1%) were male. The 28 day in-hospital mortality was 43.2%. There were 46 (56.8%) patients in the survivors and 35 (43.2%) in the non-survivors group. On study day 0 no differences were noted in demographics, clinical characteristics, severity of illness scores, or treatments received between survivors and non-survivors. C-reactive protein was significantly higher in the non-survivors compared to survivors. Compared to non-survivors, recipients of tocilizumab within 12 days of symptom onset was independently associated with survival (adjusted OR: 0.296, 95% CI: 0.098-0.889). SOFA score ≥8 on day 0 was independently associated with mortality (adjusted OR: 2.842, 95% CI: 1.042-7.753). Clinical response occurred more commonly in survivors than non-survivors (80.4% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001). Improvements in the six-point ordinal scale and SOFA score were observed in survivors after tocilizumab. Early receipt of tocilizumab in patients with severe COVID-19 was an independent predictor for in-hospital survival at 28 days.