Real-World COPD Management Over 3 Years at the Community Health Service Center of Shanghai During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China.

Objective: To evaluate the real-world situation for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and poorly controlled disease risk factors in the Chinese community. Methods: This retrospective multicentre study analysed data from COPDMICand MICHC in Shanghai Songjiang District, Shanghai, China. The differences in COPD Assessment Test (CAT), the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale, and the number of emergency cases, emergency visits, inpatient cases, and hospitalisations from January 2018 to December 2020 were analysed. The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on COPD management was also assessed. Results: For 2020 versus 2018, analysis of 468 COPD cases from COPDMIC matched with MICHC data showed significantly more patients with improved mMRC grades, significantly fewer emergency cases and emergency visits, and significantly fewer hospitalisation cases and hospitalisations. Differences in the number of emergency visits and hospitalisations per capita were statistically significant. Compared to GOLD 3-4, GOLD 1-2 patients showed significant improvements in CAT score, mMRC grade, the number of emergency visits and hospitalisations per capita. Treatment adherence from 2018 to 2020 was 25%, 29.1%, and 6.8%, and the proportion of medication regimens consistent with guidelines was 43.44%, 50.98%, and 71.87%, respectively. Higher treatment adherence resulted in significantly improved CAT scores and mMRC grades and fewer emergency department visits and hospitalisations per capita. Conclusion: Combined with remote management tools, patients with COPD achieved continuous improvement in symptoms and exacerbations over 3 years. In the context of COVID-19 prevention/control measures, improvements were significant for patients with GOLD 1-2 COPD but limited with GOLD 3-4. Pharmacologic treatment significantly improved clinical symptoms and reduced emergency visits and hospitalisations. Severe airflow limitation and poor adherence to pharmacologic treatment were important risk factors for lack of disease remission.

Critical Care Pharmacist Attitudes and Perceptions of Neuromuscular Blocker Infusions in ARDS.

BACKGROUND: Current critical care pharmacist (CCP) practices and perceptions related to neuromuscular infusion (NMBI) use for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) maybe different with the COVID-19 pandemic and the publication of 2020 NMBI practice guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate CCP practices and perceptions regarding NMBI use for patients with moderate-severe ARDS. METHODS: We developed, tested, and electronically administered a questionnaire (7 parent-, 42 sub-questions) to 409 American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) Critical Care Practice and Research Network members in 12 geographically diverse states. The questionnaire focused on adults with moderate-severe ARDS (PaO2:FiO2<150) whose causes of dyssynchrony were addressed. Two reminders were sent at 10-day intervals. RESULTS: Respondents [131/409 (32%)] primarily worked in a medical intensive care unit (ICU) 102 (78%). Compared to COVID-negative(-) ARDS patients, COVID positive(+) ARDS patients were twice as likely to receive a NMBI (34 ± 18 vs.16 ± 17%; P < 0.01). Respondents somewhat/strongly agreed a NMBI should be reserved until after trials of deep sedation (112, 86%) or proning (92, 81%) and that NMBI reduced barotrauma (88, 67%), dyssynchrony (87, 66%), and plateau pressure (79, 60%). Few respondents somewhat/strongly agreed that a NMBI should be initiated at ARDS onset (23, 18%) or that NMBI reduced 90-day mortality (12, 10%). Only 2/14 potential NMBI risks [paralysis awareness (101, 82%) and prolonged muscle weakness (84, 68%)] were frequently reported to be of high/very high concern. Multiple NMBI titration targets were assessed as very/extremely important including arterial pH (109, 88%), dyssynchrony (107, 86%), and PaO2: FiO2 ratio (82, 66%). Train-of-four (55, 44%) and BIS monitoring (36, 29%) were deemed less important. Preferred NMBI discontinuation criteria included absence of dysschrony (84, 69%) and use ≥48 hour (72, 59%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Current critical care pharmacists believe NMBI for ARDS patients are best reserved until after trials of deep sedation or proning; unique considerations exist in COVID+ patients. Our results should be considered when ICU NMBI protocols are being developed and bedside decisions regarding NMBI use in ARDS are being formulated.

Physicians' attitudes and perceptions of neuromuscular blocker infusions in ARDS.

PURPOSE: The perceptions and practices of ICU physicians regarding initiating neuromuscular blocker infusions (NMBI) in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) may not be evidence-based amidst the surge of severe ARDS during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and new practice guidelines. We identified ICU physicians' perspectives and practices regarding NMBI use in adults with moderate-severe ARDS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After extensive development and testing, an electronic survey was distributed to 342 ICU physicians from three geographically-diverse U.S. health systems(n = 12 hospitals). RESULTS: The 173/342 (50.5%) respondents (75% medical) somewhat/strongly agreed a NMBI should be reserved until: after a trial of deep sedation (142, 82%) or proning (59, 34%) and be dose-titrated based on train-of-four monitoring (107, 62%). Of 14 potential NMBI risks, 2 were frequently reported to be of high/very high concern: prolonged muscle weakness with steroid use (135, 79%) and paralysis awareness due to inadequate sedation (114, 67%). Absence of dyssychrony (93, 56%) and use ≥48 h (87, 53%) were preferred NMBI stopping criteria. COVID-19 + ARDS patients were twice as likely to receive a NMBI (56 ± 37 vs. 28 ± 19%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Most intensivists agreed NMBI in ARDS should be reserved until after a deep sedation trial. Stopping criteria remain poorly defined. Unique considerations exist regarding the role of paralysis in COVID-19+ ARDS.

Learner Engagement in a Business Simulation Game: Impact on Higher-Order Thinking Skills

Higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) are reliable predictors of success in school and the workplace. A typical technique for encouraging higher-order thinking is to use instructional design interventions that engage learners in simple cognitive activities. Business simulation game (BSG) is one of the types of interactive learning environments that can increase HOTS. In addition, student engagement and attitude toward technology use are considered strong influences on HOTS. The study explored the effect of using a BSG on HOTS and student engagement. It examined the influence of attitude toward the use of a BSG on HOTS and student engagement. The results of the t-test analysis showed that learning activities using BSG had a positive effect on HOTS and student engagement. Additionally, PLS-SEM analysis results indicated that immersion, interaction, and intention to use the game influence student engagement. Furthermore, student engagement significantly influenced HOTS. The findings indicate that students must demonstrate that they are engaging actively in a course to improve HOTS and that a BSG can be a valuable and effective tool for promoting engagement. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic caused limitations in sampling and representativeness of respondents. Future research should involve a bigger sample size and students who have attended related courses.