Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
BMJ (Clinical research ed.) ; 377:e068723-e068723, 2022.
Article in English | PMC | ID: covidwho-1822063

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE To estimate the effect of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) compared with conventional mechanical ventilation on outcomes of patients with covid-19 associated respiratory failure. DESIGN Observational study. SETTING 30 countries across five continents, 3 January 2020 to 29 August 2021. PARTICIPANTS 7345 adults admitted to the intensive care unit with clinically suspected or laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. INTERVENTIONS ECMO in patients with a partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio <80 mm Hg compared with conventional mechanical ventilation without ECMO. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE The primary outcome was hospital mortality within 60 days of admission to the intensive care unit. Adherence adjusted estimates were calculated using marginal structural models with inverse probability weighting, accounting for competing events and for baseline and time varying confounding. RESULTS 844 of 7345 eligible patients (11.5%) received ECMO at any time point during follow-up. Adherence adjusted mortality was 26.0% (95% confidence interval 24.5% to 27.5%) for a treatment strategy that included ECMO if the PaO2/FiO2 ratio decreased <80 mm Hg compared with 33.2% (31.8% to 34.6%) had patients received conventional treatment without ECMO (risk difference -7.1%, 95% confidence interval -8.2% to -6.1%;risk ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.75 to 0.82). In secondary analyses, ECMO was most effective in patients aged <65 years and with a PaO2/FiO2 <80 mm Hg or with driving pressures >15 cmH2O during the first 10 days of mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS ECMO was associated with a reduction in mortality in selected adults with covid-19 associated respiratory failure. Age, severity of hypoxaemia, and duration and intensity of mechanical ventilation were found to be modifiers of treatment effectiveness and should be considered when deciding to initiate ECMO in patients with covid-19.

2.
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0264360, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736508

ABSTRACT

Appropriate descriptions of statistical methods are essential for evaluating research quality and reproducibility. Despite continued efforts to improve reporting in publications, inadequate descriptions of statistical methods persist. At times, reading statistical methods sections can conjure feelings of dèjá vu, with content resembling cut-and-pasted or "boilerplate text" from already published work. Instances of boilerplate text suggest a mechanistic approach to statistical analysis, where the same default methods are being used and described using standardized text. To investigate the extent of this practice, we analyzed text extracted from published statistical methods sections from PLOS ONE and the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR). Topic modeling was applied to analyze data from 111,731 papers published in PLOS ONE and 9,523 studies registered with the ANZCTR. PLOS ONE topics emphasized definitions of statistical significance, software and descriptive statistics. One in three PLOS ONE papers contained at least 1 sentence that was a direct copy from another paper. 12,675 papers (11%) closely matched to the sentence "a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant". Common topics across ANZCTR studies differentiated between study designs and analysis methods, with matching text found in approximately 3% of sections. Our findings quantify a serious problem affecting the reporting of statistical methods and shed light on perceptions about the communication of statistics as part of the scientific process. Results further emphasize the importance of rigorous statistical review to ensure that adequate descriptions of methods are prioritized over relatively minor details such as p-values and software when reporting research outcomes.

3.
Crit Care Med ; 50(2): 275-285, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1691783

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The study investigated the impact of prone positioning during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory failure on the patient outcome. DESIGN: An observational study of venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients. We used a multistate survival model to compare the outcomes of patients treated with or without prone positioning during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, which incorporates the dynamic nature of prone positioning and adjusts for potential confounders. SETTING: Seventy-two international institutions participating in the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Critical Care Consortium international registry. PATIENTS: Coronavirus disease 2019 patients who were supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the study period. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 232 coronavirus disease 2019 patients at 72 participating institutions who were supported with venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation during the study period from February 16, 2020, to October 31, 2020. Proning was used in 176 patients (76%) before initiation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and in 67 patients (29%) during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Survival to hospital discharge was 33% in the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation prone group versus 22% in the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation supine group. Prone positioning during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was associated with reduced mortality (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights that prone positioning during venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support for refractory coronavirus disease 2019-related acute respiratory distress syndrome is associated with reduced mortality. Given the observational nature of the study, a randomized controlled trial of prone positioning on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation is needed to confirm these findings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Patient Positioning/methods , Prone Position , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , COVID-19/complications , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge , Probability , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology
5.
2021.
Preprint in English | Other preprints | ID: ppcovidwho-294627

ABSTRACT

Governments are considering financial incentives to increase vaccine uptake to end the COVID-19 pandemic. Incentives being offered include cash-equivalents such as vouchers or being entered into lotteries. Our experiment involved random assignment of 1,628 unvaccinated participants in the United States to one of three 45 second informational videos promoting vaccination with messages about: (a) health benefits of COVID-19 vaccines (control);(b) being entered into lotteries;or (c) receiving cash equivalent vouchers. After seeing the control health information video, 16% of individuals wanted information on where to get vaccinated. This compared with 14% of those assigned to the lottery video (odds ratio of 0.82 relative to control: 95% credible interval 0.57-1.17) and 22% of those assigned to the cash voucher video (odds ratio of 1.53 relative to control: 95% credible interval 1.11-2.11). These results support greater use of cash vouchers to promote COVID-19 vaccine uptake and do not support the use of lottery incentives.

6.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy ; 20(1): 55-65, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1540299

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many high-income countries (HICs) have now vaccinated a substantial proportion of their population against COVID-19. Many low-income countries (LICs) may need to wait until at least 2022 before even the most vulnerable 20% of their populations are vaccinated. Beyond ethical considerations, some redistribution of doses would reduce the risk of the emergence and spread of new variants and benefit the economy, both globally and in donor countries. However, the willingness of HIC governments to donate vaccine doses is likely to depend on public support. While previous work has indicated strong average levels of public support in HIC for donation, little is known about how broad-based this support is. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the extent to which support for donation holds across both pre-specified and exploratory subgroups. METHODS: From 24 November-28 December 2020 we conducted an online survey of 8209 members of the general public in seven HIC (Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Spain, UK and USA). We conducted tests of proportions and used Bayesian ordinal logistic regression models to assess the extent of support for donation across population subgroups. RESULTS: We found broad-based support for donations in terms of age, gender, socio-economic status and political ideology. We found no strong evidence that support for donations was higher among those with greater income or a university education. Support for donation among those on the political right and centre was lower than on the left, but 51% (95% confidence interval 48-53%) of respondents who identified with the right supported some level of donation. Those in the more altruistic half of the sample (as captured by willingness to donate money to a good cause) were more likely to support donation than those who were not, but around half of the less altruistic group supported some level of donation. CONCLUSION: There is broad-based support for policymakers in HICs to donate some of their countries' COVID-19 vaccine doses for distribution to LICs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Bayes Theorem , Developed Countries , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
7.
Crit Care Med ; 49(12): e1223-e1233, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526199

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Stroke has been reported in observational series as a frequent complication of coronavirus disease 2019, but more information is needed regarding stroke prevalence and outcomes. We explored the prevalence and outcomes of acute stroke in an international cohort of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who required ICU admission. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected database. SETTING: A registry of coronavirus disease 2019 patients admitted to ICUs at over 370 international sites was reviewed for patients diagnosed with acute stroke during their stay. PATIENTS: Patients older than 18 years old with acute coronavirus disease 2019 infection in ICU. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 2,699 patients identified (median age 59 yr; male 65%), 59 (2.2%) experienced acute stroke: 0.7% ischemic, 1.0% hemorrhagic, and 0.5% unspecified type. Systemic anticoagulant use was not associated with any stroke type. The frequency of diabetes, hypertension, and smoking was higher in patients with ischemic stroke than in stroke-free and hemorrhagic stroke patients. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was more common among patients with hemorrhagic (56%) and ischemic stroke (16%) than in those without stroke (10%). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients had higher cumulative 90-day probabilities of hemorrhagic (relative risk = 10.5) and ischemic stroke (relative risk = 1.7) versus nonextracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients. Hemorrhagic stroke increased the hazard of death (hazard ratio = 2.74), but ischemic stroke did not-similar to the effects of these stroke types seen in noncoronavirus disease 2019 ICU patients. CONCLUSIONS: In an international registry of ICU patients with coronavirus disease 2019, stroke was infrequent. Hemorrhagic stroke, but not ischemic stroke, was associated with increased mortality. Further, both hemorrhagic stroke and ischemic stroke were associated with traditional vascular risk factors. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use was strongly associated with both stroke and death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Stroke/epidemiology , Aged , Comorbidity , Critical Illness , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
8.
BMJ Neurology Open ; 3(Suppl 1):A13-A14, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1476584

ABSTRACT

ObjectiveCOVID-19 has been identified as a risk factor for severe cerebrovascular complications, albeit mostly in small patient populations, limited to specific regions, and including all severities of disease. Utilising the largest database of critically-ill COVID-19 patients, we investigated risk factors for stroke in intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 patients.MethodsData for this matched case-control study were extracted from a large international registry of adult COVID-19 patients requiring ICU admission. Patients with imaging-confirmed cerebrovascular events identified following ICU admission were compared against five controls per case, matched for demographics, morphometrics, illness severity, and ICU days. Expert consensus determined key clinical and laboratory variables for risk assessment.ResultsFrom January 1-December 21 2020, 2,715 ICU patients were registered across >370 sites spanning 52 countries;acute stroke was identified during the ICU stay in 59(2.2%);27(46%) haemorrhagic, 19(32%) ischaemic, 13(22%) unspecified. Stroke patients had higher SOFA and APACHE scores, more frequent hypertension and cardiovascular disease, and more often required mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, and ECMO. Diabetes, hypertension, smoking, and Caucasian ethnicity were identified as risk factors for ischaemic versus haemorrhagic stroke and being stroke-free. Ethnicity (Hispanic or black), higher PaO2, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were significant risk factors for haemorrhagic stroke.Anticoagulation had no association with either stroke subtype.ConclusionsSevere illness and more aggressive management were major risk factors for acute stroke. Traditional vascular risk factors and Caucasian ethnicity were risk factors for ischaemic stroke, while Hispanic or black ethnicity, higher PaO2, and ECMO were significant risk factors for haemorrhagic stroke.

9.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 8: 738086, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1441122

ABSTRACT

Background: In a disease that has only existed for 18 months, it is difficult to be fully informed of the long-term sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Evidence is growing that most organ systems can be affected by the virus, causing severe disabilities in survivors. The extent of the aftermath will declare itself over the next 5-10 years, but it is likely to be substantial with profound socio-economic impact on society. Methods: This is an international multi-center, prospective long-term follow-up study of patients who developed severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and were admitted to Intensive Care Units (ICUs). The study will be conducted at international tertiary hospitals. Patients will be monitored from time of ICU discharge up to 24 months. Information will be collected on demographics, co-existing illnesses before ICU admission, severity of illness during ICU admission and post-ICU quality of life as well as organ dysfunction and recovery. Statistical analysis will consist of patient trajectories over time for the key variables of quality of life and organ function. Using latent class analysis, we will determine if there are distinct patterns of patients in terms of recovery. Multivariable regression analyses will be used to examine associations between baseline characteristics and severity variables upon admission and discharge in the ICU, and how these impact outcomes at all follow-up time points up to 2 years. Ethics and Dissemination: The core study team and local principal investigators will ensure that the study adheres to all relevant national and local regulations, and that the necessary approvals are in place before a site may enroll patients. Clinical Trial Registration:anzctr.org.au: ACTRN12620000799954.

10.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 118(38)2021 09 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1412238

ABSTRACT

How does the public want a COVID-19 vaccine to be allocated? We conducted a conjoint experiment asking 15,536 adults in 13 countries to evaluate 248,576 profiles of potential vaccine recipients who varied randomly on five attributes. Our sample includes diverse countries from all continents. The results suggest that in addition to giving priority to health workers and to those at high risk, the public favors giving priority to a broad range of key workers and to those with lower income. These preferences are similar across respondents of different education levels, incomes, and political ideologies, as well as across most surveyed countries. The public favored COVID-19 vaccines being allocated solely via government programs but were highly polarized in some developed countries on whether taking a vaccine should be mandatory. There is a consensus among the public on many aspects of COVID-19 vaccination, which needs to be taken into account when developing and communicating rollout strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/prevention & control , Public Health , Public Opinion , Vaccination/psychology , Adult , Health Personnel , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
11.
Crit Care Med ; 49(12): e1223-e1233, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1315707

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Stroke has been reported in observational series as a frequent complication of coronavirus disease 2019, but more information is needed regarding stroke prevalence and outcomes. We explored the prevalence and outcomes of acute stroke in an international cohort of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who required ICU admission. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected database. SETTING: A registry of coronavirus disease 2019 patients admitted to ICUs at over 370 international sites was reviewed for patients diagnosed with acute stroke during their stay. PATIENTS: Patients older than 18 years old with acute coronavirus disease 2019 infection in ICU. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 2,699 patients identified (median age 59 yr; male 65%), 59 (2.2%) experienced acute stroke: 0.7% ischemic, 1.0% hemorrhagic, and 0.5% unspecified type. Systemic anticoagulant use was not associated with any stroke type. The frequency of diabetes, hypertension, and smoking was higher in patients with ischemic stroke than in stroke-free and hemorrhagic stroke patients. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support was more common among patients with hemorrhagic (56%) and ischemic stroke (16%) than in those without stroke (10%). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients had higher cumulative 90-day probabilities of hemorrhagic (relative risk = 10.5) and ischemic stroke (relative risk = 1.7) versus nonextracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients. Hemorrhagic stroke increased the hazard of death (hazard ratio = 2.74), but ischemic stroke did not-similar to the effects of these stroke types seen in noncoronavirus disease 2019 ICU patients. CONCLUSIONS: In an international registry of ICU patients with coronavirus disease 2019, stroke was infrequent. Hemorrhagic stroke, but not ischemic stroke, was associated with increased mortality. Further, both hemorrhagic stroke and ischemic stroke were associated with traditional vascular risk factors. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use was strongly associated with both stroke and death.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Stroke/epidemiology , Aged , Comorbidity , Critical Illness , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Scientometrics ; 126(7): 6127-6130, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1237539

ABSTRACT

"COVID" which stands for corona virus disease, has become the world's most infamous acronym. Previous analysis of acronyms in health and medical journals found a growing use of acronyms over time in titles and abstracts, with "DNA" as the most common. Here we examine acronyms in the pandemic year of 2020 to show the dramatic rise of COVID-related research. "COVID" was over five times more frequently used than "DNA" in 2020, and in just one year it has become the sixth most popular acronym of all time, surpassing "AIDS", "PCR" and "MRI".

14.
Epidemiology ; 32(1): 152-153, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-990841

Subject(s)
Social Media , Humans
15.
BMJ Open ; 10(12): e041417, 2020 12 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-955461

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is a paucity of data that can be used to guide the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19. In response, a research and data-sharing collaborative-The COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium-has been assembled to harness the cumulative experience of intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide. The resulting observational study provides a platform to rapidly disseminate detailed data and insights crucial to improving outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an international, multicentre, observational study of patients with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to ICUs. This is an evolving, open-ended study that commenced on 1 January 2020 and currently includes >350 sites in over 48 countries. The study enrols patients at the time of ICU admission and follows them to the time of death, hospital discharge or 28 days post-ICU admission, whichever occurs last. Key data, collected via an electronic case report form devised in collaboration with the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium/Short Period Incidence Study of Severe Acute Respiratory Illness networks, include: patient demographic data and risk factors, clinical features, severity of illness and respiratory failure, need for non-invasive and/or mechanical ventilation and/or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and associated complications, as well as data on adjunctive therapies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Local principal investigators will ensure that the study adheres to all relevant national regulations, and that the necessary approvals are in place before a site may contribute data. In jurisdictions where a waiver of consent is deemed insufficient, prospective, representative or retrospective consent will be obtained, as appropriate. A web-based dashboard has been developed to provide relevant data and descriptive statistics to international collaborators in real-time. It is anticipated that, following study completion, all de-identified data will be made open access. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000421932 (http://anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12620000421932.aspx).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Registries , COVID-19/mortality , Evidence-Based Medicine , Global Health , Humans , Observational Studies as Topic , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics , Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2
16.
Clin Epidemiol ; 12: 925-928, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-781765

ABSTRACT

By definition, in-hospital patient data are restricted to the time between hospital admission and discharge (alive or dead). For hospitalised cases of COVID-19, a number of events during hospitalization are of interest regarding the influence of risk factors on the likelihood of experiencing these events. The same is true for predicting times from hospital admission of COVID-19 patients to intensive care or from start of ventilation (invasive or non-invasive) to extubation. This logical restriction of the data to the period of hospitalisation is associated with a substantial risk that inappropriate methods are used for analysis. Here, we briefly discuss the most common types of bias which can occur when analysing in-hospital COVID-19 data.

18.
Pharmacoecon Open ; 4(2): 207-210, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-149510
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL