Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 15 de 15
Filter
1.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ; 23(1): 46, 2023 03 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2277606

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Early prognostication of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who may require mechanical ventilation and have worse outcomes within 30 days of admission is useful for delivering appropriate clinical care and optimizing resource allocation. OBJECTIVE: To develop machine learning models to predict COVID-19 severity at the time of the hospital admission based on a single institution data. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We established a retrospective cohort of patients with COVID-19 from University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center from May 2020 to March 2022. Easily accessible objective markers including basic laboratory variables and initial respiratory status were assessed using Random Forest's feature importance score to create a predictive risk score. Twenty-five significant variables were identified to be used in classification models. The best predictive models were selected with repeated tenfold cross-validation methods. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Among patients with COVID-19 admitted to the hospital, severity was defined by 30-day mortality (30DM) rates and need for mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: This was a large, single institution COVID-19 cohort including total of 1795 patients. The average age was 59.7 years old with diverse heterogeneity. 236 (13%) required mechanical ventilation and 156 patients (8.6%) died within 30 days of hospitalization. Predictive accuracy of each predictive model was validated with the 10-CV method. Random Forest classifier for 30DM model had 192 sub-trees, and obtained 0.72 sensitivity and 0.78 specificity, and 0.82 AUC. The model used to predict MV has 64 sub-trees and returned obtained 0.75 sensitivity and 0.75 specificity, and 0.81 AUC. Our scoring tool can be accessed at https://faculty.tamuc.edu/mmete/covid-risk.html . CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, we developed a risk score based on objective variables of COVID-19 patients within six hours of admission to the hospital, therefore helping predict a patient's risk of developing critical illness secondary to COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/diagnosis , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Patient Acuity , Machine Learning
3.
Arch Bronconeumol ; 58(11): 746-753, 2022 Nov.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2007445

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The goal of this investigation is to assess the association between prehospital use of aspirin (ASA) and patient-centered outcomes in a large global cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This study utilizes data from the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) Registry. Adult patients hospitalized from February 15th, 2020, to September 30th, 2021, were included. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized to assess the association between pre-hospital use of ASA and the primary outcome of overall hospital mortality. RESULTS: 21,579 patients were included from 185 hospitals (predominantly US-based, 71.3%), with 4691 (21.7%) receiving pre-hospital ASA. Patients receiving ASA, compared to those without pre-admission ASA use, were generally older (median 70 vs. 59 years), more likely to be male (58.7 vs. 56.0%), caucasian (57.4 vs. 51.6%), and more commonly had higher rates of medical comorbidities. In multivariable analyses, patients receiving pre-hospital ASA had lower mortality (HR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97, p=0.01) and reduced hazard for progression to severe disease or death (HR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.84-0.99, p=0.02) and more hospital free days (1.00 days, 95% CI 0.66-1.35, p=0.01) compared to those without pre-hospital ASA use. The overall direction and significance of the results remained the same in sensitivity analysis, after adjusting the multivariable model for time since pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: In this large international cohort, pre-hospital use of ASA was associated with a lower hazard for death in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Randomized controlled trials may be warranted to assess the utility of pre-hospital use of ASA.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Virus Diseases , Adult , Humans , Male , Female , COVID-19/epidemiology , Aspirin/therapeutic use , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics , Hospitalization , Hospital Mortality
4.
Crit Care Med ; 50(10): e744-e758, 2022 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1961176

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association of prior use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASIs) with mortality and outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Multicenter, international COVID-19 registry. SUBJECTS: Adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients on antihypertensive agents (AHAs) prior to admission, admitted from March 31, 2020, to March 10, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data were compared between three groups: patients on RAASIs only, other AHAs only, and those on both medications. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were performed after controlling for prehospitalization characteristics to estimate the effect of RAASIs on mortality and other outcomes during hospitalization. Of 26,652 patients, 7,975 patients were on AHAs prior to hospitalization. Of these, 1,542 patients (19.3%) were on RAASIs only, 3,765 patients (47.2%) were on other AHAs only, and 2,668 (33.5%) patients were on both medications. Compared with those taking other AHAs only, patients on RAASIs only were younger (mean age 63.3 vs 66.9 yr; p < 0.0001), more often male (58.2% vs 52.4%; p = 0.0001) and more often White (55.1% vs 47.2%; p < 0.0001). After adjusting for age, gender, race, location, and comorbidities, patients on combination of RAASIs and other AHAs had higher in-hospital mortality than those on RAASIs only (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% CI [1.19-1.38]; p < 0.0001) and higher mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 1.09; 95% CI [1.03-1.15]; p = 0.0017). Patients on RAASIs only had lower mortality than those on other AHAs only (OR = 0.87; 95% CI [0.81-0.94]; p = 0.0003). Patients on ACEIs only had higher mortality compared with those on ARBs only (OR = 1.37; 95% CI [1.20-1.56]; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were taking AHAs, prior use of a combination of RAASIs and other AHAs was associated with higher in-hospital mortality than the use of RAASIs alone. When compared with ARBs, ACEIs were associated with significantly higher mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hypertension , Adult , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Humans , Hypertension/drug therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Renin-Angiotensin System , Retrospective Studies
5.
Respir Care ; 67(8): 929-938, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1879560

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 are recommended by critical-care guidelines; however, apprehension about viral particle aerosolization and patient self-inflicted lung injury may have limited use. We aimed to describe hospital variation in the use and clinical outcomes of HFNC and NIV for the management of COVID-19. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who received supplemental oxygen between February 15, 2020, and April 12, 2021, across 102 international and United States hospitals by using the COVID-19 Registry. Associations of HFNC and NIV use with clinical outcomes were evaluated by using multivariable adjusted hierarchical random-effects logistic regression models. Hospital variation was characterized by using intraclass correlation and the median odds ratio. RESULTS: Among 13,454 adults with COVID-19 who received supplemental oxygen, 8,143 (60%) received nasal cannula/face mask only, 2,859 (21%) received HFNC, 878 (7%) received NIV, 1,574 (12%) received both HFNC and NIV, with 3,640 subjects (27%) progressing to invasive ventilation. The hospital of admission contributed to 24% of the risk-adjusted variation in HFNC and 30% of the risk-adjusted variation in NIV. The median odds ratio for hospital variation of HFNC was 2.6 (95% CI 1.4-4.9) and of NIV was 3.1 (95% CI 1.2-8.1). Among 5,311 subjects who received HFNC and/or NIV, 2,772 (52%) did not receive invasive ventilation and survived to hospital discharge. Hospital-level use of HFNC or NIV were not associated with the rates of invasive ventilation or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital variation in the use of HFNC and NIV for acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 was great but was not associated with intubation or mortality. The wide variation and relatively low use of HFNC/NIV observed within our study signaled that implementation of increased HFNC/NIV use in patients with COVID-19 will require changes to current care delivery practices. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT04323787.).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Noninvasive Ventilation , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Cannula , Humans , Oxygen , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy
6.
Crit Care Explor ; 4(4): e0686, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1816286

ABSTRACT

To describe the prevalence, associated risk factors, and outcomes of serious neurologic manifestations (encephalopathy, stroke, seizure, and meningitis/encephalitis) among patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: One hundred seventy-nine hospitals in 24 countries within the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study COVID-19 Registry. PATIENTS: Hospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. INTERVENTIONS: None. RESULTS: Of 16,225 patients enrolled in the registry with hospital discharge status available, 2,092 (12.9%) developed serious neurologic manifestations including 1,656 (10.2%) with encephalopathy at admission, 331 (2.0%) with stroke, 243 (1.5%) with seizure, and 73 (0.5%) with meningitis/encephalitis at admission or during hospitalization. Patients with serious neurologic manifestations of COVID-19 were older with median (interquartile range) age 72 years (61.0-81.0 yr) versus 61 years (48.0-72.0 yr) and had higher prevalence of chronic medical conditions, including vascular risk factors. Adjusting for age, sex, and time since the onset of the pandemic, serious neurologic manifestations were associated with more severe disease (odds ratio [OR], 1.49; p < 0.001) as defined by the World Health Organization ordinal disease severity scale for COVID-19 infection. Patients with neurologic manifestations were more likely to be admitted to the ICU (OR, 1.45; p < 0.001) and require critical care interventions (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: OR, 1.78; p = 0.009 and renal replacement therapy: OR, 1.99; p < 0.001). Hospital, ICU, and 28-day mortality for patients with neurologic manifestations was higher (OR, 1.51, 1.37, and 1.58; p < 0.001), and patients had fewer ICU-free, hospital-free, and ventilator-free days (estimated difference in days, -0.84, -1.34, and -0.84; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Encephalopathy at admission is common in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and is associated with worse outcomes. While serious neurologic manifestations including stroke, seizure, and meningitis/encephalitis were less common, all were associated with increased ICU support utilization, more severe disease, and worse outcomes.

7.
World J Crit Care Med ; 11(2): 102-111, 2022 Mar 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1791995

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) course may be affected by environmental factors. Ecological studies previously suggested a link between climatological factors and COVID-19 fatality rates. However, individual-level impact of these factors has not been thoroughly evaluated yet. AIM: To study the association of climatological factors related to patient location with unfavorable outcomes in patients. METHODS: In this observational analysis of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study: COVID-19 Registry cohort, the latitudes and altitudes of hospitals were examined as a covariate for mortality within 28 d of admission and the length of hospital stay. Adjusting for baseline parameters and admission date, multivariable regression modeling was utilized. Generalized estimating equations were used to fit the models. RESULTS: Twenty-two thousand one hundred eight patients from over 20 countries were evaluated. The median age was 62 (interquartile range: 49-74) years, and 54% of the included patients were males. The median age increased with increasing latitude as well as the frequency of comorbidities. Contrarily, the percentage of comorbidities was lower in elevated altitudes. Mortality within 28 d of hospital admission was found to be 25%. The median hospital-free days among all included patients was 20 d. Despite the significant linear relationship between mortality and hospital-free days (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.39 (1.04, 1.86), P = 0.025 for mortality within 28 d of admission; aOR = -1.47 (-2.60, -0.33), P = 0.011 for hospital-free days), suggesting that adverse patient outcomes were more common in locations further away from the Equator; the results were no longer significant when adjusted for baseline differences (aOR = 1.32 (1.00, 1.74), P = 0.051 for 28-day mortality; aOR = -1.07 (-2.13, -0.01), P = 0.050 for hospital-free days). When we looked at the altitude's effect, we discovered that it demonstrated a non-linear association with mortality within 28 d of hospital admission (aOR = 0.96 (0.62, 1.47), 1.04 (0.92, 1.19), 0.49 (0.22, 0.90), and 0.51 (0.27, 0.98), for the altitude points of 75 MASL, 125 MASL, 400 MASL, and 600 MASL, in comparison to the reference altitude of 148 m.a.s.l, respectively. P = 0.001). We detected an association between latitude and 28-day mortality as well as hospital-free days in this worldwide study. When the baseline features were taken into account, however, this did not stay significant. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that differences observed in previous epidemiological studies may be due to ecological fallacy rather than implying a causal relationship at the patient level.

8.
Transplantation ; 106(4): e202-e211, 2022 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1684929

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Studies indicate that the recovery from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome may be slower than other viral pneumonia. There are limited data to guide decisions among patients who need extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support, especially the expected time of recovery and considering lung transplantation (LT). METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review of patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome placed on ECMO between March 1, 2020, and September 15, 2021 (n = 20; median age, 44 y; range, 22-62 y; male:female, 15:5). We contrasted the baseline variables and clinical course of patients with and without the need for ECMO support >30 d (ECMO long haulers, n = 10). RESULTS: Ten patients met the criteria for ECMO long haulers (median duration of ECMO, 86 d; range, 42-201 d). The long haulers were healthier at baseline with fewer comorbidities but had worse pulmonary compliance and higher partial pressure of CO2. They had a significantly higher number of membrane oxygenator failures, changes to their cannulation sites, and suffer more complications on ECMO. One of the long hauler was bridged to LT while another 6 patients recovered and were discharged. Overall survival was better among the ECMO long haulers (70% versus 20%; 9.3, 1.2-73; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Despite worse pulmonary physiology, frequent complications, and a tortuous hospital course that may appear to portend a poor prognosis, ECMO long haulers have the potential to recover and be weaned off ECMO without the need for LT. A customized approach comprising a more conservative timeline for the consideration of LT may be prudent among these patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Lung Transplantation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , COVID-19/complications , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Phenotype , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Young Adult
9.
Critical Care Medicine ; 50:10-10, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1593598

ABSTRACT

B Conclusions: b MetS, diagnosed by the clustering of obesity, prediabetes/DM, HTN, and dyslipidemia, is associated with significantly increased mortality and ARDS in a global population of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. B Introduction/Hypothesis: b Little is known about metabolic syndrome (MetS) and ARDS in COVID-19. However, patients from non-US hospitals had significantly higher hospital mortality as compared with US hospitals (24.5% vs 15.7%, aOR 1.58 [CI 1.41-1.77]) with similar findings noted when patients were stratified by MetS (34.1% vs 21.3%, aOR 1.49 [CI 1.08-2.06]). [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.)

10.
Critical Care Medicine ; 50:75-75, 2022.
Article in English | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-1593488

ABSTRACT

B Introduction: b Despite critical care guidelines supporting the use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in patients with acute respiratory failure from coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), concerns surrounding aerosolization of viral particles, and patient self-inflicted lung injury likely influenced use across hospitals. Among 5311 patients who received HFNC and/or NIV, 2772 (52%) did not receive invasive mechanical ventilation and survived to hospital discharge. B Conclusions: b Hospital variation in use of HFNC and NIV for acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 was large, and was not associated with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or mortality. [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.)

11.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(12): e2140568, 2021 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1592803

ABSTRACT

Importance: Obesity, diabetes, and hypertension are common comorbidities in patients with severe COVID-19, yet little is known about the risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or death in patients with COVID-19 and metabolic syndrome. Objective: To determine whether metabolic syndrome is associated with an increased risk of ARDS and death from COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study used data from the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Respiratory Illness Universal Study collected from 181 hospitals across 26 countries from February 15, 2020, to February 18, 2021. Outcomes were compared between patients with metabolic syndrome (defined as ≥3 of the following criteria: obesity, prediabetes or diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia) and a control population without metabolic syndrome. Participants included adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 during the study period who had a completed discharge status. Data were analyzed from February 22 to October 5, 2021. Exposures: Exposures were SARS-CoV-2 infection, metabolic syndrome, obesity, prediabetes or diabetes, hypertension, and/or dyslipidemia. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included ARDS, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, need for invasive mechanical ventilation, and length of stay (LOS). Results: Among 46 441 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 29 040 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.2 [17.8] years; 13 059 [45.0%] women and 15713 [54.1%] men; 6797 Black patients [23.4%], 5325 Hispanic patients [18.3%], and 16 507 White patients [57.8%]) met inclusion criteria. A total of 5069 patients (17.5%) with metabolic syndrome were compared with 23 971 control patients (82.5%) without metabolic syndrome. In adjusted analyses, metabolic syndrome was associated with increased risk of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.32 [95% CI, 1.14-1.53]), invasive mechanical ventilation (aOR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.28-1.65]), ARDS (aOR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.12-1.66]), and mortality (aOR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.08-1.31]) and prolonged hospital LOS (median [IQR], 8.0 [4.2-15.8] days vs 6.8 [3.4-13.0] days; P < .001) and ICU LOS (median [IQR], 7.0 [2.8-15.0] days vs 6.4 [2.7-13.0] days; P < .001). Each additional metabolic syndrome criterion was associated with increased risk of ARDS in an additive fashion (1 criterion: 1147 patients with ARDS [10.4%]; P = .83; 2 criteria: 1191 patients with ARDS [15.3%]; P < .001; 3 criteria: 817 patients with ARDS [19.3%]; P < .001; 4 criteria: 203 patients with ARDS [24.3%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that metabolic syndrome was associated with increased risks of ARDS and death in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The association with ARDS was cumulative for each metabolic syndrome criteria present.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Hospitalization , Metabolic Syndrome/epidemiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/epidemiology , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Critical Care , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Resuscitation ; 170: 230-237, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1569021

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: The impact of palliative care consultation on end-of-life care has not previously been evaluated in a multi-center study. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of palliative care consultation on the incidence of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed and comfort care received at the end-of-life in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We used the Society of Critical Care Medicine's COVID-19 registry to extract clinical data on patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between March 31st, 2020 to March 17th, 2021 and died during their hospitalization. The proportion of patients who received palliative care consultation was assessed in patients who did and did not receive CPR (primary outcome) and comfort care (secondary outcome). Propensity matching was used to account for potential confounding variables. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: 3,227 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the incidence of palliative care consultation between the CPR and no-CPR groups (19.9% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.8334). Patients who received comfort care at the end-of-life were significantly more likely to have received palliative care consultation (43.3% vs. 7.7%, p < 0.0001). After propensity matching for comfort care on demographic characteristics and comorbidities, this relationship was still significant (43.2% vs. 8.5%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Palliative care consultation was not associated with CPR performed at the end-of-life but was associated with increased incidence of comfort care being utilized. These results suggest that utilizing palliative care consultation at the end-of-life may better align the needs and values of patients with the care they receive.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Terminal Care , Death , Humans , Palliative Care , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Crit Care Explor ; 3(8): e0514, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1393343

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Even with its proclivity for older age, coronavirus disease 2019 has been shown to affect all age groups. However, there remains a lack of research focused primarily on the young adult population. OBJECTIVES: To describe the epidemiology and outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 and identify the risk factors associated with critical illness and mortality in hospitalized young adults. DESIGN SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective cohort study of the Society of Critical Care Medicine's Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study registry. Patients 18-40 years old, hospitalized from coronavirus disease 2019 from March 2020 to April 2021, were included in the analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Critical illness was defined as a composite of mortality and 21 predefined interventions and complications. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess associations with critical illness and mortality. RESULTS: Data from 4,005 patients (152 centers, 19 countries, 18.6% non-U.S. patients) were analyzed. The median age was 32 years (interquartile range, 27-37 yr); 51% were female, 29.4% Hispanic, and 42.9% had obesity. Most patients (63.2%) had comorbidities, the most common being hypertension (14.5%) and diabetes (13.7%). Hospital and ICU mortality were 3.2% (129/4,005) and 8.3% (109/1,313), respectively. Critical illness occurred in 25% (n = 996), and 34.3% (n = 1,376) were admitted to the ICU. Older age (p = 0.03), male sex (adjusted odds ratio, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.2-2.6]), and obesity (adjusted odds ratio, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.1-2.4]) were associated with hospital mortality. In addition to the above factors, the presence of any comorbidity was associated with critical illness from coronavirus disease 2019. Multiple sensitivity analyses, including analysis with U.S. patients only and patients admitted to high-volume sites, showed similar risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Among hospitalized young adults, obese males with comorbidities are at higher risk of developing critical illness or dying from coronavirus disease 2019.

14.
Crit Care Med ; 49(3): 437-448, 2021 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1298993

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe the outcomes of hospitalized patients in a multicenter, international coronavirus disease 2019 registry. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study including coronavirus disease 2019 patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection between February 15, 2020, and November 30, 2020, according to age and type of organ support therapies. SETTING: About 168 hospitals in 16 countries within the Society of Critical Care Medicine's Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness University Study coronavirus disease 2019 registry. PATIENTS: Adult hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients who did and did not require various types and combinations of organ support (mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, vasopressors, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcome was hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were discharge home with or without assistance and hospital length of stay. Risk-adjusted variation in hospital mortality for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation was assessed by using multilevel models with hospitals as a random effect, adjusted for age, race/ethnicity, sex, and comorbidities. Among 20,608 patients with coronavirus disease 2019, the mean (± sd) age was 60.5 (±17), 11,1887 (54.3%) were men, 8,745 (42.4%) were admitted to the ICU, and 3,906 (19%) died in the hospital. Hospital mortality was 8.2% for patients receiving no organ support (n = 15,001). The most common organ support therapy was invasive mechanical ventilation (n = 5,005; 24.3%), with a hospital mortality of 49.8%. Mortality ranged from 40.8% among patients receiving only invasive mechanical ventilation (n =1,749) to 71.6% for patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drugs, and new renal replacement therapy (n = 655). Mortality was 39% for patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 389). Rates of discharge home ranged from 73.5% for patients who did not require organ support therapies to 29.8% for patients who only received invasive mechanical ventilation, and 8.8% for invasive mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drugs, and renal replacement; 10.8% of patients older than 74 years who received invasive mechanical ventilation were discharged home. Median hospital length of stay for patients on mechanical ventilation was 17.1 days (9.7-28 d). Adjusted interhospital variation in mortality among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation was large (median odds ratio 1.69). CONCLUSIONS: Coronavirus disease 2019 prognosis varies by age and level of organ support. Interhospital variation in mortality of mechanically ventilated patients was not explained by patient characteristics and requires further evaluation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care Outcomes , Hospital Mortality , Hospitalization , Patient Discharge/statistics & numerical data , Registries , Adult , Aged , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Renal Replacement Therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Vasoconstrictor Agents
15.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 34(10): 2595-2603, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-634042

ABSTRACT

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2-associated disease (coronavirus disease 2019) poses a unique challenge to health- care providers due to the risk of viral aerosolization and disease transmission. This has caused some centers to modify existing CPR procedures, limit the duration of CPR, or consider avoiding CPR altogether. In this review, the authors propose a procedure for CPR in the intensive care unit that minimizes the number of personnel in the immediate vicinity of the patient and conserves the use of scarce personal protective equipment. Highlighting the low likelihood of successful resuscitation in high-risk patients may prompt patients to decline CPR. The authors recommend the preemptive placement of central venous lines in high-risk patients with intravenous tubing extensions that allow for medication delivery from outside the patients' rooms. During CPR, this practice can be used to deliver critical medications without delay. The use of a mechanical compression system for CPR further reduces the risk of infectious exposure to health- care providers. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation should be reserved for patients with few comorbidities and a single failing organ system. Reliable teleconferencing tools are essential to facilitate communication between providers inside and outside the patients' rooms. General principles regarding the ethics and peri-resuscitative management of coronavirus 2019 patients also are discussed.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/methods , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Critical Care/methods , Heart Arrest/therapy , Intensive Care Units , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , COVID-19 , Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation/standards , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Critical Care/standards , Heart Arrest/epidemiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units/standards , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Workflow
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL