Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
2.
Crit Care Explor ; 4(4): e0673, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1769407

ABSTRACT

To determine the prevalence and extent of impairments impacting health-related quality of life among survivors of COVID-19 who required mechanical ventilation, 6 months after hospital discharge. DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective cohort study, enrolling adults 18 years old or older with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection who received mechanical ventilation for 48 hours or more and survived to hospital discharge. Eligible patients were contacted 6 months after discharge for telephone-based interviews from March 2020 to December 2020. Assessments included: Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Blind, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Impact of Event Scale-6, EuroQOL 5 domain quality-of-life questionnaire, and components of the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile. SETTING: Two tertiary academic health systems. PATIENTS: Of 173 eligible survivors, a random sample of 63 were contacted and 60 consented and completed interviews. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mean age was 57 + 13 years and mean duration of invasive mechanical ventilation was 14 + 8.2 days. Six months post-discharge, 48 patients (80%; 95% CI, 68-88%) met criteria for post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), with one or more domains impaired. Among patients with PICS, 28 (47%; 95% CI, 35-59%) were impaired in at least 2 domains, and 12 (20%; 95% CI, 12-32%) impaired in all three domains. Significant symptoms of post-traumatic stress were present in 20 patients (33%; 95% CI, 23-46%), anxiety in 23 (38%; 95% CI, 27-51%), and depression in 25 (42%; 95% CI, 30-54%). Thirty-three patients (55%; 95% CI, 42-67%) had impairments in physical activity; 25 patients (42%; 95% CI, 30-54%) demonstrated cognitive impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Eighty percent of COVID-19 survivors who required mechanical ventilation demonstrated PICS 6 months after hospital discharge. Patients were commonly impaired in multiple PICS domains as well as coexisting mental health domains.

3.
Am J Surg ; 224(2): 761-768, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1767861

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the pandemic, hospitals implemented disaster plans to conserve resources while maintaining patient care. It was unclear how these plans impacted injury care and trauma surgeons. STUDY DESIGN: A 16 question survey assessing COVID-related hospital policy and resource allocation pre-COVID-19 peak (March), and a 19 question post-peak (June) survey was distributed to Trauma/Critical Care attending's via social media and the Western Trauma Association member email list. RESULTS: There were 120 pre- and 134 post-peak respondents. Most (95%) altered trauma PPE components, a nd 67% noted changes in their admission population pre-peak while 80% did so post-peak. Penetrating injury increased 56% at Level 1 centers and 27% at Level 2 centers. Altered ICU and transfusion criteria were noted with 25% relocating TBI patients, 17% revised rib fracture admission criteria, and 23% adjusted transfusion practices. Importantly, 12% changed their massive transfusion protocol, with 11% reducing the symptomatic transfusion threshold from 7 g/dL to 6 g/dL. Half (50%) disclosed impediments to patient care including PPE shortages and COVID test-related procedural delay (Fig. 2). While only 14% felt their institution was overwhelmed by COVID, the vast majority (81%) shared durable concerns about personal health and safety. CONCLUSIONS: Disparate approaches to COVID-19 preparedness and response characterize survey respondent facility actions. These disparities, especially between Level 1 and Level 2 centers, represent opportunities for the trauma community to coordinate best-practice planning and implementation in light of future consequence infection or pandemic care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals , Humans , Pandemics , Resource Allocation , SARS-CoV-2 , Trauma Centers
7.
COVID-19 Pandemic ; : 99-107, 2022.
Article in English | PMC | ID: covidwho-1252348
8.
Crit Care Med ; 49(3): e219-e234, 2021 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1069322

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic continues to affect millions worldwide. Given the rapidly growing evidence base, we implemented a living guideline model to provide guidance on the management of patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. METHODS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Disease 2019 panel has expanded to include 43 experts from 14 countries; all panel members completed an electronic conflict-of-interest disclosure form. In this update, the panel addressed nine questions relevant to managing severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. We used the World Health Organization's definition of severe and critical coronavirus disease 2019. The systematic reviews team searched the literature for relevant evidence, aiming to identify systematic reviews and clinical trials. When appropriate, we performed a random-effects meta-analysis to summarize treatment effects. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach, then used the evidence-to-decision framework to generate recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel issued nine statements (three new and six updated) related to ICU patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019. For severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019, the panel strongly recommends using systemic corticosteroids and venous thromboprophylaxis but strongly recommends against using hydroxychloroquine. In addition, the panel suggests using dexamethasone (compared with other corticosteroids) and suggests against using convalescent plasma and therapeutic anticoagulation outside clinical trials. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel suggests using remdesivir in nonventilated patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 and suggests against starting remdesivir in patients with critical coronavirus disease 2019 outside clinical trials. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel did not issue a recommendation on the use of awake prone positioning. CONCLUSION: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel issued several recommendations to guide healthcare professionals caring for adults with critical or severe coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. Based on a living guideline model the recommendations will be updated as new evidence becomes available.


Subject(s)
Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Care , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Disease Management , Intensive Care Units , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Adenosine Monophosphate/analogs & derivatives , Adenosine Monophosphate/therapeutic use , Alanine/analogs & derivatives , Alanine/therapeutic use , Anticoagulants , Evidence-Based Medicine , Hemodynamics , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine , Immunization, Passive , Patient Positioning , Ventilation
9.
J Am Coll Surg ; 232(2): 159-168.e3, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1065267

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Public health measures were instituted to reduce COVID-19 spread. A decrease in total emergency department volume followed, but the impact on injury is unknown. With lockdown and social distancing potentially increasing domicile discord, we hypothesized that intentional injury increased during COVID-19, driven primarily by an increase in penetrating trauma. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of acute adult patient care in an urban Level I trauma center assessed injury patterns. Presenting patient characteristics and diagnoses from 6 weeks pre to 10 weeks post statewide stay-at-home orders (March 16, 2020) were compared, as well as with 2015-2019. Subsets were defined by intentionality (intentional vs nonintentional) and mechanism of injury (blunt vs penetrating). Fisher exact and Wilcoxon tests were used to compare proportions and means. RESULTS: There were 357 trauma patients that presented pre stay-at-home order and 480 that presented post stay-at-home order. Pre and post groups demonstrated differences in sex (35.6% vs 27.9% female; p = 0.02), age (47.4 ± 22.1 years vs 42 ± 20.3 years; p = 0.009), and race (1.4% vs 2.3% Asian; 63.3% vs 68.3% Black; 30.5% vs 22.3% White; and 4.8% vs 7.1% other; p = 0.03). Post stay-at-home order mechanism of injury revealed more intentional injury (p = 0.0008). Decreases in nonintentional trauma after adoption of social isolation paralleled declines in daily emergency department visits. Compared with earlier years, 2020 demonstrated a significantly greater proportion of intentional violent injury during the peripandemic months, especially from firearms. CONCLUSIONS: Unprecedented social isolation policies to address COVID-19 were associated with increased intentional injury, especially gun violence. Meanwhile, emergency department and nonintentional trauma visits decreased. Pandemic-related public health measures should embrace intentional injury prevention and management strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Firearms , Pandemics , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Wounds, Gunshot/epidemiology , Adult , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Trauma Centers , United States/epidemiology
10.
Crit Care Explor ; 2(5): e0125, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-646537

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Global cases of coronavirus disease 2019 infection continue to increase, and significant numbers of patients are critically ill, placing an immense burden on ICU resources. Understanding baseline resource needs and surge capacity in the ICU will be essential to meet current and projected healthcare needs. Continued appraisal of the state of readiness for healthcare systems at individual, regional and national levels will be paramount to ensure we are poised to continue the fight against coronavirus disease 2019. OBJECTIVES: This study queried U.S. ICU clinician perspectives on ICU preparedness and concerns regarding delivering coronavirus disease 2019 patient care. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: An anonymous web-based survey administered from March 18, 2020, to March 25, 2020 (email and newsletter) used survey methodology to query members of U.S. national critical care organizations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Through a 12-item descriptive questionnaire, ICU clinicians were assessed regarding preparedness, techniques employed to augment critical care capacity, and concerns related to caring for coronavirus disease 2019 patients. RESULTS: A total of 4,875 ICU clinicians responded to the survey. Respondents included ICU nurses (n = 3,470, 71.3%), physicians (n = 664, 13.6%), advanced practice providers (nurse practitioners and physician assistants; n = 334, 6.9%), respiratory therapists (n = 236, 4.9%), and pharmacists (n = 79, 1.6%). Over half (n = 2,552, 52.5%) reported having cared for a presumed or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 patient. The majority (n = 4,010, 82.9%) identified that their hospital was employing techniques to augment critical care capacity. However, 64.5% (n = 3,125) believed that their ICU facility and team were inadequately prepared to treat coronavirus disease 2019 patients. The majority (n = 4,547, 93.9%) anticipated ICU personal protective equipment shortages based upon their current use profile. The chief reported concerns include ICU resource shortages such as supplies, medications, beds, ICU staffing shortages, and patient surge leading to overcrowding. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This national ICU clinician survey indicates that hospitals are expanding ICU bed capacity to prepare for coronavirus disease 2019 patient surge. Importantly, amid this preparation, ICU clinicians harbor concerns regarding preparedness, staffing, and common use resources that merit specific education as well as resource allocation and utilization planning.

11.
Crit Care Med ; 48(10): e846-e855, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-636350

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Recent reports identify that among hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, 30% require ICU care. Understanding ICU resource needs remains an essential component of meeting current and projected needs of critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients. OBJECTIVES: This study queried U.S. ICU clinician perspectives on challenging aspects of care in managing coronavirus disease 2019 patients, current and anticipated resource demands, and personal stress. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using a descriptive survey methodology, an anonymous web-based survey was administered from April 7, 2020, to April 22, 2020 (email and newsletter) to query members of U.S. national critical care organizations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Through a 16-item descriptive questionnaire, ICU clinician perceptions were assessed regarding current and emerging critical ICU needs in managing the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infected patients, resource levels, concerns about being exposed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and perceived level of personal stress. A total of 9,120 ICU clinicians responded to the survey, representing all 50 U.S. states, with 4,106 (56.9%) working in states with 20,000 or more coronavirus disease 2019 cases. The 7,317 respondents who indicated their profession included ICU nurses (n = 6,731, 91.3%), advanced practice providers (nurse practitioners and physician assistants; n = 334, 4.5%), physicians (n = 212, 2.9%), respiratory therapists (n = 31, 0.4%), and pharmacists (n = 30, 0.4%). A majority (n = 6,510, 88%) reported having cared for a patient with presumed or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. The most critical ICU needs identified were personal protective equipment, specifically N95 respirator availability, and ICU staffing. Minimizing healthcare worker virus exposure during care was believed to be the most challenging aspect of coronavirus disease 2019 patient care (n = 2,323, 30.9%). Nurses report a high level of concern about exposing family members to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (median score of 10 on 0-10 scale). Similarly, the level of concern reached the maximum score of 10 in ICU clinicians who had provided care to coronavirus disease 2019 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This national ICU clinician survey identifies continued concerns regarding personal protective equipment supplies with the chief issue being N95 respirator availability. As the pandemic continues, ICU clinicians anticipate a number of limited resources that may impact ICU care including personnel, capacity, and surge potential, as well as staff and subsequent family members exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. These persistent concerns greatly magnify personal stress, offering a therapeutic target for professional organization and facility intervention efforts.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Medical Staff, Hospital/organization & administration , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/therapy , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Critical Illness/mortality , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Hospital Mortality/trends , Humans , Interdisciplinary Communication , Male , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/diagnosis , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/mortality , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
12.
Surg Infect (Larchmt) ; 21(4): 301-308, 2020 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-88662

ABSTRACT

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-associated viral infection (coronavirus disease 2019, COVID-19) is a virulent, contagious viral pandemic that is affecting populations worldwide. As with any airborne viral respiratory infection, surgical and non-surgical patients may be affected. Methods: Review and synthesis of pertinent English-language literature pertaining to COVID-19 infection among adult patients. Results: COVID-19 disease that requires hospitalization results in critical illness approximately 25% of the time and requires mechanical ventilation with positive airway pressure. Acute kidney injury, a marked hypercoagulable state, and sometimes myocarditis can be features of COVID-19 in addition to the characteristic severe acute lung injury. Even if not among the most seriously afflicted, older patients with medical comorbidities are both predisposed to infection and risk increased morbidity and mortality, however, all persons presenting for surgical intervention should be suspected of infection (and thus transmissibility) even if asymptomatic. Although most elective surgery has been curtailed by administrative or governmental fiat, patients will still need urgent or emergency operative intervention for time-sensitive disease processes such as malignant neoplasia or for true emergencies such as perforated viscus or traumatic injury. It is possible to provide safe surgical care for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and minimize nosocomial transmission to healthcare workers. Conclusions: This guidance will facilitate appropriate protection of patients and staff, and maintenance of infection control measures to assist surgical personnel and facilities to prepare for COVID-19-infected adult patients requiring urgent or emergent operative intervention and to provide optimal patient care.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Elective Surgical Procedures/standards , Infection Control/standards , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Perioperative Care/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Adult , Aerosols/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Cross Infection/etiology , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Cross Infection/virology , Elective Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Elective Surgical Procedures/methods , Health Facilities/standards , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Intraoperative Care/methods , Intraoperative Care/standards , Intubation, Intratracheal/adverse effects , Patient Safety/standards , Perioperative Care/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL