Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
1.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 179, 2022 06 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1951304

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mechanically ventilated patients have experienced greater periods of prolonged deep sedation during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Multiple studies from the pre-COVID era demonstrate that early deep sedation is associated with worse outcome. Despite this, there is a lack of data on sedation depth and its impact on outcome for mechanically ventilated patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to characterize the emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) sedation practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to determine if early deep sedation was associated with worse clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Dual-center, retrospective cohort study conducted over 6 months (March-August, 2020), involving consecutive, mechanically ventilated adults. All sedation-related data during the first 48 h were collected. Deep sedation was defined as Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale of - 3 to - 5 or Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale of 1-3. To examine impact of early sedation depth on hospital mortality (primary outcome), we used a multivariable logistic regression model. Secondary outcomes included ventilator-, ICU-, and hospital-free days. RESULTS: 391 patients were studied, and 283 (72.4%) experienced early deep sedation. Deeply sedated patients received higher cumulative doses of fentanyl, propofol, midazolam, and ketamine when compared to light sedation. Deep sedation patients experienced fewer ventilator-, ICU-, and hospital-free days, and greater mortality (30.4% versus 11.1%) when compared to light sedation (p < 0.01 for all). After adjusting for confounders, early deep sedation remained significantly associated with higher mortality (adjusted OR 3.44; 95% CI 1.65-7.17; p < 0.01). These results were stable in the subgroup of patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The management of sedation for mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU has changed during the COVID pandemic. Early deep sedation is common and independently associated with worse clinical outcomes. A protocol-driven approach to sedation, targeting light sedation as early as possible, should continue to remain the default approach.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Deep Sedation , Adult , Cohort Studies , Deep Sedation/methods , Humans , Hypnotics and Sedatives/therapeutic use , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Retrospective Studies
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2021 Oct 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493770

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Based on interim analyses and modelling data, lower doses of bamlanivimab and etesevimab together (700mg/1400mg) were investigated to determine optimal dose and expand availability of treatment. METHODS: This Phase 3 portion of the BLAZE-1 trial characterized the effect of bamlanivimab with etesevimab on overall patient clinical status and virologic outcomes in ambulatory patients ≥12 years old, with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, and ≥1 risk factor for progressing to severe COVID-19 and/or hospitalization. Bamlanivimab and etesevimab together (700mg/1400mg) or placebo were infused intravenously within 3 days of patients' first positive COVID-19 test. RESULTS: 769 patients were infused (median age [range]; 56.0 years [12, 93], 30.3% of patients ≥65 years of age and median duration of symptoms; 4 days). By day 29, 4/511 patients (0.8%) in the antibody treatment group had a COVID-19-related hospitalization or any-cause death, as compared with 15/258 patients (5.8%) in the placebo group (Δ[95% CI]=-5.0 [-8.0, -2.1], p<0.001). No deaths occurred in the bamlanivimab and etesevimab group compared with 4 deaths (all COVID-19-related) in the placebo group. Patients receiving antibody treatment had a greater mean reduction in viral load from baseline to Day 7 (Δ[95% CI]=-0.99 [-1.33, -0.66], p<0.0001) compared with those receiving placebo. Persistently high viral load at Day 7 correlated with COVID-19-related hospitalization or any-cause death by Day 29 in all BLAZE-1 cohorts investigated. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the use of bamlanivimab and etesevimab (700mg/1400mg) for ambulatory patients at high risk for severe COVID-19. Evolution of SARS-CoV-2 variants will require continued monitoring to determine the applicability of this treatment.

3.
BMJ Open ; 11(9): e045557, 2021 09 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1394106

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has precipitated widespread shortages of filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) and the creation and sharing of proposed substitutes (novel designs, repurposed materials) with limited testing against regulatory standards. We aimed to categorically test the efficacy and fit of potential N95 respirator substitutes using protocols that can be replicated in university laboratories. SETTING: Academic medical centre with occupational health-supervised fit testing along with laboratory studies. PARTICIPANTS: Seven adult volunteers who passed quantitative fit testing for small-sized (n=2) and regular-sized (n=5) commercial N95 respirators. METHODS: Five open-source potential N95 respirator substitutes were evaluated and compared with commercial National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-approved N95 respirators as controls. Fit testing using the 7-minute standardised Occupational Safety and Health Administration fit test was performed. In addition, protocols that can be performed in university laboratories for materials testing (filtration efficiency, air resistance and fluid resistance) were developed to evaluate alternate filtration materials. RESULTS: Among five open-source, improvised substitutes evaluated in this study, only one (which included a commercial elastomeric mask and commercial HEPA filter) passed a standard quantitative fit test. The four alternative materials evaluated for filtration efficiency (67%-89%) failed to meet the 95% threshold at a face velocity (7.6 cm/s) equivalent to that of a NIOSH particle filtration test for the control N95 FFR. In addition, for all but one material, the small surface area of two 3D-printed substitutes resulted in air resistance that was above the maximum in the NIOSH standard. CONCLUSIONS: Testing protocols such as those described here are essential to evaluate proposed improvised respiratory protection substitutes, and our testing platform could be replicated by teams with similar cross-disciplinary research capacity. Healthcare professionals should be cautious of claims associated with improvised respirators when suggested as FFR substitutes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Occupational Exposure , Respiratory Protective Devices , Adult , Equipment Design , Humans , N95 Respirators , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , United States , Ventilators, Mechanical
4.
N Engl J Med ; 385(15): 1382-1392, 2021 10 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1309482

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with underlying medical conditions are at increased risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Whereas vaccine-derived immunity develops over time, neutralizing monoclonal-antibody treatment provides immediate, passive immunity and may limit disease progression and complications. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, a cohort of ambulatory patients with mild or moderate Covid-19 who were at high risk for progression to severe disease to receive a single intravenous infusion of either a neutralizing monoclonal-antibody combination agent (2800 mg of bamlanivimab and 2800 mg of etesevimab, administered together) or placebo within 3 days after a laboratory diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The primary outcome was the overall clinical status of the patients, defined as Covid-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause by day 29. RESULTS: A total of 1035 patients underwent randomization and received an infusion of bamlanivimab-etesevimab or placebo. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 53.8±16.8 years, and 52.0% were adolescent girls or women. By day 29, a total of 11 of 518 patients (2.1%) in the bamlanivimab-etesevimab group had a Covid-19-related hospitalization or death from any cause, as compared with 36 of 517 patients (7.0%) in the placebo group (absolute risk difference, -4.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.4 to -2.3; relative risk difference, 70%; P<0.001). No deaths occurred in the bamlanivimab-etesevimab group; in the placebo group, 10 deaths occurred, 9 of which were designated by the trial investigators as Covid-19-related. At day 7, a greater reduction from baseline in the log viral load was observed among patients who received bamlanivimab plus etesevimab than among those who received placebo (difference from placebo in the change from baseline, -1.20; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.94; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk ambulatory patients, bamlanivimab plus etesevimab led to a lower incidence of Covid-19-related hospitalization and death than did placebo and accelerated the decline in the SARS-CoV-2 viral load. (Funded by Eli Lilly; BLAZE-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04427501.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , COVID-19/ethnology , COVID-19/virology , Child , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Acuity , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Viral Load/drug effects , Young Adult
5.
Probation Journal ; : 02645505211002257, 2021.
Article in English | Sage | ID: covidwho-1153928

ABSTRACT

We analyse practitioner and service user reflections on a digitally enabled toolkit designed to enable desistance-focused conversations within routine probation supervision of men with convictions for Intimate Partner Violence in England and Wales. We explore how to embed inclusive therapeutic service provision within the role of public sector National Probation Service practitioners through the testimony of case managers (N = 9) and people on probation (N = 7). We discuss the strengths and challenges of the approach and its implementation. The findings are discussed in the context of: the forthcoming Domestic Abuse Bill;the renationalisation of probation;the recovery of probation services following the COVID-19 pandemic;and the emergence of technology that supports desistance.

6.
JAMA ; 325(7): 632-644, 2021 02 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1126320

ABSTRACT

Importance: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to spread rapidly worldwide. Neutralizing antibodies are a potential treatment for COVID-19. Objective: To determine the effect of bamlanivimab monotherapy and combination therapy with bamlanivimab and etesevimab on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load in mild to moderate COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: The BLAZE-1 study is a randomized phase 2/3 trial at 49 US centers including ambulatory patients (N = 613) who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection and had 1 or more mild to moderate symptoms. Patients who received bamlanivimab monotherapy or placebo were enrolled first (June 17-August 21, 2020) followed by patients who received bamlanivimab and etesevimab or placebo (August 22-September 3). These are the final analyses and represent findings through October 6, 2020. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive a single infusion of bamlanivimab (700 mg [n = 101], 2800 mg [n = 107], or 7000 mg [n = 101]), the combination treatment (2800 mg of bamlanivimab and 2800 mg of etesevimab [n = 112]), or placebo (n = 156). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was change in SARS-CoV-2 log viral load at day 11 (±4 days). Nine prespecified secondary outcome measures were evaluated with comparisons between each treatment group and placebo, and included 3 other measures of viral load, 5 on symptoms, and 1 measure of clinical outcome (the proportion of patients with a COVID-19-related hospitalization, an emergency department [ED] visit, or death at day 29). Results: Among the 577 patients who were randomized and received an infusion (mean age, 44.7 [SD, 15.7] years; 315 [54.6%] women), 533 (92.4%) completed the efficacy evaluation period (day 29). The change in log viral load from baseline at day 11 was -3.72 for 700 mg, -4.08 for 2800 mg, -3.49 for 7000 mg, -4.37 for combination treatment, and -3.80 for placebo. Compared with placebo, the differences in the change in log viral load at day 11 were 0.09 (95% CI, -0.35 to 0.52; P = .69) for 700 mg, -0.27 (95% CI, -0.71 to 0.16; P = .21) for 2800 mg, 0.31 (95% CI, -0.13 to 0.76; P = .16) for 7000 mg, and -0.57 (95% CI, -1.00 to -0.14; P = .01) for combination treatment. Among the secondary outcome measures, differences between each treatment group vs the placebo group were statistically significant for 10 of 84 end points. The proportion of patients with COVID-19-related hospitalizations or ED visits was 5.8% (9 events) for placebo, 1.0% (1 event) for 700 mg, 1.9% (2 events) for 2800 mg, 2.0% (2 events) for 7000 mg, and 0.9% (1 event) for combination treatment. Immediate hypersensitivity reactions were reported in 9 patients (6 bamlanivimab, 2 combination treatment, and 1 placebo). No deaths occurred during the study treatment. Conclusions and Relevance: Among nonhospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 illness, treatment with bamlanivimab and etesevimab, compared with placebo, was associated with a statistically significant reduction in SARS-CoV-2 viral load at day 11; no significant difference in viral load reduction was observed for bamlanivimab monotherapy. Further ongoing clinical trials will focus on assessing the clinical benefit of antispike neutralizing antibodies in patients with COVID-19 as a primary end point. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04427501.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Neutralizing/administration & dosage , Antiviral Agents/administration & dosage , COVID-19/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Viral Load/drug effects , Adult , Aged , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Neutralizing/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/drug effects , Severity of Illness Index
7.
Acad Radiol ; 28(2): 158-165, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1064684

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE: Three-dimensional (3D) printing allows innovative solutions for personal protective equipment, particularly in times of crisis. Our goal was to generate an N95-alternative 3D-printed respirator that passed Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)-certified quantitative fit testing during the COVID-19 pandemic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 3D printed prototypes for N95 solutions were created based on the design of commercial N95 respirators. Computed tomography imaging was performed on an anthropomorphic head phantom wearing a commercially available N95 respirator and these facial contour data was used in mask prototyping. Prototypes were generated using rigid and flexible polymers. According to OSHA standards, prototypes underwent subsequent quantitative respirator fit testing on volunteers who passed fit tests on commercial N95 respirators. RESULTS: A total of 10 prototypes were 3D printed using both rigid (n = 5 designs) and flexible materials (n = 5 designs), Prototypes generated with rigid printing materials (n = 5 designs) did not pass quantitative respirator fit testing. Three of the five prototypes with flexible materials failed quantitative fit testing. The final two prototypes designs passed OSHA-certified quantitative fit tests with an overall mean fit factor of 138 (passing is over 100). CONCLUSION: Through rapid prototyping, 3D printed N95 alternative masks were designed with topographical facial computed tomography data to create mask facial contour and passed OSHA-certified quantitative respiratory testing when flexible polymer was used. This mask design may provide an alternative to disposable N95 respirators in case of pandemic-related shortages. Furthermore, this approach may allow customization for those that would otherwise fail fit testing on standard commercial respirators.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Equipment Design , Humans , Masks , Materials Testing , N95 Respirators , Printing, Three-Dimensional , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomography, X-Ray Computed
8.
N Engl J Med ; 384(3): 229-237, 2021 01 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-894458

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), which is most frequently mild yet can be severe and life-threatening. Virus-neutralizing monoclonal antibodies are predicted to reduce viral load, ameliorate symptoms, and prevent hospitalization. METHODS: In this ongoing phase 2 trial involving outpatients with recently diagnosed mild or moderate Covid-19, we randomly assigned 452 patients to receive a single intravenous infusion of neutralizing antibody LY-CoV555 in one of three doses (700 mg, 2800 mg, or 7000 mg) or placebo and evaluated the quantitative virologic end points and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the viral load at day 11. The results of a preplanned interim analysis as of September 5, 2020, are reported here. RESULTS: At the time of the interim analysis, the observed mean decrease from baseline in the log viral load for the entire population was -3.81, for an elimination of more than 99.97% of viral RNA. For patients who received the 2800-mg dose of LY-CoV555, the difference from placebo in the decrease from baseline was -0.53 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.98 to -0.08; P = 0.02), for a viral load that was lower by a factor of 3.4. Smaller differences from placebo in the change from baseline were observed among the patients who received the 700-mg dose (-0.20; 95% CI, -0.66 to 0.25; P = 0.38) or the 7000-mg dose (0.09; 95% CI, -0.37 to 0.55; P = 0.70). On days 2 to 6, the patients who received LY-CoV555 had a slightly lower severity of symptoms than those who received placebo. The percentage of patients who had a Covid-19-related hospitalization or visit to an emergency department was 1.6% in the LY-CoV555 group and 6.3% in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In this interim analysis of a phase 2 trial, one of three doses of neutralizing antibody LY-CoV555 appeared to accelerate the natural decline in viral load over time, whereas the other doses had not by day 11. (Funded by Eli Lilly; BLAZE-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04427501.).


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Neutralizing/administration & dosage , COVID-19/drug therapy , Immunologic Factors/administration & dosage , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Viral Load/drug effects , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Antibodies, Neutralizing/adverse effects , COVID-19/virology , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Immunologic Factors/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Outpatients , RNA, Viral/blood , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Severity of Illness Index , Young Adult
9.
3D Printing in Medicine ; 6(1):27-27, 2020.
Article | BioMed Central | ID: covidwho-806942

ABSTRACT

Purpose Many commonly used mask designs are secured by elastic straps looping around the posterior auricular region. This constant pressure and friction against the skin may contribute to increased wearer pain, irritation, and discomfort. The purpose of this work is to report a modified 3D printed mask extender to alleviate discomfort and increase mask wearability by relieving posterior auricular pressure from isolation masks.Methods Our institutional review board designated this project as non-human research and exempt. As part of resourcing 3D printing laboratories along with individual 3D printers to provide resources to healthcare workers, mask extenders were printed to relieve posterior auricular pressure from individuals wearing isolation masks. The authors modifed an existing mask extender, increasing its length with accompanying peripheral rungs for isolation mask securement. 3D printing was performed with Ultimaker S5 (Ultimaker B.V.;Geldermalsen, Netherlands) and CR-10 (Creality3D;Shenzhen, China) 3D printers using polylactic acid filaments. The author's modified extended mask extenders were printed and freely delivered to healthcare workers (physicians, nurses, technologists, and other personnel) at the authors' institution.Results The final mask extender design was printed with the two 3D printers with a maximum 7 straps printed simultaneously on each 3D printer. Mean print times ranges from 105 minutes for the Ultimaker S5 printer and 150 minutes for the CR-10. 475 mask extenders were delivered to healthcare workers at the authors' institution, with the demand far exceeding the available supply.Conclusion We offer a modification of a 3D printed mask extender design that decreases discomfort and increases the wearability of isolation mask designs with ear loops thought to relieve posterior auricular skin pressure and ability to control strap tension. The design is simple, produced with inexpensive material (polylactic acid), and have been well-received by healthcare providers at our institution

10.
3D Print Med ; 6(1): 27, 2020 Sep 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-802427

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Many commonly used mask designs are secured by elastic straps looping around the posterior auricular region. This constant pressure and friction against the skin may contribute to increased wearer pain, irritation, and discomfort. The purpose of this work is to report a modified 3D printed mask extender to alleviate discomfort and increase mask wearability by relieving posterior auricular pressure from isolation masks. METHODS: Our institutional review board designated this project as non-human research and exempt. As part of resourcing 3D printing laboratories along with individual 3D printers to provide resources to healthcare workers, mask extenders were printed to relieve posterior auricular pressure from individuals wearing isolation masks. The authors modifed an existing mask extender, increasing its length with accompanying peripheral rungs for isolation mask securement. 3D printing was performed with Ultimaker S5 (Ultimaker B.V.; Geldermalsen, Netherlands) and CR-10 (Creality3D; Shenzhen, China) 3D printers using polylactic acid filaments. The author's modified extended mask extenders were printed and freely delivered to healthcare workers (physicians, nurses, technologists, and other personnel) at the authors' institution. RESULTS: The final mask extender design was printed with the two 3D printers with a maximum 7 straps printed simultaneously on each 3D printer. Mean print times ranges from 105 min for the Ultimaker S5 printer and 150 min for the CR-10. Four hundred seventy-five mask extenders were delivered to healthcare workers at the authors' institution, with the demand far exceeding the available supply. CONCLUSION: We offer a modification of a 3D printed mask extender design that decreases discomfort and increases the wearability of isolation mask designs with ear loops thought to relieve posterior auricular skin pressure and ability to control strap tension. The design is simple, produced with inexpensive material (polylactic acid), and have been well-received by healthcare providers at our institution.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL