Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 19 de 19
Filter
1.
Indian J Anaesth ; 66(4): 311-313, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1810653
2.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 26(3): 405, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1742859

ABSTRACT

Nasa P, Chaudhry D. In Response to: Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19: Finding Window of Opportunity. Indian J Crit Care 2022;26(3):405.

3.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 26(3): 268-275, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1742853

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had affected the visiting or communicating policies for family members. We surveyed the intensive care units (ICUs) in South Asia and the Middle East to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on visiting and communication policies. Materials and method: A web-based cross-sectional survey was used to collect data between March 22, 2021, and April 7, 2021, from healthcare professionals (HCP) working in COVID and non-COVID ICUs (one response per ICU). The topics of the questionnaire included current and pre-pandemic policies on visiting, communication, informed consent, and end-of-life care in ICUs. Results: A total of 292 ICUs (73% of COVID ICUs) from 18 countries were included in the final analysis. Most (92%) of ICUs restricted their visiting hours, and nearly one-third (32.3%) followed a "no-visitor" policy. There was a significant change in the daily visiting duration in COVID ICUs compared to the pre-pandemic times (p = 0.011). There was also a significant change (p <0.001) in the process of informed consent and end-of-life discussions during the ongoing pandemic compared to pre-pandemic times. Conclusion: Visiting and communication policies of the ICUs had significantly changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Future studies are needed to understand the sociopsychological and medicolegal implications of revised policies. How to cite this article: Chanchalani G, Arora N, Nasa P, Sodhi K, Al Bahrani MJ, Al Tayar A, et al. Visiting and Communication Policy in Intensive Care Units during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-sectional Survey from South Asia and the Middle East. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(3):268-275.

4.
Indian J Nephrol ; 31(6): 559-561, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574798

ABSTRACT

Acute Kidney Injury (AKI) in COVID-19 patients is common and independently associated with higher mortality. The pathophysiology of AKI is multifactorial and may be either direct viral trophism or immune mediated injury and hypercoagulability. This case highlights AKI in a young female with severe COVID-19 due to complement-3 mediated thrombotic microangiopathy with pre-existing chronic kidney disease likely because of IgA nephropathy.

5.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 25(11): 1280-1285, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1526937

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is strong evidence for the use of corticosteroid in the management of severe coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). However, there is still uncertainty about the timing of corticosteroids. We undertook a modified Delphi study to develop expert consensus statements on the early identification of a subset of patients from non-severe COVID-19 who may benefit from using corticosteroids. METHODS: A modified Delphi was conducted with two anonymous surveys between April 30, 2021, and May 3, 2021. An expert panel of 35 experts was selected and invited to participate through e-mail. The consensus was defined as >70% votes in multiple-choice questions (MCQ) on Likert-scale type statements, while strong consensus as >90% votes in MCQ or >50% votes for "very important" on Likert-scale questions in the final round. RESULTS: Twenty experts completed two rounds of the survey. There was strong consensus for the increased work of breathing (95%), a positive six-minute walk test (90%), thorax computed tomography severity score of >14/25 (85%), new-onset organ dysfunction (using clinical or biochemical criteria) (80%), and C-reactive protein >5 times the upper limit of normal (70%) as the criteria for patients' selection. The experts recommended using oral or intravenous (IV) low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days and monitoring of oxygen saturation, body temperature, clinical scoring system, blood sugar, and inflammatory markers for any "red-flag" signs. CONCLUSION: The experts recommended against indiscriminate use of corticosteroids in mild to moderate COVID-19 without the signs of clinical worsening. Oral or IV low-dose corticosteroids (the equivalent of 6 mg/day dexamethasone) for 5-10 days are recommended for patients with features of disease progression based on clinical, biochemical, or radiological criteria after 5 days from symptom onset under close monitoring. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: How to cite this article: Nasa P, Chaudhry D, Govil D, Daga MK, Jain R, Chhallani AA, et al. Expert Consensus Statements on the Use of Corticosteroids in Non-severe COVID-19. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(11):1280-1285.

6.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 22(3): e74-e87, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1510480

ABSTRACT

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers and uninfected patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 as a result of transmission from infected patients and health-care workers. In the absence of high-quality evidence on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, clinical practice of infection control and prevention in ICUs varies widely. Using a Delphi process, international experts in intensive care, infectious diseases, and infection control developed consensus statements on infection control for SARS-CoV-2 in an ICU. Consensus was achieved for 31 (94%) of 33 statements, from which 25 clinical practice statements were issued. These statements include guidance on ICU design and engineering, health-care worker safety, visiting policy, personal protective equipment, patients and procedures, disinfection, and sterilisation. Consensus was not reached on optimal return to work criteria for health-care workers who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or the acceptable disinfection strategy for heat-sensitive instruments used for airway management of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Well designed studies are needed to assess the effects of these practice statements and address the remaining uncertainties.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Consensus , Infection Control/standards , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/prevention & control , Intensive Care Units/standards , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Delphi Technique , Health Personnel/standards , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment/standards
7.
World J Methodol ; 11(4): 116-129, 2021 Jul 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1332323

ABSTRACT

The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members. The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine. The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited, ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting. However, the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance, and details of the process followed are usually unclear. We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology; identification of problem area of research, selection of panel, anonymity of panelists, controlled feedback, iterative Delphi rounds, consensus criteria, analysis of consensus, closing criteria, and stability of the results. Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points, we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019. There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members, defining consensus, closing criteria for rounds, and presenting the results. We propose our evaluation points for researchers, medical journal editorial boards, and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.

8.
Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann ; 30(2): 237-244, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1305542

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There are various reports of air leaks with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We undertook a systematic review of all published case reports and series to analyse the types of air leaks in COVID-19 and their outcomes. METHODS: The literature search from PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases was performed from the start of the pandemic till 31 March 2021. The inclusion criteria were case reports or series on (1) laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, (2) with the individual patient details, and (3) reported diagnosis of one or more air leak syndrome (pneumothorax, subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastinum, pneumoperitoneum, pneumopericardium). RESULTS: A total of 105 studies with 188 patients were included in the final analysis. The median age was 56.02 (SD 15.53) years, 80% males, 11% had previous respiratory disease, and 8% were smokers. Severe or critical COVID-19 was present in 50.6% of the patients. Pneumothorax (68%) was the most common type of air leak. Most patients (56.7%) required intervention with lower mortality (29.1% vs. 44.1%, p = 0.07) and intercostal drain (95.9%) was the preferred interventional management. More than half of the patients developed air leak on spontaneous breathing. The mortality was significantly higher in patients who developed air leak with positive pressure ventilation (49%, p < 0.001) and required escalation of respiratory support (39%, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Air leak in COVID-19 can occur spontaneously without positive pressure ventilation, higher transpulmonary pressures, and other risk factors like previous respiratory disease or smoking. The mortality is significantly higher if associated with positive pressure ventilation and escalation of respiratory support.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mediastinal Emphysema , Pneumothorax , Female , Humans , Male , Mediastinal Emphysema/diagnostic imaging , Mediastinal Emphysema/etiology , Mediastinal Emphysema/therapy , Middle Aged , Pneumothorax/etiology , Pneumothorax/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Treatment Outcome
9.
Indian J Psychiatry ; 63(3): 285-289, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1290709

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is predicted to have long-term sequelae on the physical and mental health of survivors. We aim to calculate the prevalence of psychological distress in moderate-to-critical survivors of COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The patients discharged from the hospital after moderate-to-critical COVID-19 were interviewed using e-mail at 30 and 60 days for anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) using Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, and PTSD Check List-5 questionnaire, respectively. RESULTS: In 103 patients (96% were immigrant workers), the prevalence rate of clinically significant anxiety, depression, and PTSD was 21.4%, 12.7%, and 8.7% at day 30 and 9.5%, 7.1%, and 4.7% at day 60, respectively. There was significantly higher anxiety in patients of Indian nationality and depression with preexisting chronic illness. CONCLUSION: There is a high prevalence rate of clinically significant psychological distress among COVID-19 survivors, and we propose a formal psychiatric assessment and long-term follow-up.

10.
Int J Clin Pract ; 75(10): e14574, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1281995

ABSTRACT

AIM: During the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the physicians are using various off-label therapeutics to manage COVID-19. We undertook a cross-sectional survey to study the current variation in therapeutic strategies for managing severe COVID-19 in India. METHODS: From January 4 to January 18, 2021, an online cross-sectional survey was conducted among physicians involved in the management of severe COVID-19. The survey had three sections: 1. Antiviral agents, 2. Immunomodulators, and 3. Adjuvant therapies. RESULTS: 1055 respondents (from 24 states and five union territories), of which 64.2% were consultants, 54.3% working in private hospitals, and 39.1% were from critical care medicine completed the survey. Remdesivir (95.2%), antithrombotics (94.2%), corticosteroids (90.3%), vitamins (89.7%) and empirical antibiotics (85.6%) were the commonly used therapeutics. Ivermectin (33%), convalescent plasma (28.6%) and favipiravir (17.6%) were other antiviral agents used. Methylprednisolone (50.2%) and dexamethasone (44.1%) were preferred corticosteroids and at a dose equivalent of 8 mg of dexamethasone phosphate (70.2%). There was significant variation among physicians from different medical specialities in the use of favipiravir, corticosteroids, empirical antibiotics and vitamins. CONCLUSION: There is a considerable variation in the physicians' choice of therapeutic strategies for the management of severe COVID-19 in India, as compared with the available evidence.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Immunization, Passive , India/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
11.
World J Hepatol ; 13(5): 522-532, 2021 May 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1271018

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on public health and healthcare. The pandemic surge and resultant lockdown have affected the standard-of-care of many medical conditions and diseases. The initial uncertainty and fear of cross transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have changed the routine management of patients with pre-existing liver diseases, hepatocellular carcinoma, and patients either listed for or received a liver transplant. COVID-19 is best described as a multisystem disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, and it can cause acute liver injury or decompensation of the pre-existing liver disease. There has been considerable research on the pathophysiology, infection transmission, and treatment of COVID-19 in the last few months. The pathogenesis of liver involvement in COVID-19 includes viral cytotoxicity, the secondary effect of immune dysregulation, hypoxia resulting from respiratory failure, ischemic damage caused by vascular endotheliitis, congestion because of right heart failure, or drug-induced liver injury. Patients with chronic liver diseases, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma are at high risk for severe COVID-19 and mortality. The phase III trials of recently approved vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 did not include enough patients with pre-existing liver diseases and excluded immunocompromised patients or those on immunomodulators. This article reviews the currently published research on the effect of COVID-19 on the liver and the management of patients with pre-existing liver disease, including SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.

12.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 25(5): 499-506, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1229408

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) in the last few months has disrupted the healthcare system globally. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the psychological and emotional well-being of healthcare workers (HCWs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an online, cross-sectional, multinational survey, assessing the anxiety (using Generalized Anxiety Disorder [GAD-2] and GAD-7), depression (using Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression), and insomnia (using Insomnia Severity Index), among HCWs across India, the Middle East, and North America. We used univariate and bivariate logistic regression to identify risk factors for psychological distress. RESULTS: The prevalence of clinically significant anxiety, depression, and insomnia were 41.4, 48.0, and 31.3%, respectively. On bivariate logistic regression, lack of social or emotional support to HCWs was independently associated with anxiety [odds ratio (OR), 3.81 (2.84-3.90)], depression [OR, 6.29 (4.50-8.79)], and insomnia [OR, 3.79 (2.81-5.110)]. Female gender and self-COVID-19 were independent risk factors for anxiety [OR, 3.71 (1.53-9.03) and 1.71 (1.23-2.38)] and depression [OR, 1.72 (1.27-2.31) and 1.62 (1.14-2.30)], respectively. Frontliners were independently associated with insomnia [OR, 1.68 (1.23-2.29)]. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 pandemic has a high prevalence of anxiety, depression, and insomnia among HCWs. Female gender, frontliners, self-COVID-19, and absence of social or emotional support are the independent risk factors for psychological distress. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Jagiasi BG, Chanchalani G, Nasa P, Tekwani S. Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Emotional Well-being of Healthcare Workers: A Multinational Cross-sectional Survey. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(5):499-506.

13.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 106, 2021 03 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1136238

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. METHODS: Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable). RESULTS: Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. CONCLUSION: Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Consensus , Delphi Technique , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/virology , Humans
14.
Int J Infect Dis ; 102: 332-334, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1060485

ABSTRACT

The pathophysiology of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is primarily a host immune interplay to virus invasion. The therapeutic options have been explored either against hyperinflammation from dysregulated adaptive immunity or direct virus neutralization using antibodies from convalescent plasma (CP) of a recovered patient. The therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) for removal of excessive inflammatory cytokines has been tried with success in COVID-19. We undertook this exploratory study to evaluate safety and efficacy of TPE followed by CP transfusion in 14 patients with critical COVID-19 requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). All patients showed improvement in symptoms and decrease of inflammatory markers especially CRP (p = 0.03). 10 patients were liberated from IMV after a median of 5.5 (3-36) days, post sequential therapy. Day 7 and Day 28 mortality was 21.4% and 28.6% respectively. The median duration ICU and hospital LOS were 12 (5-42) days and 18 (12-47) days respectively. No patient developed transfusion-associated complications, but three patients developed secondary bacterial sepsis within 14 days of therapy, and one died. This case series demonstrated the sequential use of TPE followed by CP transfusion as a therapeutic option in critical COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Blood Component Transfusion , COVID-19/therapy , Plasma Exchange , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Humans , Immunization, Passive , Male , Middle Aged , Plasma/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology
15.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 24(Suppl 5): S280-S289, 2020 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1049125

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has very high rates of hospital-related transmission among healthcare workers (HCWs), mandating the need for careful intensive care unit (ICU) designing, optimization of staff resources, implementation of vigorous infection control practices, environmental disinfection, meticulous sample collection, and criteria for staff quarantine. Most of the ICUs are not designed to deal with airborne viral infections and require redesigning for the safety of HCWs and patients. Infection control practices related to the prevention of spread of COVD-19 are unique and are well described. The training of staff on infection control practices reduces the infection rate among HCWs significantly. Adequate staffing not only helps in infection control but also prevents burnout of the staff. In case of infection to HCW, the staff must be assessed systematically, and institute's infection control committee should guide for isolation period as well as return to work based upon standard recommendations. This article focuses on infection control and prevention measures required in ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic. How to cite this article: Sharma J, Nasa P, Reddy KS, Kuragayala SD, Sahi S, Gopal P, et al. Infection Prevention and Control for ICU during COVID-19 Pandemic: Position Paper of the Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(Suppl 5):S280-S289.

16.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 24(10): 895-896, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-931213

ABSTRACT

How to cite this article: Nasa P. Coronavirus Disease 2019 Treatment: It is Time for Stewardship! Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(10):895-896.

17.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 24(9): 771-776, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-883967

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Cytokine-release syndrome (CRS) in COVID-19 patients can cause multiorgan failure and higher mortality. We used a structured protocol based on clinical, biochemical, and interleukin 6 (IL-6) criteria for the identification of the subset of patients with CRS and analyzed the use of tocilizumab for their treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We did a retrospective case-control analysis of all COVID-19 patients between 15 March and 15 May 2020 with severe to critical disease in ICU. They were evaluated for CRS, and 22 patients who met the criterion were given tocilizumab. The primary objective was to evaluate the effect of tocilizumab on escalation of respiratory support and ICU mortality. The secondary objectives were ICU length of stay, trends of inflammatory markers, and any adverse effects. RESULTS: The need for escalation of respiratory support was significantly lower in the tocilizumab group as compared to standard treatment (p = 0.001). The mortality at day 7 and 28 was also significantly lower in the tocilizumab group (p = 0.007 and p = 0.001 respectively). There was a significant reduction in C-reactive protein (CRP) who received tocilizumab (p = 0.033). CONCLUSION: In our limited number of patients, timely intervention with tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients with CRS significantly improved overall ICU outcome by reducing the need for invasive ventilation and mortality. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Nasa P, Singh A, Upadhyay S, Bagadia S, Polumuru S, Shrivastava PK, et al. Tocilizumab Use in COVID-19 Cytokine-release Syndrome: Retrospective Study of Two Centers. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(9):771-776.

18.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 24(9): 832-834, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-883963

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has inundated healthcare systems globally especially resources in intensive care units (ICUs). Tracheostomy may be required in critically ill COVID-19 patients to facilitate weaning and to optimize resources like ventilator and ICU beds. Percutaneous tracheostomy (PCT) has become the standard of care globally in ICUs; however, it is considered a high-risk procedure in COVID-19 patients because of the inherent risk of aerosol generation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with severe COVID-19 who were on mechanical ventilation because of respiratory failure for ≥10 days were evaluated for PCT. We developed a four-step approach from patient selection and timing, preparation, performance, and postprocedure for PCT in these patients. RESULTS: We evaluated our four-step protocol in four patients. One of them was non-COVID patient and rest three were COVID patients. The procedure was uneventful in all of the patients with median time of procedure and apnea is 10 minutes 30 seconds and 2 minutes 20 seconds, respectively. The tracheostomy was decannulated in two of these patients and one patient is still on ventilator. CONCLUSION: We believe our four-step protocol for PCT in critically ill COVID-19 patient is simple, safe, and easily adapted in any setting with limited training and available resources. We recommend further studies to evaluate this approach in selected critically ill COVID-19 patients who need tracheostomy. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Nasa P, Singh A, Ali A, Patidar S, Georgian A. Percutaneous Tracheostomy in COVID-19 Patients: A Four-step Safe Protocol. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(9):832-834.

19.
Indian J Crit Care Med ; 24(8): 609-610, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-836354

ABSTRACT

How to cite this article: Chawla R, Nasa P. Ventilatory Management of COVID-19-related ARDS: Stick to Basics and Infection Control. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(8):609-610.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL