Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 9(1)2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1807446

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is increasingly used for clinical decision making in acute care but little is known about frailty after COVID-19. OBJECTIVES: To investigate frailty and the CFS for post-COVID-19 follow-up. METHODS: This prospective multicentre cohort study included COVID-19 survivors aged ≥50 years presenting for a follow-up visit ≥3 months after the acute illness. Nine centres retrospectively collected pre-COVID-19 CFS and prospectively CFS at follow-up. Three centres completed the Frailty Index (FI), the short physical performance battery (SPPB), 30 s sit-to-stand test and handgrip strength measurements. Mixed effect logistic regression models accounting for repeated measurements and potential confounders were used to investigate factors associated with post-COVID-19 CFS. Criterion and construct validity were determined by correlating the CFS to other concurrently assessed frailty measurements and measures of respiratory impairment, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 288 participants 65% were men, mean (SD) age was 65.1 (9) years. Median (IQR) CFS at follow-up was 3 (2-3), 21% were vulnerable or frail (CFS ≥4). The CFS was responsive to change, correlated with the FI (r=0.69, p<0.001), the SPPB score (r=-0.48, p<0.001) (criterion validity) and with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score (r=0.59, p<0.001), forced vital capacity %-predicted (r=-0.25, p<0.001), 6 min walk distance (r=-0.39, p<0.001) and modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) (r=0.59, p<0.001). Dyspnoea was significantly associated with a higher odds for vulnerability/frailty (per one mMRC adjusted OR 2.01 (95% CI 1.13 to 3.58), p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The CFS significantly increases with COVID-19, and dyspnoea is an important risk factor for post-COVID-19 frailty and should be addressed thoroughly.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic , Frailty , Cohort Studies , Dyspnea/epidemiology , Dyspnea/etiology , Female , Frailty/diagnosis , Frailty/epidemiology , Hand Strength , Humans , Male , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies
2.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr ; 2022 Jan 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1694689

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little is known about metabolic and nutrition characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and persistent critical illness. We aimed to compare those characteristics in patients with PCI and COVID-19 and patients without COVID-19 infection (non-CO)-primarily, their energy balance. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study including two consecutive cohorts, defined as needing intubation for >10 days. We collected demographic data, severity scores, nutrition variables, length of stay, and mortality. RESULTS: Altogether, 104 patients (52 per group) were included (59 ± 14 years old [mean ± SD], 75% men) between July 2019 and May 2020. SAPSII, Nutrition Risk Screening (NRS) score, proportion of obese patients, duration of intubation (18.2 ± 11.7 days), and mortality rates were similar. Patients with COVID-19 (vs non-CO) had lower SOFA scores (P = 0.013) and more frequently needed prone position (P < 0.0001) and neuromuscular blockade (P < 0.0001): lengths of ICU (P = 0.03) and hospital stays were shorter (P < 0.0001). Prescribed energy targets were below those of the ICU protocol. The energy balance of patients with COVID-19 was significantly more negative after day 10. Enteral nutrition (EN) started earlier (P < 0.0001). During the first 10 days, COVID-19 patients received more lipid (propofol sedation) and less protein. Higher admission C-reactive protein (P = 0.002) decreased faster (P < 0.001). Whereas intestinal function was characterized by constipation in both groups during the first 10 days, diarrhea was less common in patients with COVID-19 thereafter. CONCLUSION: Compared with non-CO patients, COVID-19 patients were not more obese, had lower SOFA scores, and were fed more rapidly with EN, because of a more normal gastrointestinal function possibly due to fewer non-respiratory organ failures: their energy balances were more negative after the first 10 days. Propofol sedation reduced protein delivery.

3.
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
4.
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
5.
Swiss Med Wkly ; 150: w20387, 2020 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-922917

ABSTRACT

A 22-year-old male with a typical history of pauci-symptomatic COVID-19 3 weeks earlier, confirmed by positive serology for SARS-CoV-2 (IgG), was admitted to the intensive care unit because of severe myocarditis with refractory cardiogenic shock that required extracorporeal life support. Due to a clinical presentation suggestive of Kawasaki-like disease with coronary aneurysm and severe systemic inflammation, intravenous immunoglobulins were administered in combination with tocilizumab. The initial clinical course was favourable with these treatments. However, the patient subsequently developed a severe mononeuritis multiplex leading to bilateral foot drop, which required intensive immunosuppressive therapy (corticosteroids, cyclophosphamide and rituximab). The clinical presentation meets the criteria for multisystem inflammatory syndrome associated with SARS-CoV-2, but includes very severe organ damages. Early recognition, a multidisciplinary approach and aggressive therapeutic intervention can lead to a favourable outcome.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Mononeuropathies/etiology , Myocarditis/etiology , Shock, Cardiogenic/etiology , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome/etiology , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
6.
Revue medicale suisse ; 16(N° 691-2):863-868, 2020.
Article | WHO COVID | ID: covidwho-154687

ABSTRACT

The SARS-coronavirus 2 disease initially reported in December 2019 in China (COVID-19) represents a major challenge for intensive care medicine, due to the high number of ICU admission and the prolonged stay for many patients. Up to 5 % of COVID-19 infected patients develop severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring invasive mechanical ventilation as supportive treatment. Apart from early antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatment, the management of COVID-19 patients is mainly applying protective mechanical ventilation, to support the injured lungs. However recently acquired data and clinical experience suggest that COVID-19-related ARDS presents some specificities that will be summarized in the present article. La maladie a coronavirus SARS-Cov2 apparue en Chine en decembre 2019 (COVID-19) constitue un defi majeur pour les unites de soins intensifs en raison du nombre important dadmissions. En effet, pres de 5 % des patients infectes necessitent une ventilation invasive et une part importante de ces patients restent aux soins intensifs durant une longue periode. A part lapproche pharmacologique antivirale et anti-inflammatoire precoce, le traitement est centre sur la ventilation mecanique protectrice, qui a fait ses preuves dans le syndrome de detresse respiratoire (SDRA) et qui constitue la pierre angulaire du traitement de latteinte pulmonaire du COVID-19. Toutefois, en letat actuel des connaissances, le SDRA sur COVID-19 presente des caracteristiques particulieres qui necessitent une approche specifique que nous resumons dans cet article.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL