Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 24
Filter
1.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 108, 2022 04 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1793838

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy of a closed-loop oxygen control in critically ill patients with moderate to severe acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) treated with high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO). METHODS: In this single-centre, single-blinded, randomized crossover study, adult patients with moderate to severe AHRF who were treated with HFNO (flow rate ≥ 40 L/min with FiO2 ≥ 0.30) were randomly assigned to start with a 4-h period of closed-loop oxygen control or 4-h period of manual oxygen titration, after which each patient was switched to the alternate therapy. The primary outcome was the percentage of time spent in the individualized optimal SpO2 range. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were included. Patients spent more time in the optimal SpO2 range with closed-loop oxygen control compared with manual titrations of oxygen (96.5 [93.5 to 98.9] % vs. 89 [77.4 to 95.9] %; p < 0.0001) (difference estimate, 10.4 (95% confidence interval 5.2 to 17.2). Patients spent less time in the suboptimal range during closed-loop oxygen control, both above and below the cut-offs of the optimal SpO2 range, and less time above the suboptimal range. Fewer number of manual adjustments per hour were needed with closed-loop oxygen control. The number of events of SpO2 < 88% and < 85% were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Closed-loop oxygen control improves oxygen administration in patients with moderate-to-severe AHRF treated with HFNO, increasing the percentage of time in the optimal oxygenation range and decreasing the workload of healthcare personnel. These results are especially relevant in a context of limited oxygen supply and high medical demand, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial registration The HILOOP study was registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov under the identifier NCT04965844 .


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Cannula , Cross-Over Studies , Humans , Hypoxia/etiology , Hypoxia/therapy , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Pandemics , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy
2.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 84, 2022 03 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1765461

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (APP) improves oxygenation in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients and, when successful, may decrease the risk of intubation. However, factors associated with APP success remain unknown. In this secondary analysis, we aimed to assess whether APP can reduce intubation rate in patients with COVID-19 and to focus on the factors associated with success. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, conducted in three high-acuity units, we randomly assigned patients with COVID-19-induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) requiring high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen to APP or standard care. Primary outcome was intubation rate at 28 days. Multivariate analyses were performed to identify the predictors associated to treatment success (survival without intubation). RESULTS: Among 430 patients randomized, 216 were assigned to APP and 214 to standard care. The APP group had a lower intubation rate (30% vs 43%, relative risk [RR] 0.70; CI95 0.54-0.90, P = 0.006) and shorter hospital length of stay (11 interquartile range [IQR, 9-14] vs 13 [IQR, 10-17] days, P = 0.001). A respiratory rate ≤ 25 bpm at enrollment, an increase in ROX index > 1.25 after first APP session, APP duration > 8 h/day, and a decrease in lung ultrasound score ≥ 2 within the first 3 days were significantly associated with treatment success for APP. CONCLUSION: In patients with COVID-19-induced AHRF treated by HFNC, APP reduced intubation rate and improved treatment success. A longer APP duration is associated with APP success, while the increase in ROX index and decrease in lung ultrasound score after APP can also help identify patients most likely to benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov at July 20, 2021. Identification number NCT04477655. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04477655?term=PRO-CARF&draw=2&rank=1.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Cannula , Humans , Prone Position , Respiratory Insufficiency/complications , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Wakefulness
3.
Lancet Respir Med ; 2022 Mar 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1740330

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning has been broadly utilised for non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, but the results from published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the past year are contradictory. We aimed to systematically synthesise the outcomes associated with awake prone positioning, and evaluate these outcomes in relevant subpopulations. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, two independent groups of researchers searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs and observational studies (with a control group) of awake prone positioning in patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure published in English from Jan 1, 2020, to Nov 8, 2021. We excluded trials that included patients intubated before or at enrolment, paediatric patients (ie, younger than 18 years), or trials that did not include the supine position in the control group. The same two independent groups screened studies, extracted the summary data from published reports, and assessed the risk of bias. We used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool individual studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty and quality of the evidence. The primary outcome was the reported cumulative intubation risk across RCTs, and effect estimates were calculated as risk ratios (RR;95% CI). The analysis was primarily conducted on RCTs, and observational studies were used for sensitivity analyses. No serious adverse events associated with awake prone positioning were reported. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021271285. FINDINGS: A total of 1243 studies were identified, we assessed 138 full-text articles and received the aggregated results of three unpublished RCTs; therefore, after exclusions, 29 studies were included in the study. Ten were RCTs (1985 patients) and 19 were observational studies (2669 patients). In ten RCTs, awake prone positioning compared with the supine position significantly reduced the need for intubation in the overall population (RR 0·84 [95% CI 0·72-0·97]). A reduced need for intubation was shown among patients who received advanced respiratory support (ie, high-flow nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation) at enrolment (RR 0·83 [0·71-0·97]) and in intensive care unit (ICU) settings (RR 0·83 [0·71-0·97]) but not in patients receiving conventional oxygen therapy (RR 0·87 [0·45-1·69]) or in non-ICU settings (RR 0·88 [0·44-1·76]). No obvious risk of bias and publication bias was found among the included RCTs for the primary outcome. INTERPRETATION: In patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, awake prone positioning reduced the need for intubation, particularly among those requiring advanced respiratory support and those in ICU settings. Awake prone positioning should be used in patients who have acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and require advanced respiratory support or are treated in the ICU. FUNDING: OpenAI, Rice Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, and Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

5.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-318845

ABSTRACT

Background: Awake prone positioning (APP) has been advocated to improve oxygenation and prevent intubations of patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This paper aims to synthesize the available evidence on the efficacy of APP. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to compare oxygenation parameters in-hospital intubation rate in patients treated with APP or with standard care. Results: A total of 46 published and 4 unpublished observational studies that included 2994 patients were included. APP was associated with significant improvement of various oxygenation parameters in 19 studies (n=381) that reported this outcome. The intubation rate was 27% (95%CI, 19 to 37%) in the 870 patients treated with APP, as compared to 30% (95%CI, 20 to 42%) in the 852 patients treated with usual care (p=0.71). Conclusions: On the basis of the available evidence, it is not possible to demonstrate efficacy of APP for patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory failure, as assessed by the need for invasive ventilation. Routine implementation of APP outside of a clinical trial is not supported by current evidence. Randomized controlled clinical studies are urgently needed to definitively assess the utility of APP in these patients. Registered on PROSPERO on August 3d, 2020, CRD42020201947.

6.
Lancet Respir Med ; 9(12): 1387-1395, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621129

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning has been reported to improve oxygenation for patients with COVID-19 in retrospective and observational studies, but whether it improves patient-centred outcomes is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of awake prone positioning to prevent intubation or death in patients with severe COVID-19 in a large-scale randomised trial. METHODS: In this prospective, a priori set up and defined, collaborative meta-trial of six randomised controlled open-label superiority trials, adults who required respiratory support with high-flow nasal cannula for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 were randomly assigned to awake prone positioning or standard care. Hospitals from six countries were involved: Canada, France, Ireland, Mexico, USA, Spain. Patients or their care providers were not masked to allocated treatment. The primary composite outcome was treatment failure, defined as the proportion of patients intubated or dying within 28 days of enrolment. The six trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04325906, NCT04347941, NCT04358939, NCT04395144, NCT04391140, and NCT04477655. FINDINGS: Between April 2, 2020 and Jan 26, 2021, 1126 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to awake prone positioning (n=567) or standard care (n=559). 1121 patients (excluding five who withdrew from the study) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Treatment failure occurred in 223 (40%) of 564 patients assigned to awake prone positioning and in 257 (46%) of 557 patients assigned to standard care (relative risk 0·86 [95% CI 0·75-0·98]). The hazard ratio (HR) for intubation was 0·75 (0·62-0·91), and the HR for mortality was 0·87 (0·68-1·11) with awake prone positioning compared with standard care within 28 days of enrolment. The incidence of prespecified adverse events was low and similar in both groups. INTERPRETATION: Awake prone positioning of patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 reduces the incidence of treatment failure and the need for intubation without any signal of harm. These results support routine awake prone positioning of patients with COVID-19 who require support with high-flow nasal cannula. FUNDING: Open AI inc, Rice Foundation, Projet Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique Interrégional, Appel d'Offre 2020, Groupement Interrégional de Recherche Clinique et d'Innovation Grand Ouest, Association pour la Promotion à Tours de la Réanimation Médicale, Fond de dotation du CHRU de Tours, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Ltd.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Patient Positioning , Prone Position , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , COVID-19/therapy , Canada , France , Humans , Ireland , Mexico , Prospective Studies , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain , Treatment Outcome , United States , Wakefulness
7.
Br J Anaesth ; 128(2): e97-e100, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1556064

ABSTRACT

With healthcare systems rapidly becoming overwhelmed and occupied by patients during a pandemic, effective and safe care for patients is easily compromised. During the course of the current pandemic, numerous treatment guidelines have been developed and published that have improved care for patients with COVID-19. Certain lessons have only been learned during the course of the outbreak, from which we can learn for future pandemics. This editorial aims to raise awareness about the importance of timely stockpiling of sufficient amounts of personal protection equipment and medications, adequate oxygen supplies, uninterrupted electricity, and fair locally adapted triage strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Civil Defense/methods , Mass Casualty Incidents/prevention & control , Triage/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Global Health , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment
9.
Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin (Engl Ed) ; 40(2): 71-77, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1536523

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In the context of community transmission of the virus, the impact of the pandemic on health-care systems, mainly on intensive care units (ICU), was expected to be devastating. Vall d'Hebron University Hospital (HUVH) implemented an unprecedented critical patient-care planning and management of resources. METHODS: We describe a cohort of critically ill patients during the first two months of the pandemic (from March 3, 2020, to May 2, 2020) in HUVH, Barcelona. In this manuscript, we report our previsions, strategies implemented, and the outcomes obtained. RESULTS: Three-thousand and thirty-three patients were admitted to the HUVH Critical Care Units. Throughout the study period, the proportion of patients on IMV or IMV and ECMO remained above 78%. Most patients were men (65%); the most common age group was 60-70 years. Twenty-three patients received ECMO, and eighteen were cannulated at another center and transferred to HUVH. At the end of the study, fourteen patients were successfully decannulated, three patients died, and the rest of the patients were still on ECMO. Eight pregnant women have been treated in the ICU, with a survival rate of 100%. The ICU mortality of patients younger than 60 years was 3.2%. The mean ICU stay of both survivors and nonsurvivors was 14 days. CONCLUSION: The adequate preparation for resource expansion for critically ill patients care, main challenges, and overall positive results can serve as a precedent for similar future scenarios.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Aged , Critical Illness , Female , Hospitals, University , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Pregnancy
10.
British journal of anaesthesia ; 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1516011

ABSTRACT

With healthcare systems rapidly becoming overwhelmed and occupied by patients during a pandemic, effective and safe care for patients is easily compromised. During the course of the current pandemic, numerous treatment guidelines have been developed and published that have improved care for patients with COVID-19. Certain lessons have only been learned during the course of the outbreak, from which we can learn for future pandemics. This editorial aims to raise awareness about the importance of timely stockpiling of sufficient amounts of personal protection equipment and medications, adequate oxygen supplies, uninterrupted electricity, and fair locally adapted triage strategies.

11.
Respir Care ; 2021 Jul 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1485303

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (APP) has been advocated to improve oxygenation and prevent intubation of patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This paper aims to synthesize the available evidence on the efficacy of APP. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of proportional outcomes from observational studies to compare intubation rate in patients treated with APP or with standard care. RESULTS: A total of 46 published and 4 unpublished observational studies that included 2,994 subjects were included, of which 921 were managed with APP and 870 were managed with usual care. APP was associated with significant improvement of oxygenation parameters in 381 cases of 19 studies that reported this outcome. Among the 41 studies assessing intubation rates (870 subjects treated with APP and 852 subjects treated with usual care), the intubation rate was 27% (95% CI 19-37%) as compared to 30% (95% CI 20-42%) (P = .71), even when duration of application, use of adjunctive respiratory assist device (high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive ventilation), and severity of oxygenation deficit were taken into account. There appeared to be a trend toward improved mortality when APP was compared with usual care (11% vs 22%), which was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: APP was associated with improvement of oxygenation but did not reduce the intubation rate in subjects with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19. This finding is limited by the high heterogeneity and the observational nature of included studies. Randomized controlled clinical studies are needed to definitively assess whether APP could improve key outcome such as intubation rate and mortality in these patients.

12.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 315, 2021 08 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1383659

ABSTRACT

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2021. Other selected articles can be found online at  https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2021 . Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from  https://link.springer.com/bookseries/8901 .


Subject(s)
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Patient Positioning/standards , Prone Position/physiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/methods , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/trends , Humans , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Patient Positioning/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/complications , Survival Analysis
14.
Chest ; 161(1): 121-129, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1272334

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, shortages of ventilators and ICU beds overwhelmed health care systems. Whether early tracheostomy reduces the duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU stay is controversial. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can failure-free day outcomes focused on ICU resources help to decide the optimal timing of tracheostomy in overburdened health care systems during viral epidemics? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who had undergone tracheostomy in 15 Spanish ICUs during the surge, when ICU occupancy modified clinician criteria to perform tracheostomy in Patients with COVID-19. We compared ventilator-free days at 28 and 60 days and ICU- and hospital bed-free days at 28 and 60 days in propensity score-matched cohorts who underwent tracheostomy at different timings (≤ 7 days, 8-10 days, and 11-14 days after intubation). RESULTS: Of 1,939 patients admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia, 682 (35.2%) underwent tracheostomy, 382 (56%) within 14 days. Earlier tracheostomy was associated with more ventilator-free days at 28 days (≤ 7 days vs > 7 days [116 patients included in the analysis]: median, 9 days [interquartile range (IQR), 0-15 days] vs 3 days [IQR, 0-7 days]; difference between groups, 4.5 days; 95% CI, 2.3-6.7 days; 8-10 days vs > 10 days [222 patients analyzed]: 6 days [IQR, 0-10 days] vs 0 days [IQR, 0-6 days]; difference, 3.1 days; 95% CI, 1.7-4.5 days; 11-14 days vs > 14 days [318 patients analyzed]: 4 days [IQR, 0-9 days] vs 0 days [IQR, 0-2 days]; difference, 3 days; 95% CI, 2.1-3.9 days). Except hospital bed-free days at 28 days, all other end points were better with early tracheostomy. INTERPRETATION: Optimal timing of tracheostomy may improve patient outcomes and may alleviate ICU capacity strain during the COVID-19 pandemic without increasing mortality. Tracheostomy within the first work on a ventilator in particular may improve ICU availability.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Intensive Care Units , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Tracheostomy , Aged , Bed Occupancy/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies , Spain/epidemiology
15.
Chest ; 159(4): 1426-1436, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-921554

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sigh is a cyclic brief recruitment maneuver: previous physiologic studies showed that its use could be an interesting addition to pressure support ventilation to improve lung elastance, decrease regional heterogeneity, and increase release of surfactant. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is the clinical application of sigh during pressure support ventilation (PSV) feasible? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter noninferiority randomized clinical trial on adult intubated patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure or ARDS undergoing PSV. Patients were randomized to the no-sigh group and treated by PSV alone, or to the sigh group, treated by PSV plus sigh (increase in airway pressure to 30 cm H2O for 3 s once per minute) until day 28 or death or successful spontaneous breathing trial. The primary end point of the study was feasibility, assessed as noninferiority (5% tolerance) in the proportion of patients failing assisted ventilation. Secondary outcomes included safety, physiologic parameters in the first week from randomization, 28-day mortality, and ventilator-free days. RESULTS: Two-hundred and fifty-eight patients (31% women; median age, 65 [54-75] years) were enrolled. In the sigh group, 23% of patients failed to remain on assisted ventilation vs 30% in the no-sigh group (absolute difference, -7%; 95% CI, -18% to 4%; P = .015 for noninferiority). Adverse events occurred in 12% vs 13% in the sigh vs no-sigh group (P = .852). Oxygenation was improved whereas tidal volume, respiratory rate, and corrected minute ventilation were lower over the first 7 days from randomization in the sigh vs no-sigh group. There was no significant difference in terms of mortality (16% vs 21%; P = .337) and ventilator-free days (22 [7-26] vs 22 [3-25] days; P = .300) for the sigh vs no-sigh group. INTERPRETATION: Among hypoxemic intubated ICU patients, application of sigh was feasible and without increased risk. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03201263; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.


Subject(s)
Positive-Pressure Respiration , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Aged , Female , Humans , Intubation, Intratracheal , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/physiopathology , Respiratory Insufficiency/physiopathology , Respiratory Mechanics
16.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 104(5): 1676-1686, 2021 Mar 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1128113

ABSTRACT

Non-intubated patients with acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 could benefit from awake proning. Awake proning is an attractive intervention in settings with limited resources, as it comes with no additional costs. However, awake proning remains poorly used probably because of unfamiliarity and uncertainties regarding potential benefits and practical application. To summarize evidence for benefit and to develop a set of pragmatic recommendations for awake proning in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, focusing on settings where resources are limited, international healthcare professionals from high and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with known expertise in awake proning were invited to contribute expert advice. A growing number of observational studies describe the effects of awake proning in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in whom hypoxemia is refractory to simple measures of supplementary oxygen. Awake proning improves oxygenation in most patients, usually within minutes, and reduces dyspnea and work of breathing. The effects are maintained for up to 1 hour after turning back to supine, and mostly disappear after 6-12 hours. In available studies, awake proning was not associated with a reduction in the rate of intubation for invasive ventilation. Awake proning comes with little complications if properly implemented and monitored. Pragmatic recommendations including indications and contraindications were formulated and adjusted for resource-limited settings. Awake proning, an adjunctive treatment for hypoxemia refractory to supplemental oxygen, seems safe in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory failure. We provide pragmatic recommendations including indications and contraindications for the use of awake proning in LMICs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Hypoxia/therapy , Prone Position/physiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Acute Disease , Continuous Positive Airway Pressure , Health Personnel , Humans , Wakefulness
18.
BMJ Open ; 10(11): e041520, 2020 11 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-920921

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Prone positioning (PP) is an effective first-line intervention to treat patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, as it improves gas exchanges and reduces mortality. The use of PP in awake spontaneous breathing patients with ARDS secondary to COVID-19 was reported to improve oxygenation in few retrospective trials with small sample size. High-level evidence of awake PP for hypoxaemic patients with COVID-19 patients is still lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The protocol of this meta-trial is a prospective collaborative individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled open label superiority trials. This design is particularly adapted to a rapid scientific response in the pandemic setting. It will take place in multiple sites, among others in USA, Canada, Ireland, France and Spain. Patients will be followed up for 28 days. Patients will be randomised to receive whether awake PP and nasal high flow therapy or standard medical treatment and nasal high flow therapy. Primary outcome is defined as the occurrence rate of tracheal intubation or death up to day 28. An interim analysis plan has been set up on aggregated data from the participating research groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approvals were obtained in all participating countries. Results of the meta-trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Each randomised controlled trial was registered individually, as follows: NCT04325906, NCT04347941, NCT04358939, NCT04395144 and NCT04391140.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Hypoxia/therapy , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Patient Positioning/methods , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Prone Position , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Cannula , Equivalence Trials as Topic , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Pandemics , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Wakefulness
19.
Eur Respir Rev ; 29(157)2020 Sep 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-835811

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2. Consensus suggestions can standardise care, thereby improving outcomes and facilitating future research. METHODS: An International Task Force was composed and agreement regarding courses of action was measured using the Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations and Evidence (CORE) process. 70% agreement was necessary to make a consensus suggestion. RESULTS: The Task Force made consensus suggestions to treat patients with acute COVID-19 pneumonia with remdesivir and dexamethasone but suggested against hydroxychloroquine except in the context of a clinical trial; these are revisions of prior suggestions resulting from the interim publication of several randomised trials. It also suggested that COVID-19 patients with a venous thromboembolic event be treated with therapeutic anticoagulant therapy for 3 months. The Task Force was unable to reach sufficient agreement to yield consensus suggestions for the post-hospital care of COVID-19 survivors. The Task Force fell one vote shy of suggesting routine screening for depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The Task Force addressed questions related to pharmacotherapy in patients with COVID-19 and the post-hospital care of survivors, yielding several consensus suggestions. Management options for which there is insufficient agreement to formulate a suggestion represent research priorities.


Subject(s)
Advisory Committees/organization & administration , Betacoronavirus , Consensus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , International Cooperation , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pulmonary Medicine/standards , Societies, Medical , COVID-19 , Europe , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
20.
Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin (Engl Ed) ; 2020 Sep 08.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-813567

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In the context of community transmission of the virus, the impact of the pandemic on health-care systems, mainly on intensive care units (ICU), was expected to be devastating. Vall d́Hebron University Hospital (HUVH) implemented an unprecedented critical patient-care planning and management of resources. METHODS: We describe a cohort of critically ill patients during the first two months of the pandemic (from March 3, 2020, to May 2, 2020) in HUVH, Barcelona. In this manuscript, we report our previsions, strategies implemented, and the outcomes obtained. RESULTS: Three-thousand and thirty-three patients were admitted to the HUVH Critical Care Units. Throughout the study period, the proportion of patients on IMV or IMV and ECMO remained above 78%. Most patients were men (65%); the most common age group was 60-70 years. Twenty-three patients received ECMO, and eighteen were cannulated at another center and transferred to HUVH. At the end of the study, fourteen patients were successfully decannulated, three patients died, and the rest of the patients were still on ECMO. Eight pregnant women have been treated in the ICU, with a survival rate of 100%. The ICU mortality of patients younger than 60 years was 3.2%. The mean ICU stay of both survivors and nonsurvivors was 14 days. CONCLUSION: The adequate preparation for resource expansion for critically ill patients care, main challenges, and overall positive results can serve as a precedent for similar future scenarios.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL