Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 170
Filter
1.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 350, 2022 11 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2115659

ABSTRACT

Spontaneous pneumomediastinum (SP) has been described early during the COVID-19 pandemic in large series of patients with severe pneumonia, but most patients were receiving invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) at the time of SP diagnosis. In this retrospective multicenter observational study, we aimed at describing the prevalence and outcomes of SP during severe COVID-19 with pneumonia before any IMV, to rule out mechanisms induced by IMV in the development of pneumomediastinum.Among 549 patients, 21 patients (4%) developed a SP while receiving non-invasive respiratory support, after a median of 6 days [4-12] from ICU admission. The proportion of patients requiring IMV was similar. However, the time to tracheal intubation was longer in patients with SP (6 days [5-13] vs. 2 days [1-4]; P = 0.00002), with a higher first-line use of non-invasive ventilation (n = 11; 52% vs. n = 150; 28%; P = 0.02). The 21 patients who developed a SP had persisting signs of severe lung disease and respiratory failure with lower ROX index between ICU admission and occurrence of SP (3.94 [3.15-5.55] at admission vs. 3.25 [2.73-4.02] the day preceding SP; P = 0.1), which may underline potential indirect signals of Patient-self inflicted lung injury (P-SILI).In this series of critically ill COVID-19 patients, the prevalence of SP without IMV was not uncommon, affecting 4% of patients. They received more often vasopressors and had a longer ICU length of stay, as compared with their counterparts. One pathophysiological mechanism may potentially be carried out by P-SILI related to a prolonged respiratory failure, as underlined by a delayed use of IMV and the evolution of the ROX index between ICU admission and the day preceding SP.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Mediastinal Emphysema , Respiratory Insufficiency , Humans , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/therapy , Pandemics , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Mediastinal Emphysema/epidemiology , Mediastinal Emphysema/therapy , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies
3.
Turk J Med Sci ; 52(5): 1495-1503, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2091803

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury is strongly associated with mortality in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, age-related risk factors for acute kidney injury are not clear yet. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the effects of clinical factors on acute kidney injury development in an elderly COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Critically ill patients (≥65years) with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit were included in the study. Primary outcome of the study was the rate of acute kidney injury, and secondary outcome was to define the effect of frailty and other risk factors on acute kidney injury development and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients (median age 76 years, 68.2% male) were assessed. Patients were divided into two groups as follows: acute kidney injury (n = 84) and nonacute kidney injury (n = 48). Frailty incidence (48.8% vs. 8.3%, p < 0.01) was higher in the acute kidney injury group. In multivariate analysis, frailty (OR, 3.32, 95% CI, 1.67-6.56), the use of vasopressors (OR, 3.06 95% CI, 1.16-8.08), and the increase in respiratory support therapy (OR, 2.60, 95% CI, 1.01-6.6) were determined to be independent risk factors for acute kidney injury development. The mortality rate was found to be 97.6% in patients with acute kidney injury. DISCUSSION: Frailty is a risk factor for acute kidney injury in geriatric patients with severe COVID-19. The evaluation of geriatric patients based on a frailty scale before intensive care unit admission may improve outcomes.


Subject(s)
Acute Kidney Injury , COVID-19 , Frailty , Humans , Male , Aged , Female , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Frailty/complications , Frailty/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , Intensive Care Units
4.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 319, 2022 10 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2079528

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to describe the epidemiology and outcomes of hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HABSIs) between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 critically ill patients. METHODS: We used data from the Eurobact II study, a prospective observational multicontinental cohort study on HABSI treated in ICU. For the current analysis, we selected centers that included both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 critically ill patients. We performed descriptive statistics between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 in terms of patients' characteristics, source of infection and microorganism distribution. We studied the association between COVID-19 status and mortality using multivariable fragility Cox models. RESULTS: A total of 53 centers from 19 countries over the 5 continents were eligible. Overall, 829 patients (median age 65 years [IQR 55; 74]; male, n = 538 [64.9%]) were treated for a HABSI. Included patients comprised 252 (30.4%) COVID-19 and 577 (69.6%) non-COVID-19 patients. The time interval between hospital admission and HABSI was similar between both groups. Respiratory sources (40.1 vs. 26.0%, p < 0.0001) and primary HABSI (25.4% vs. 17.2%, p = 0.006) were more frequent in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 patients had more often enterococcal (20.5% vs. 9%) and Acinetobacter spp. (18.8% vs. 13.6%) HABSIs. Bacteremic COVID-19 patients had an increased mortality hazard ratio (HR) versus non-COVID-19 patients (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.49-2.45). CONCLUSIONS: We showed that the epidemiology of HABSI differed between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. Enterococcal HABSI predominated in COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 patients with HABSI had elevated risk of mortality. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.org number NCT03937245 . Registered 3 May 2019.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cross Infection , Sepsis , Aged , Humans , Male , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units , Sepsis/epidemiology
5.
Int J Med Inform ; 164: 104807, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2076190

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: COVID-19 disease frequently affects the lungs leading to bilateral viral pneumonia, progressing in some cases to severe respiratory failure requiring ICU admission and mechanical ventilation. Risk stratification at ICU admission is fundamental for resource allocation and decision making. We assessed performances of three machine learning approaches to predict mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU using early operative data from the Lombardy ICU Network. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from Lombardy ICU network. A logistic regression, balanced logistic regression and random forest were built to predict survival on two datasets: dataset A included patient demographics, medications before admission and comorbidities, and dataset B included respiratory data the first day in ICU. RESULTS: Models were trained on 1484 patients on four outcomes (7/14/21/28 days) and reached the greatest predictive performance at 28 days (F1-score: 0.75 and AUC: 0.80). Age, number of comorbidities and male gender were strongly associated with mortality. On dataset B, mode of ventilatory assistance at ICU admission and fraction of inspired oxygen were associated with an increase in prediction performances. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning techniques might be useful in emergency phases to reach good predictive performances maintaining interpretability to gain knowledge on complex situations and enhance patient management and resources.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Supervised Machine Learning
6.
Respir Res ; 23(1): 256, 2022 Sep 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2038756

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic in The Netherlands, critically ill ventilated COVID-19 patients were transferred not only between hospitals by ambulance but also by the Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS). To date, little is known about the physiological impact of helicopter transport on critically ill patients and COVID-19 patients in particular. This study was conducted to explore the impact of inter-hospital helicopter transfer on vital signs of mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19, with special focus on take-off, midflight, and landing. METHODS: All ventilated critically ill COVID-19 patients who were transported between April 2020 and June 2021 by the Dutch 'Lifeliner 5' HEMS team and who were fully monitored, including noninvasive cardiac output, were included in this study. Three 10-min timeframes (take-off, midflight and landing) were defined for analysis. Continuous data on the vital parameters heart rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, arterial blood pressure, end-tidal CO2 and noninvasive cardiac output using electrical cardiometry were collected and stored at 1-min intervals. Data were analyzed for differences over time within the timeframes using one-way analysis of variance. Significant differences were checked for clinical relevance. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included in the analysis. During take-off, an increase was noticed in cardiac output (from 6.7 to 8.2 L min-1; P < 0.0001), which was determined by a decrease in systemic vascular resistance (from 1071 to 739 dyne·s·cm-5, P < 0.0001) accompanied by an increase in stroke volume (from 88.8 to 113.7 mL, P < 0.0001). Other parameters were unchanged during take-off and mid-flight. During landing, cardiac output and stroke volume slightly decreased (from 8.0 to 6.8 L min-1, P < 0.0001 and from 110.1 to 84.4 mL, P < 0.0001, respectively), and total systemic vascular resistance increased (P < 0.0001). Though statistically significant, the found changes were small and not clinically relevant to the medical status of the patients as judged by the attending physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Interhospital helicopter transfer of ventilated intensive care patients with COVID-19 can be performed safely and does not result in clinically relevant changes in vital signs.


Subject(s)
Air Ambulances , COVID-19 , Aircraft , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/therapy , Carbon Dioxide , Cardiac Output/physiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Pandemics , Vital Signs
7.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 264, 2022 09 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2009442

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 ARDS shares features with non-COVID ARDS but also demonstrates distinct physiological differences. Despite a lack of strong evidence, prone positioning has been advocated as a key therapy for COVID-19 ARDS. The effects of prone position in critically ill patients with COVID-19 are not fully understood, nor is the optimal time of initiation defined. In this nationwide cohort study, we aimed to investigate the association between early initiation of prone position and mortality in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients with low oxygenation on ICU admission. METHODS: Using the Swedish Intensive Care Registry (SIR), all Swedish ICU patients ≥ 18 years of age with COVID-19 admitted between March 2020, and April 2021 were identified. A study-population of patients with PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 20 kPa on ICU admission and receiving invasive mechanical ventilation within 24 h from ICU admission was generated. In this study-population, the association between early use of prone position (within 24 h from intubation) and 30-day mortality was estimated using univariate and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: The total study cohort included 6350 ICU patients with COVID-19, of whom 46.4% were treated with prone position ventilation. Overall, 30-day mortality was 24.3%. In the study-population of 1714 patients with lower admission oxygenation (PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤ 20 kPa), the utilization of early prone increased from 8.5% in March 2020 to 48.1% in April 2021. The crude 30-day mortality was 27.2% compared to 30.2% in patients not receiving early prone positioning. We found no significant association between early use of prone positioning and survival. CONCLUSIONS: During the first three waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, almost half of the patients in Sweden were treated with prone position ventilation. We found no association between early use of prone positioning and survival in patients on mechanical ventilation with severe hypoxemia on ICU admission. To fully elucidate the effect and timing of prone position ventilation in critically ill patients with COVID-19 further studies are desirable.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , COVID-19/therapy , Cohort Studies , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Pandemics , Prevalence , Prone Position , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects
8.
Iran J Med Sci ; 47(4): 291-299, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1998156

ABSTRACT

In December 2019, the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outbreak emerged in Wuhan, China. The World Health Organization officially declared it a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Reports indicated that the associated mortality of the infection is quite higher in the elderly, individuals with specific comorbidities (such as diabetes mellitus), and generally the ones with a compromised immune system. A cohort study in Wuhan, China, reported a dysregulated immune response in 452 patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. As a result of this suppressed immune response, an increase in neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, T lymphopenia, and a decrease in CD4+ T cells were all common laboratory findings, especially in severe cases. On the other hand, there is substantial evidence of T cell exhaustion in critically ill patients. Accordingly, the immune system seems to play an important role in the prognosis and pathogenesis of the disease. Therefore, this study aims to review the evidence on the immune response dysregulation in COVID-19 infection and the potential role of immunoregulatory treatments such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, interferons, and CD200 inhibitors in altering disease prognosis, especially in critically ill patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Cohort Studies , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 244, 2022 08 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1978786

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A greater understanding of disease heterogeneity may facilitate precision medicine for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Previous work identified four distinct clinical phenotypes associated with outcome and treatment responses in non-COVID-19 sepsis patients, but it is unknown if and how these phenotypes are recapitulated in COVID-19 sepsis patients. METHODS: We applied the four non-COVID-19 sepsis phenotypes to a total of 52,274 critically ill patients, comprising two cohorts of COVID-19 sepsis patients (admitted before and after the introduction of dexamethasone as standard treatment) and three non-COVID-19 sepsis cohorts (non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia sepsis, bacterial pneumonia sepsis, and bacterial sepsis of non-pulmonary origin). Differences in proportions of phenotypes and their associated mortality were determined across these cohorts. RESULTS: Phenotype distribution was highly similar between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia sepsis cohorts, whereas the proportion of patients with the δ-phenotype was greater in both bacterial sepsis cohorts compared to the viral sepsis cohorts. The introduction of dexamethasone treatment was associated with an increased proportion of patients with the δ-phenotype (6% vs. 11% in the pre- and post-dexamethasone COVID-19 cohorts, respectively, p < 0.001). Across the cohorts, the α-phenotype was associated with the most favorable outcome, while the δ-phenotype was associated with the highest mortality. Survival of the δ-phenotype was markedly higher following the introduction of dexamethasone (60% vs 41%, p < 0.001), whereas no relevant differences in survival were observed for the other phenotypes among COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Classification of critically ill COVID-19 patients into clinical phenotypes may aid prognostication, prediction of treatment efficacy, and facilitation of personalized medicine.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , Pneumonia , Sepsis , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Humans , Phenotype , SARS-CoV-2
10.
J Laryngol Otol ; 136(12): 1278-1283, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1972483

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Post-extubation dysphagia in critically ill patients is known to affect about 18 per cent of mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit patients. This study investigated the incidence of post-extubation dysphagia in adult intensive care unit patients with coronavirus disease 2019. METHOD: This study was a retrospective analysis of consecutive intensive care unit patients prospectively screened for dysphagia. Systematic screening of all extubated intensive care unit patients at our tertiary centre was performed using the Bernese intensive care unit dysphagia algorithm. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of post-extubation dysphagia. RESULTS: A total of 231 critically ill adult coronavirus disease 2019 positive patients were included, and 81 patients remained in the final analysis after exclusion criteria were applied (e.g. patients transferred). Dysphagia screening positivity was 25 of 81 (30.9 per cent), with 28.2 per cent (22 of 78) having confirmed dysphagia by specialist examination within 24 hours (n = 3 lost to follow up). CONCLUSION: In this observational study, it was observed that the incidence of dysphagia in adult critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 patients was about 31 per cent (i.e. increased when compared with a historical pre-pandemic non-coronavirus disease 2019 intensive care unit cohort).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Deglutition Disorders , Humans , Adult , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Deglutition Disorders/diagnosis , Deglutition Disorders/epidemiology , Deglutition Disorders/etiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Incidence , Critical Care , Intensive Care Units
11.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 142, 2022 05 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1951298

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Critically ill COVID-19 patients may develop acute respiratory distress syndrome and the need for respiratory support, including mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit. Previous observational studies have suggested early tracheotomy to be advantageous. The aim of this parallel, multicentre, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the optimal timing of tracheotomy. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2-infected patients within the Region Västra Götaland of Sweden who needed intubation and mechanical respiratory support were included and randomly assigned to early tracheotomy (≤ 7 days after intubation) or late tracheotomy (≥ 10 days after intubation). The primary objective was to compare the total number of mechanical ventilation days between the groups. RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients (mean age 65 years, 79% males) were included. Seventy-two patients were assigned to early tracheotomy, and 78 were assigned to late tracheotomy. One hundred two patients (68%) underwent tracheotomy of whom sixty-one underwent tracheotomy according to the protocol. The overall median number of days in mechanical ventilation was 18 (IQR 9; 28), but no significant difference was found between the two treatment regimens in the intention-to-treat analysis (between-group difference: - 1.5 days (95% CI - 5.7 to 2.8); p = 0.5). A significantly reduced number of mechanical ventilation days was found in the early tracheotomy group during the per-protocol analysis (between-group difference: - 8.0 days (95% CI - 13.8 to - 2.27); p = 0.0064). The overall correlation between the timing of tracheotomy and days of mechanical ventilation was significant (Spearman's correlation: 0.39, p < 0.0001). The total death rate during intensive care was 32.7%, but no significant differences were found between the groups regarding survival, complications or adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The potential superiority of early tracheotomy when compared to late tracheotomy in critically ill patients with COVID-19 was not confirmed by the present randomized controlled trial but is a strategy that should be considered in selected cases where the need for MV for more than 14 days cannot be ruled out. Trial registration NCT04412356 , registered 05/24/2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Tracheotomy/methods , Treatment Outcome
12.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 217, 2022 07 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1938337

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Neurologic manifestations are increasingly reported in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Yet, data on prevalence, predictors and relevance for outcome of neurological manifestations in patients requiring intensive care are scarce. We aimed to characterize prevalence, risk factors and impact on outcome of neurologic manifestations in critically ill COVID-19 patients. METHODS: In the prospective, multicenter, observational registry study PANDEMIC (Pooled Analysis of Neurologic DisordErs Manifesting in Intensive care of COVID-19), we enrolled COVID-19 patients with neurologic manifestations admitted to 19 German intensive care units (ICU) between April 2020 and September 2021. We performed descriptive and explorative statistical analyses. Multivariable models were used to investigate factors associated with disorder categories and their underlying diagnoses as well as to identify predictors of outcome. RESULTS: Of the 392 patients included in the analysis, 70.7% (277/392) were male and the mean age was 65.3 (SD ± 3.1) years. During the study period, a total of 2681 patients with COVID-19 were treated at the ICUs of 15 participating centers. New neurologic disorders were identified in 350 patients, reported by these centers, suggesting a prevalence of COVID-19-associated neurologic disorders of 12.7% among COVID-19 ICU patients. Encephalopathy (46.2%; 181/392), cerebrovascular (41.0%; 161/392) and neuromuscular disorders (20.4%; 80/392) were the most frequent categories identified. Out of 35 cerebrospinal fluid analyses with reverse transcriptase PCR for SARS-COV-2, only 3 were positive. In-hospital mortality was 36.0% (140/389), and functional outcome (mRS 3 to 5) of surviving patients was poor at hospital discharge in 70.9% (161/227). Intracerebral hemorrhage (OR 6.2, 95% CI 2.5-14.9, p < 0.001) and acute ischemic stroke (OR 3.9, 95% CI 1.9-8.2, p < 0.001) were the strongest predictors of poor outcome among the included patients. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this well-characterized COVID-19 ICU cohort, that comprised 12.7% of all severe ill COVID-19 patients, neurologic manifestations increase mortality and morbidity. Since no reliable evidence of direct viral affection of the nervous system by COVID-19 could be found, these neurologic manifestations may for a great part be indirect para- or postinfectious sequelae of the infection or severe critical illness. Neurologic ICU complications should be actively searched for and treated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Cerebral Hemorrhage , Ischemic Stroke , Nervous System Diseases , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cerebral Hemorrhage/virology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Ischemic Stroke/virology , Male , Middle Aged , Nervous System Diseases/virology , Pandemics , Prospective Studies , Registries , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 58(7)2022 Jul 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1938902

ABSTRACT

Background and Objective: Bradycardia has been observed among patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and is suspected to be associated with poorer outcomes. Heart rate (HR) fluctuation has been found to be correlated with a greater mortality rate in critically ill patients. The association of bradycardia and HR fluctuation with the outcome of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has not been clarified. Therefore, we aimed to examine whether bradycardia and HR fluctuation correlated with poor outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19. Materials and Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis from a prospective data collection of patients admitted to the intensive care unit, between April and June 2021, at Chiang Mai University Hospital. Results: The results showed that 62 of 86 patients (72.1%) had bradycardia, defined by HR < 60 beats per minute (bpm). The number of patients with high HR fluctuation, defined as the difference in HR during admission ≥ 40 bpm, was greater among the bradycardia group than in the non-bradycardia group (70.9% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.015, respectively). The patients with bradycardia had greater levels of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP). In addition, a greater proportion of patients with bradycardia received interleukin-6 inhibitors and hemoperfusion as a rescue therapy than those with non-bradycardia. After adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, CRP, and mechanical ventilator; bradycardia and the high HR fluctuation were significantly associated with a longer length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU-LOS), with adjusted risk ratios of 2.67, 95% CI; 1.02, 6.94, p = 0.045 and 2.88, 95% CI; 1.22, 6.78, p = 0.016, respectively. Conclusion: We found that bradycardia and a high heart rate fluctuation were associated with a poorer ICU outcome in terms of longer ICU-LOS among the patients with severe COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/complications , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Heart Rate , Humans , Intensive Care Units , SARS-CoV-2
14.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 19(7): 1158-1168, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1923731

ABSTRACT

Rationale: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a dramatic increase in the number of survivors of critical illness. These survivors are at increased risk for physical, psychological, and cognitive impairments known collectively as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS). Little is known about the prevalence of PICS in COVID-19 survivors. Objectives: To report the prevalence of physical, psychological, and cognitive impairment among COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) survivors receiving follow-up care in an ICU recovery clinic, to assess for associations between PICS and ICU-related factors, and to compare the cohort of ICU survivors who attended a post-ICU clinic with a cohort of ICU survivors who did not. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of COVID-19 ICU survivors admitted from March to May 2020 who were subsequently seen in a post-ICU recovery clinic in New York City. We abstracted medical chart data on available clinical screening instruments for physical, psychological, and cognitive impairment. Associations between these outcomes and care-related variables were tested. Baseline characteristics and in-hospital treatments of the post-ICU clinic cohort were compared with those of COVID-19 ICU survivors from the same institution who were not seen in the post-ICU clinic. Results: Eighty-seven COVID-19 ICU survivors were seen in our post-ICU recovery clinic. The median age was 62 years, and 74% were male. The median length of hospitalization was 51 days, and the median length of ICU stay was 22 days. At the post-ICU follow-up visit, 29%, 21%, and 13% of patients reported clinically significant levels of depressive symptoms, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, respectively. Twenty-five percent had cognitive impairment. The overall prevalence of PICS was 90%. There were no associations between length of ICU stay, delirium, and exposure to benzodiazepines, steroids, or systemic paralytics with positive screening results for physical, psychological, or cognitive impairment. Baseline characteristics and ICU-related factors were similar in the cohort of COVID-19 ICU survivors who attended the ICU recovery clinic and those who did not. Conclusions: PICS is common in COVID-19 survivors. We did not find any association with length of ICU stay or the use of benzodiazepines, steroids, or paralytics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Benzodiazepines , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Critical Care/methods , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/psychology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , New York City/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Survivors/psychology
15.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 199, 2022 07 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1916967

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It remains elusive how the characteristics, the course of disease, the clinical management and the outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) worldwide have changed over the course of the pandemic. METHODS: Prospective, observational registry constituted by 90 ICUs across 22 countries worldwide including patients with a laboratory-confirmed, critical presentation of COVID-19 requiring advanced organ support. Hierarchical, generalized linear mixed-effect models accounting for hospital and country variability were employed to analyse the continuous evolution of the studied variables over the pandemic. RESULTS: Four thousand forty-one patients were included from March 2020 to September 2021. Over this period, the age of the admitted patients (62 [95% CI 60-63] years vs 64 [62-66] years, p < 0.001) and the severity of organ dysfunction at ICU admission decreased (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment 8.2 [7.6-9.0] vs 5.8 [5.3-6.4], p < 0.001) and increased, while more female patients (26 [23-29]% vs 41 [35-48]%, p < 0.001) were admitted. The time span between symptom onset and hospitalization as well as ICU admission became longer later in the pandemic (6.7 [6.2-7.2| days vs 9.7 [8.9-10.5] days, p < 0.001). The PaO2/FiO2 at admission was lower (132 [123-141] mmHg vs 101 [91-113] mmHg, p < 0.001) but showed faster improvements over the initial 5 days of ICU stay in late 2021 compared to early 2020 (34 [20-48] mmHg vs 70 [41-100] mmHg, p = 0.05). The number of patients treated with steroids and tocilizumab increased, while the use of therapeutic anticoagulation presented an inverse U-shaped behaviour over the course of the pandemic. The proportion of patients treated with high-flow oxygen (5 [4-7]% vs 20 [14-29], p < 0.001) and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (14 [11-18]% vs 24 [17-33]%, p < 0.001) throughout the pandemic increased concomitant to a decrease in invasive mechanical ventilation (82 [76-86]% vs 74 [64-82]%, p < 0.001). The ICU mortality (23 [19-26]% vs 17 [12-25]%, p < 0.001) and length of stay (14 [13-16] days vs 11 [10-13] days, p < 0.001) decreased over 19 months of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Characteristics and disease course of critically ill COVID-19 patients have continuously evolved, concomitant to the clinical management, throughout the pandemic leading to a younger, less severely ill ICU population with distinctly different clinical, pulmonary and inflammatory presentations than at the onset of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Registries
16.
Emerg Med Australas ; 34(5): 822-824, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1909283

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the sensitivity of the Interagency Integrated Triage Tool to identify severe and critical illness among adult patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective observational study conducted at Port Moresby General Hospital ED during a three-month Delta surge. RESULTS: Among 387 eligible patients with COVID-19, 63 were diagnosed with severe or critical illness. Forty-seven were allocated a high acuity triage category, equating to a sensitivity of 74.6% (95% CI 62.1-84.7) and a negative predictive value of 92.7% (95% CI 88.4-95.8). CONCLUSION: In a resource-constrained context, the tool demonstrated reasonable sensitivity to detect severe and critical COVID-19, comparable with its reported performance for other urgent conditions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Triage , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital , Humans , Pandemics , Papua New Guinea/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
17.
Med Sci (Basel) ; 10(2)2022 06 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1884272

ABSTRACT

The rate of venous thromboembolism in COVID-19 patients has been reported to be 30% (deep vein thrombosis 20% and pulmonary embolism 18%). This has been shown to be higher in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Prophylactic anticoagulation may be sufficient at ward level, but not in intensive care. A retrospective chart review was undertaken in a large university hospital. The review included 276 patients from COVID-19 Wave 1, COVID-19 Wave 2, influenza, and community-acquired pneumonia groups. The timeframe included patients admitted between 23 February 2014 and 12 May 2021. Clinical characteristics, outcomes, blood results, rates of venous thromboembolism, and anticoagulation status were recorded. The incidence of venous thromboembolism in COVID-19 Wave 1, COVID-19 Wave 2, influenza, and community-acquired pneumonia was 10.91%, 13.69%, 13.33%, and 6.81%, respectively (p = 0.481). The incidence of pulmonary embolism was 7.27%, 10.95%, 3.33%, and 5.68%, respectively (p = 0.350). The incidence of deep vein thrombosis was 5.45%, 5.48%, 10.00%, and 1.14%, respectively (p = 0.117). Although most patients were prophylactically anticoagulated, venous thromboembolism still occurred. Venous thromboembolism remains an important differential to consider in critically ill COVID-19 patients. The current literature does not advise therapeutic anticoagulation for thromboprophylaxis in the ICU.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Pulmonary Embolism , Venous Thromboembolism , Venous Thrombosis , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Influenza, Human/complications , Influenza, Human/drug therapy , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Pulmonary Embolism/epidemiology , Pulmonary Embolism/etiology , Pulmonary Embolism/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Venous Thromboembolism/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & control , Venous Thrombosis/epidemiology , Venous Thrombosis/etiology , Venous Thrombosis/prevention & control
18.
Crit Care Med ; 50(6): 955-963, 2022 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1883053

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: As the pandemic advances, the interest in the long-lasting consequences of COVID-19 increases. However, a few studies have explored patient-centered outcomes in critical care survivors. We aimed to investigate frailty and disability transitions in COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: University hospital in Sao Paulo. PATIENTS: Survivors of COVID-19 ICU admissions. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We assessed frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). We also evaluated 15 basic, instrumental, and mobility activities. Baseline frailty and disability were defined by clinical conditions 2-4 weeks before COVID-19, and post-COVID-19 was characterized 90 days (day 90) after hospital discharge. We used alluvial flow diagrams to visualize transitions in frailty status, Venn diagrams to describe the overlap between frailty and disabilities in activities of daily living, and linear mixed models to explore the occurrence of new disabilities following critical care in COVID-19. We included 428 participants with a mean age of 64 years, 57% males, and a median Simplified Acute Physiology Score-3 score of 59. Overall, 14% were frail at baseline. We found that 124/394 participants (31%) were frail at day 90, 70% of whom were previously non-frail. The number of disabilities also increased (mean difference, 2.46; 95% CI, 2.06-2.86), mainly in participants who were non-frail before COVID-19. Higher pre-COVID-19 CFS scores were independently associated with new-onset disabilities. At day 90, 135 patients (34%) were either frail or disabled. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty and disability were more frequent 90 days after hospital discharge compared with baseline in COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. Our results show that most COVID-19 critical care survivors transition to poorer health status, highlighting the importance of long-term medical follow-up for this population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic , Frailty , Activities of Daily Living , Brazil , Critical Care , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Female , Frailty/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient-Centered Care , Prospective Studies , Survivors
19.
Crit Care ; 26(1): 140, 2022 05 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1849767

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia is defined as age-related loss of muscle mass, strength, and/or function in the context of aging. Mechanical ventilation (MV) is one of the most frequently used critical care technologies in critically ill patients. The prevalence of preexisting sarcopenia and the clinical impact of its prognostic value on patients with MV are unclear. This review sought to identify the prevalence and prognostic value of preexisting sarcopenia on MV patient health outcomes. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library and were searched for all articles published as of December 2021. The prevalence of sarcopenia was determined using the authors' definitions from the original studies. Comparisons were made between patients who did and did not have sarcopenia for prognostic outcomes, including mortality, the number of days of MV, the length of intensive care unit stay, and the length of hospital stay. Odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used for pooled analyses of the relationships between sarcopenia and prognostic outcomes. RESULTS: The initial search identified 1333 studies, 17 of which met the eligibility criteria for the quantitative analysis, including 3582 patients. The pooled prevalence was 43.0% (95% CI 34.0-51.0%; I2 = 96.7%). The pooled analyses showed that sarcopenia was related to increased mortality (OR 2.13; 95% CI 1.70, 2.67; I2 = 45.0%), longer duration of MV (MD = 1.22; 95% CI 0.39, 2.05; I2 = 97.0%), longer days of ICU stay (MD = 1.31; 95% CI 0.43, 2.19; I2 = 97.0%), and hospital stay (MD 2.73; 95% CI 0.58, 4.88; I2 = 98.0%) in patients with MV. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of sarcopenia is relatively high in patients with MV, and it will have a negative impact on the prognosis of patients. However, further, large-scale, high-quality prospective cohort studies are required.


Subject(s)
Respiration, Artificial , Sarcopenia , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Length of Stay , Prevalence , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Sarcopenia/diagnosis , Sarcopenia/epidemiology
20.
Air Med J ; 41(3): 323-325, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1850582

ABSTRACT

We report on the international retrieval of a critically ill, ventilated, coronavirus disease 2019-positive patient from Dili, East Timor, into the intensive care unit of the Royal Darwin Hospital in Australia. The patient had severe respiratory failure, and the medical team in Dili was struggling to maintain adequate oxygenation with a fraction of inspired oxygen of 1 most of the time. This occurred during an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 in East Timor, placing strain on the local health system. Therefore, it was decided to transfer the patient to Australia. Given the closed international borders of Australia, organization of the retrieval and infection control measures were challenging and are described in the article. We discuss the need for a pathway to retrieve critically ill patients into a well-resourced country during a pandemic and the importance of public health measures including a robust vaccination program.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , COVID-19/therapy , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL