A randomised pilot feasibility study of eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing recent traumatic episode protocol, to improve psychological recovery following intensive care admission for COVID-19

Background: Approximately 50% of intensive care survivors experience persistent psychological symptoms. Eye-movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) is a widely recommended trauma-focussed psychological therapy, which has not been investigated systematically in a cohort of intensive care survivors: We therefore conducted a randomised pilot feasibility study of EMDR, using the Recent Traumatic Episode Protocol (R-TEP), to prevent psychological distress in intensive care survivors. Findings will determine whether it would be possible to conduct a fully-powered clinical effectiveness trial and inform trial design. Method: We aimed to recruit 26 patients who had been admitted to intensive care for over 24 h with COVID-19 infection. Consenting participants were randomised (1:1) to receive either usual care plus remotely delivered EMDR R-TEP or usual care alone (controls). The primary outcome was feasibility. We also report factors related to safety and symptom changes in post-traumatic stress disorder, (PTSD) anxiety and depression. Results: We approached 51 eligible patients, with 26 (51%) providing consent. Intervention adherence (sessions offered/sessions completed) was 83%, and 23/26 participants completed all study procedures. There were no attributable adverse events. Between baseline and 6-month follow-up, mean change in PTSD score was −8 (SD = 10.5) in the intervention group versus +0.75 (SD = 15.2) in controls (p = 0.126). There were no significant changes to anxiety or depression. Conclusion: Remotely delivered EMDR R-TEP met pre-determined feasibility and safety objectives. Whilst we achieved group separation in PTSD symptom change, we have identified a number of protocol refinements that would improve the design of a fully powered, multi-centre randomised controlled trial, consistent with currently recommended rehabilitation clinical pathways. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04455360.

Caring for COVID-19 patients through a pandemic in the intensive care setting: A narrative review.

Since the declaration of the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic, health systems/ health-care-workers globally have been overwhelmed by a vast number of COVID-19 related hospitalizations and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. During the early stages of the pandemic, the lack of formalized evidence-based guidelines in all aspects of patient management was a significant challenge. Coupled with a lack of effective pharmacotherapies resulted in unsatisfactory outcomes in ICU patients. The anticipated increment in ICU surge capacity was staggering, with almost every ICU worldwide being advised to increase their capacity to allow adequate care provision in response to multiple waves of the pandemic. This increase in surge capacity required advanced planning and reassessments at every stage, taking advantage of experienced gained in combination with emerging evidence. In University Hospital Southampton General Intensive Care Unit (GICU), despite the initial lack of national and international guidance, we enhanced our ICU capacity and developed local guidance on all aspects of care to address the rapid demand from the increasing COVID-19 admissions. The main element of this success was a multidisciplinary team approach intertwined with equipment and infrastructural reorganization. This narrative review provides an insight into the approach adopted by our center to manage patients with COVID-19 critical illness, exploring the initial planning process, including contingency preparations to accommodate (360% capacity increment) and adaptation of our management pathways as more evidence emerged throughout the pandemic to provide the most appropriate levels of care to our patients. We hope our experience will benefit other intensive care units worldwide. This article is categorized under: Infectious Diseases > Genetics/Genomics/Epigenetics.

Improving physical function of patients following intensive care unit admission (EMPRESS): protocol of a randomised controlled feasibility trial.

INTRODUCTION: Physical rehabilitation delivered early following admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) has the potential to improve short-term and long-term outcomes. The use of supine cycling together with other rehabilitation techniques has potential as a method of introducing rehabilitation earlier in the patient journey. The aim of the study is to determine the feasibility of delivering the designed protocol of a randomised clinical trial comparing a protocolised early rehabilitation programme including cycling with usual care. This feasibility study will inform a larger multicentre study. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 90 acute care medical patients from two mixed medical-surgical ICUs will be recruited. We will include ventilated patients within 72 hours of initiation of mechanical ventilation and expected to be ventilated a further 48 hours or more. Patients will receive usual care or usual care plus two 30 min rehabilitation sessions 5 days/week.Feasibility outcomes are (1) recruitment of one to two patients per month per site; (2) protocol fidelity with >75% of patients commencing interventions within 72 hours of mechanical ventilation, with >70% interventions delivered; and (3) blinded outcome measures recorded at three time points in >80% of patients. Secondary outcomes are (1) strength and function, the Physical Function ICU Test-scored measured on ICU discharge; (2) hospital length of stay; and (3) mental health and physical ability at 3 months using the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2. An economic analysis using hospital health services data reported with an embedded health economic study will collect and assess economic and quality of life data including the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales core, the Euroqol-5 Dimension-5 Level and the Impact of Event Score. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has ethical approval from the South Central Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee (19/SC/0016). All amendments will be approved by this committee. An independent trial monitoring committee is overseeing the study. Results will be made available to critical care survivors, their caregivers, the critical care societies and other researchers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03771014.

CovEMERALD: Assessing the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of remotely delivered Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing following Covid-19 related critical illness: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Primary Objective: To determine the feasibility of delivering a protocolised, remote, online, Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR) intervention, within 12-weeks of hospital discharge, for adult survivors of Covid-19 related critical illness. Secondary objectives: To investigate whether remotely delivered EMDR can improve psychological outcome following Covid-19 related critical illness, specifically Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), anxiety and depression. TRIAL DESIGN: This is a single centre, randomised controlled cohort feasibility trial. PARTICIPANTS: Participants will be recruited following discharge from the Intensive Care Unit at University Hospital Southampton, United Kingdom. Eligible patients will have received mechanical ventilation for a minimum of 24 hours, tested Covid-19 positive by polymerase chain reaction, will be over the age of 18 years and have the capacity to provide informed consent. Patients will be excluded if they have pre-existing cognitive impairment, pre-existing psychotic diagnosis or are not expected to survive post-hospital discharge. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Group one: patients in the control arm will receive their standard package of prescribed care, following discharge home from hospital. If they experience any adverse physical or psychological health-conditions, they will access care through the usual available channels. Group two: patients randomly allocated to the intervention arm will receive their standard package of prescribed care, following discharge home from hospital. In addition, they will be referred to the Intensive Psychological Therapies Service in Poole, United Kingdom. They will receive an online appointment within 12-weeks of discharge home from hospital. They will receive a maximum of eight, weekly sessions of EMDR, delivered by a trained psychological therapist, following the Recent Traumatic Episode Protocol (R-TEP). Appendices 1 and 2 of the attached trial protocol contain a detailed description of the R-TEP intervention, written in accordance with the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome from this trial will be feasibility. Feasibility will be determined by recruitment rates, expressed as a percentage of eligible patients approached, completion of the EMDR intervention, completion of final assessment at 6-months, incidence of attributable adverse events and protocol adherence by the psychological therapists. Secondary, exploratory outcomes will be assessed by comparison between the control and intervention groups at 6-months post-hospital discharge. Psychometric evaluation will consist of the PTSD Checklist-Civilian Version and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. In addition, we will assess health-related quality of life using the EQ5D-5L, physical activity using wrist worn activity monitors and nutritional state using the Council of Nutrition Appetite Questionnaire. RANDOMISATION: Consenting participants will be randomly allocated to intervention or usual care using an internet-based system (ALEATM). Participants will be randomly assigned, on a 1:1 ratio, to receive either standard care (control) or the standard care plus online EMDR R-TEP (Intervention) BLINDING (MASKING): Due to the nature of the intervention, participants cannot be blinded to group allocation. 6-month patient reported outcome measures will be completed using an online, electronic case report form. Group allocation will be masked during data analysis. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): This is a feasibility study, the results of which will be used to power a definitive study if appropriate. We anticipate a 25% mortality /loss to follow-up. A total of 26 patients will be recruited to this study, 13 patients in each arm. TRIAL STATUS: CovEMERALD opened to recruitment on 23rd September 2020 with an anticipated recruitment period of 6-months. We are using protocol version number 1.2 (1st June 2020) TRIAL REGISTRATION: CovEMERALD was registered on clinicaltrials.gov NCT04455360 on 2nd July 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines (Additional file 2).

Psychological impact of caring for critically ill patients during the Covid-19 pandemic and recommendations for staff support.

BACKGROUND: Reports of significant psychological stress among frontline healthcare workers are emerging from the Covid-19 outbreak in China. Concerningly, these match findings from previous infective outbreaks, which resulted in long-term psychological pathology. METHODS: During the Covid-19 pandemic, a multi-disciplinary cohort of Intensive Care staff completed an online survey of psychological well-being and rated the perceived usefulness of supportive interventions. RESULTS: Sixty per cent of invited staff responded. Seventy-seven per cent reported normal/high level of resilience. Thirty-two staff (35%) reported anxiety of a level at which formal psychological assessment is recommended. Sixteen (14%) staff members reported symptomology suggestive of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Multiple regression analysis revealed a significant relationship between job-related well-being, anxiety (p = 0.003) and PTSD (p = 0.005). Nurses were seven times more likely than doctors to score higher anxiety (OR = 6.8; p = 0.01). Preferred supportive interventions were adequate personal protective equipment, rest facilities and regular breaks. In the subgroup with high anxiety, psychological support was perceived as significantly more useful, with significant reductions reported for rest facilities and PPE. DISCUSSION: We report concerning levels of anxiety and post-traumatic stress symptomology among intensive care staff during the Covid-19 crisis, significantly impacting job-related well-being. Nurses are disproportionately affected. Overall, physiologically protective supportive interventions were preferred by staff; however, staff with established anxiety desire professional psychological help. Our findings match reports from SARS 2003 and China 2019. To mitigate long-term psychological consequences of caring for patients during a pandemic, easily deliverable protective strategies should be instigated, supported by formal and longer-term psychological support. Particular attention should be paid to developing strategies which support nursing staff.