Incidence and Prognostic Impact of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Severe Covid-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contributes to cardiovascular complications including arrhythmias due to high inflammatory surge. Nevertheless, the common types of arrhythmia amongst severe COVID-19 is not well described. New onset atrial fibrillation(NOAF) is frequentlyseen in critically ill patients and therefore we aim to assess the incidence of NOAF in severe COVID -19and its association with prognosis. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicentre study including 109 consecutive patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia and definitive outcome (death or discharge). The study period was between 11th March and 5th May 2020. RESULTS: Median age of our population was 59 years (IQR 53-65) and 83% were men. Nearly three-fourth of the population had two or more comorbidities. 14.6% developed NOAF during ICU stay with increased risk amongst older age and with underlying chronic heart failure and chronic kidney disease. NOAF developed earlier during the course of severe COVID-19 infection amongst non-survivors than those survived the illness andstrongly associated with increased in-hospital death (OR 5.4; 95% CI 1.7-17; p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort with severe COVID-19, the incidence of new onset atrial fibrillation is comparatively lower than patients treated in ICU with severe sepsis in general. Presence of NOAF has shown to be a poor prognostic marker in this disease entity.

Communication in the intensive care unit during COVID-19: early experience with the Nightingale Communication Method.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the utility and frequency of use of the Nightingale Communication Method, during the early operational phase of the Nightingale Hospital London (NHL) 4000-bed field hospital's intensive care unit. DESIGN: Survey-based cross-sectional assessment. SETTING: The intensive care unit at the Nightingale London hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Staff working in the clinical area and therefore requiring full personal protective equipment (PPE). INTERVENTION: Survey of all staff members sampled from a single shift at the Nightingale Hospital. This investigated perceived utility and actual use of identification methods (name and role labels on visors and gowns, coloured role identification tapes) and formal hand signals as an adjunctive communication method. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-reported frequency of use and perceived utility of each communication and personnel identification adjunct. RESULTS: Fifty valid responses were received (72% response rate), covering all clinical professional groups. Prominent name/role identifications and coloured role identification tapes were very frequently used and were perceived as being highly useful. Formal hand signals were infrequently used and not perceived as being beneficial, with respondents citing use of individual hand signals only in specific circumstances. CONCLUSION: PPE is highly depersonalizing, and interpersonal identification aids are very useful. Despite being difficult, verbal communication is not completely prohibited, which could explain the low utility of formal hand signals. The methods developed at the Nightingale hospital have enhanced communication in the critical care, field hospital setting. There is potential for wider application to a variety of healthcare settings, in both the current situation and future pandemic scenarios.