ABSTRACT
BackgroundThe worldwide pandemic situation forced many hospitals to adapt COVID-19 management strategies. In this scenario, the Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences (SAMW/ASSM) organized national guidelines based on expert opinion to identify Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) patients, to reduce futile ICU admission and resource misuse. However, the practical impact of this standardized national protocol has not been yet evaluated. In our specialized COVID-19 Center, we investigated characteristics and mortality of DNR patients identified according to national standardized protocol, comparing them to non-DNR patients. MethodsThis was a pilot retrospective validation study, evaluating consecutive hospital admitted COVID-19 patients. Primary outcome was 30-days survival of DNR patients in comparison to the control group. Secondary outcomes reported quality of treatment of deceased patients, especially of agitation/sedation and dyspnea, using respectively the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale - Palliative care (RASS-PAL) for sedation and agitation (+4/-5) and the modified Borg Scale for dyspnea (1-10). ResultsFrom March 16 to April 1, 2020, 213 consecutive patients were triaged; at 30-days follow-up, 9 patients (22.5%) died in the DNR group, 4 (2.2%) in the control group. The higher mortality rate in the DNR group was further confirmed by Log-Rank Mantel-Cox (23.104, p < 0.0001). In the DNR-group deceased patients, end-of-life support was performed with oxygen (100%), opioids (100%) and sedatives (89%); the mean RASS-PAL improved from 2.2 to -1.8 (p < 0.0001) and the Borg scale improved from 5.7 to 4.7 (p = 0.581). ConclusionA national standardized protocol identified patients at higher risk of short-term death. Although the legal status of DNRs varies from country to country, the implementation of national standardized protocol could be the way to guarantee a better treatment of COVID-19 patients in a pandemic situation with limited resources.
ABSTRACT
BackgroundCOVID-19 is a multisystem disease complicated by respiratory failure requiring sustanined mechanical ventilation (MV). Prolongued oro-tracheal intubation is associated to an increased risk of dysphagia and bronchial aspiration. Purpose of this study was to investigate swallowing disorders in critically ill COVID-19 patients. MethodsThis was a retrospective study analysing a consecutive cohort of COVID-19 patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of our Hospital. Data concerning dysphagia were collected according to the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS) and related to demographic characteristics, clinical data, ICU Length-Of-Stay (LOS) and MV parameters. ResultsFrom March 2 to April 30 2020, 31 consecutive critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU were evaluated by speech and language therapists (SLT). Twenty-five of them were on MV (61% through endotracheal tube and 19% through tracheostomy); median MV lenght was 11 days. Seventeen (54.8%) patients presented dysphagia; a correlation was found between first GUSS severity stratification and MV days (p < 0.001), ICU LOS (p < 0.001), age (p = 0.03) and tracheostomy (p = 0.042). No other correlations were found. At 16 days, 90% of patients had fully recovered; a significant improvement was registered especially during the first week (p < 0.001). ConclusionCompared to non-COVID-19 patiens, a higher rate of dysphagia was reported in COVID-19 patients, with a more rapid and complete recovery. A systematic early SLT evaluation of COVID-19 patients on MV may thus be useful to prevent dysphagia-related complications.
ABSTRACT
ObjectivesDuring the pandemic, critically ill COVID-19 patients management presented an increased workload for Intensive Care Unit (ICU) nursing staff, particularly during pronation maneuvers, with high risk of complications. In this scenario, a support during pronation by the ICU Physiotherapy Team was introduced. Research methodologyRetrospective analysis. Consecutive critically ill COVID-19 patients. SettingA COVID-19 Center in southern Switzerland, between March 16th and April 30th, 2020. Main Outcome MeasuresRates and characteristics of pronation-related complications. ResultsForty-two patients on mechanical ventilation (MV) were treated; 296 standard prone/supine positioning were performed, with 3.52 cycles/patient. One (0.3%) major complication was observed, while fourteen (33.3%) patients developed minor complications, e.g. pressure injuries. The incidence of pressure sores was related to ICU length-of-stay (LOS) (p = 0.029) and MV days (p = 0.015), while their number (n = 27) further correlated with ICU LOS (p = 0.001) and MV days (p = 0.001). The propensity matching score analysis did not show any protective factor of pronation regarding pressure injuries (p = 0.448). No other significant correlation was found. ConclusionThe specific pronation team determined a low rate of major complications in critically ill COVID19 patients. The high rate of minor complications appeared to be related to disease severity, rather than from pronation.
ABSTRACT
IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic required a careful management of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, to reduce ICU overload while facing resources limitations. We implemented standardized, physiology-based, ICU admission criteria and analyzed the mortality rate of patients refused from the ICU. Materials and MethodsCOVID-19 patients proposed for ICU admission were consecutively analyzed; Do-not-resuscitate patients were excluded. Patients presenting a SpO2 lower than 85% and/or dyspnea and/or mental confusion resulted eligible for ICU admission; patients not presenting these criteria remained in the ward with an intensive monitoring protocol. Primary outcome was both groups survival rate. Secondary outcome was a sub analysis correlating SpO2 cutoff with ICU admission. ResultsFrom March 2020 to January 2021, 1623 patients were admitted to our Center; 208 DNR patients were excluded; 97 patients underwent intensivist evaluation. The ICU-admitted group mortality rate resulted 15.9% at 28 days and 27% at 40 days; the ICU-refused group mortality rate resulted 0% at both intervals (p < 0.001). With a SpO2 cut-off of 92%, the hypoxia rate distribution did not correlate with ICU admission (p = 0.26); with a SpO2 cut-off of 85%, a correlation was found (p = 0.009). A similar correlation was also found with dyspnea (p =0.0002). ConclusionIn COVID-19 patients, standardized ICU admission criteria appeared to reduce safely ICU overload. In the absence of dyspnea and/or confusion, a SpO2 cutoff up to 85% for ICU admission was not burdened by negative outcomes. In a pandemic context, the SpO2 cutoff of 92%, as a threshold for ICU admission, needs critical re-evaluation.
