ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To study the role of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with C-ARF managed on NIV were categorized as NIV success or failure (death or intubation). Factors associated with failure were explored using regression analysis and expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI. RESULTS: Between April 1, 2020, and September 15, 2020, a total of 286 patients with a mean ± SD age of 53.1±11.6 years and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 11.1±5.5 were initiated on NIV. Of the 182 patients (63.6%) successfully managed on NIV alone, 118 had moderate or severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. When compared with NIV success, NIV failure was associated with lower admission PaO2 to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (P<.001) and higher respiratory rate (P<.001). On penalized logistic regression analysis, NIV failure was associated with higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.24), severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (OR, 3.99; 95% CI, 1.24 to 12.9), D-dimer level of 1000 ng/mL DDU (to convert to mg/L, divide by 1000) or greater (OR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.16 to 5.87), need for inotropes or dialysis (OR, 12.7; 95% CI, 4.3 to 37.7), and nosocomial infections (OR, 13.6; 95% CI, 4.06 to 45.9). Overall mortality was 30.1% (86/286). In patients requiring intubation, time to intubation was longer in nonsurvivors than survivors (median, 5; interquartile range, 3-8 vs 3; interquartile range, 2-3 days; P<.001). CONCLUSION: Noninvasive ventilation can be used successfully in C-ARF. Illness severity and need for non-respiratory organ support predict NIV failure.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Critical Illness/therapy , Noninvasive Ventilation/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/immunology , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Sustaining interest and promoting deep learning is a challenge in any teaching method. The purpose of the study is to find the perception of trainee doctors in Internal Medicine and teaching faculty on the usefulness of case-based learning (CBL) and to compare assessment knowledge outcome with didactic seminars. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We developed and conducted a CBL teaching program on eight topics in infectious diseases. First group had CBL and second group had didactic seminars. In step 1, a clinical case was introduced in stages. Learning objectives were formulated and topics were divided among the trainees. At step 2, trainees shared what they had learnt from self-directed learning. Faculty summarized the case and learning points. In the seminar group, trainees made presentations on the given topics. Trainees who had CBL underwent a questionnaire survey. Multiple choice questions-based test was administered for both the groups. RESULTS: The trainee doctors and staff overwhelmingly found CBL to be more interesting, stimulating, and useful compared to didactic seminars. There was no statistical difference in the test scores. CONCLUSIONS: CBL is a useful and interesting method of learning and should be employed more often in teaching for trainee doctors.
