The immediate impact of Covid-19 infection and the resulting lockdown on nursing home residents / Impact immédiat d'une infection liée à la Covid-19 et du confinement consécutif sur les résidents d'un Ehpad

Introduction: Following the Covid-19 epidemic affecting 76 of the 97 residents (78.3 %) in a French nursing home, we assessed the impact of this cluster period on the physical and psycho-cognitive health of the residents, expecting in particular to observe effects that were dependent on their state of cognitive-behavioural dependence. Methods: We retained twenty-two variables, 5 relating to demographic data, 6 to the specific care linked to Covid-19 infection, 6 to somatic pathologies and psycho-behavioural disturbances before the epidemic and 5 to the period following it. Results: Eleven residents among those diagnosed positive died. Nine were transferred to a Covid unit, and 35 were asymptomatic. The main consequences of the period of infections were in particular behavioural, nutritional, and motor. A history of disruptive behaviours before the appearance of the cluster increased the risk of an aggravation of these behaviours by four (RR = 3.9, IC95 % = 1.38­11.02, p = 0.0042). Twenty per cent of the residents presented under-nutrition at the end of lockdown, but no specific risk factors could be identified. However, states of under-nutrition for the whole of 2020 were significantly more frequent than in 2019, in particular severe cases (χ² = 5.43, p = 0.02). A history of under-nutrition in the previous year increased twofold the likelihood of under-nutrition in the following year (RR = 2.07, IC95 % = 1.14­3.74, p = 0.02). The Covid cluster period also had an effect on the functional autonomy of certain patients. Conclusion: Our main hypothesis relating to cognitive-behavioural dependence was not completely validated. The impact of the occurrence of the cluster remained moderate, in particular because of the care resources afforded by the nursing home. The advantages of a "medicalised" facility, and the problems associated with the restrictions of lockdown, are viewed in the light of ethical considerations.

Introduction: Suite à une épidémie de Covid-19 ayant affecté 76 des 97 résidents d'un Ehpad, nous avons évalué l'impact de cette période de cluster sur la santé physique et psycho-cognitive des résidents pronostiquant notamment une altération en fonction de leur dépendance cognitivo-comportementale. Méthodes: Nous avons retenus vingt-deux variables relatives : aux données démographiques (5) ; aux prises en charge spécifiques liées à l'infection (6) ; aux pathologies somatiques et troubles psycho-comportementaux avant l'épidémie (6) et après la période de cluster (5). Résultats: Onze résidents diagnostiqués positifs sont décédés. Neuf ont été transférés en unité Covid et 35 étaient asymptomatiques. Les troubles consécutifs à la période de cluster concernaient la majoration des comportements perturbateurs et la dénutrition lorsque des antécédents existaient déjà (respectivement : RR = 3,9, IC95 % = 1,38­11,02, p = 0,0042 ; RR = 2,07, IC95 % = 1,14­3,74, p = 0,02), ainsi que la réduction des capacités motrices. Nous n'avons pu objectiver d'autres facteurs explicatifs spécifiques à ces altérations. Conclusion: Notre hypothèse principale en lien avec la dépendance cognitivo-comportementale n'apparaît pas totalement validée. L'impact de la période de cluster est resté modéré notamment grâce aux moyens médico-soignants dont l'Ehpad disposait. L'avantage d'un dispositif médicalisé et l'inconvénient des restrictions liées au confinement est discuté au regard de questions éthiques.

Conflict between guideline methodologic quality and recommendation validity: a potential problem for practitioners.

BACKGROUND: It is not clear if good methodologic quality in current practice guidelines necessarily leads to more valid recommendations, i.e., those that are supported with consistent research evidence or, when evidence is conflicting or lacking, with sufficient consensus among the guideline development team. To help clarify this issue, we assessed whether there is a link between methodologic quality and recommendation validity in practice guidelines for the use of laboratory tests in the management of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of data on laboratory tests in NSCLC published in English or in French within the last 10 years and retrieved 11 practice guidelines for the use of these tests. The guidelines were critically appraised and scored for methodologic quality and recommendation validity based on the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria and on the systematic review. RESULTS: Overall, these 11 guidelines had considerable shortcomings in methodologic quality and, to a lesser extent, in recommendation validity. Practice guidelines with the best methodologic quality were not necessarily the most valid in their recommendations, and conversely. CONCLUSIONS: Poor methodologic quality and lack of recommendation validity in laboratory medicine call for methodologic standards of guideline development and for international collaboration of guideline development agencies. We advise readers of guidelines to critically evaluate the methods used as well as the content of the recommendations before adopting them for use in practice.