Should Transport Ventilators Be Used in Times of Crisis? The Use of Emergency Authorized Nonconventional Ventilators Is Associated With Mortality Among Patients With COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Nonconventional ventilators (NCVs), defined here as transport ventilators and certain noninvasive positive pressure devices, were used extensively as crisis-time ventilators for intubated patients with COVID-19. We assessed whether there was an association between the use of NCV and higher mortality, independent of other factors. DESIGN: This is a multicenter retrospective observational study. SETTING: The sample was recruited from a single healthcare system in New York. The recruitment period spanned from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020. PATIENTS: The sample includes patients who were intubated for COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality. Multivariable logistic regression was used to derive the odds of mortality among patients managed exclusively with NCV throughout their ventilation period compared with the remainder of the sample while adjusting for other factors. A secondary analysis was also done, in which the mortality of a subset of the sample exclusively ventilated with NCV was compared with that of a propensity score-matched subset of the control group. Exclusive use of NCV was associated with a higher 28-day in-hospital mortality while adjusting for confounders in the regression analysis (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% CI [1.07-1.86]). In the propensity score matching analysis, the mortality of patients exclusively ventilated with NCV was 68.9%, and that of the control was 60.7% (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Use of NCV was associated with increased mortality among patients with COVID-19 ARDS. More lives may be saved during future ventilator shortages if more full-feature ICU ventilators, rather than NCVs, are reserved in national and local stockpiles.

Drivers of mortality in COVID ARDS depend on patient sub-type.

The most common cause of death in people with COVID-19 is Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Prior studies have demonstrated that ARDS is a heterogeneous syndrome and have identified ARDS sub-types (phenoclusters). However, non-COVID-19 ARDS phenoclusters do not clearly apply to COVID-19 ARDS patients. In this retrospective cohort study, we implemented an iterative approach, combining supervised and unsupervised machine learning methodologies, to identify clinically relevant COVID-19 ARDS phenoclusters, as well as characteristics that are predictive of the outcome for each phenocluster. To this end, we applied a supervised model to identify risk factors for hospital mortality for each phenocluster and compared these between phenoclusters and the entire cohort. We trained the models using a comprehensive, preprocessed dataset of 2,864 hospitalized COVID-19 ARDS patients. Our research demonstrates that the risk factors predicting mortality in the overall cohort of COVID-19 ARDS may not necessarily apply to specific phenoclusters. Additionally, some risk factors increase the risk of hospital mortality in some phenoclusters but decrease mortality in others. These phenocluster-specific risk factors would not have been observed with a single predictive model. Heterogeneity in phenoclusters of COVID-19 ARDS as well as the drivers of mortality may partially explain challenges in finding effective treatments for all patients with ARDS.

Application of the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the implementation of telehealth pulmonary rehabilitation in a randomized controlled trial among African-American and Hispanic patients with advanced stage Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) decreases rehospitalization for people with COPD. However, less than 2% receive PR, partly due to lack of referral and sparsity of PR facilities. This disparity is particularly pronounced in African American and Hispanic persons with COPD. Telehealth-provided PR could increase access and improve health outcomes. METHODS: We applied the RE-AIM framework in a post-hoc analysis of our mixed methods RCT comparing referral to Telehealth-delivered PR (TelePR) versus standard PR (SPR) for African American and Hispanic COPD patients hospitalized for COPD exacerbation. Both arms received a referral to PR for 8 weeks, social worker follow-up, and surveys administered at baseline, 8 weeks, 6, and 12 months. PR sessions were conducted twice a week for 90 min each (16 sessions total). Quantitative data were analyzed using 2-sample t tests or nonparametric Wilcoxon tests for continuous data and χ2/Fisher exact tests for categorical data. Logistic regression-estimated odds ratios (ORs) were used for the intention-to-treat primary outcome. Qualitative interviews were conducted at the end of the study to assess adherence and satisfaction and were analyzed using inductive and deductive methods. The goal was to understand Reach (whether the target population was able to be enrolled), Effectiveness (primary outcome was a composite of 6-month COPD rehospitalization and death), Adoption (proportion of people willing to initiate the program), Implementation (whether the program was able to be executed as intended, and Maintenance (whether the program was continued). RESULTS: Two hundred nine people enrolled out of a 276-recruitment goal. Only 85 completed at least one PR session 57/111 (51%) TelePR; 28/98 (28%) SPR. Referral to TelePR compared to SPR did not decrease the composite outcome of 6-month COPD-readmission rate/death (OR1.35;95%CI 0.69,2.66). There was significant reduction in fatigue (PROMIS® scale) from baseline to 8-weeks in TelePR compared to SPR (MD-1.34; ± SD4.22; p = 0.02). Participants who received TelePR experienced improvements from baseline in several outcomes (ie, before and after 8 weeks of PR) in the following: COPD symptoms, knowledge about COPD management, fatigue, and functional capacity. Among the patients who had 1 initial visit, adherence rates were similar (TelePR arm, 59% of sessions; SPR arm, 63%). No intervention-related adverse events occurred. Barriers to PR adoption included difficulty or reluctance to complete medical clearances and beliefs about PR efficacy. Notably, only 9 participants sustained exercise after program completion. Maintenance of the program was not possible due to low insurance reimbursement and sparsity of Respiratory Therapists. CONCLUSIONS: TelePR can reach COPD patients with health disparities and can be successfully implemented. The small sample size and large confidence intervals prevent conclusion about the relative effectiveness of participating in TelePR compared to SPR. However, improved outcomes were seen for those in TelePR as well as in SPR. Increasing adoption of PR and TelePR requires consideration of comorbidity burden, and perception of PR utility, and must facilitate medical clearances. Given the sparsity of SPR locations, TelePR can overcome at least the barrier of access. However, given the challenges to the uptake and completion of PR - many of the additional barriers in PR (both in TelePR and SPR) need to be addressed. Awareness of these real-world challenges will not only inform implementation of TelePR for clinicians seeking to adopt this platform but will also inform study designers and reviewers regarding the feasibility of approaches to patient recruitment and retention.

US and Dutch Perspectives on the Use of COVID-19 Clinical Prediction Models: Findings from a Qualitative Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical prediction models (CPMs) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may support clinical decision making, treatment, and communication. However, attitudes about using CPMs for COVID-19 decision making are unknown. METHODS: Online focus groups and interviews were conducted among health care providers, survivors of COVID-19, and surrogates (i.e., loved ones/surrogate decision makers) in the United States and the Netherlands. Semistructured questions explored experiences about clinical decision making in COVID-19 care and facilitators and barriers for implementing CPMs. RESULTS: In the United States, we conducted 4 online focus groups with 1) providers and 2) surrogates and survivors of COVID-19 between January 2021 and July 2021. In the Netherlands, we conducted 3 focus groups and 4 individual interviews with 1) providers and 2) surrogates and survivors of COVID-19 between May 2021 and July 2021. Providers expressed concern about CPM validity and the belief that patients may interpret CPM predictions as absolute. They described CPMs as potentially useful for resource allocation, triaging, education, and research. Several surrogates and people who had COVID-19 were not given prognostic estimates but believed this information would have supported and influenced their decision making. A limited number of participants felt the data would not have applied to them and that they or their loved ones may not have survived, as poor prognosis may have suggested withdrawal of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Many providers had reservations about using CPMs for people with COVID-19 due to concerns about CPM validity and patient-level interpretation of the outcome predictions. However, several people who survived COVID-19 and their surrogates indicated that they would have found this information useful for decision making. Therefore, information provision may be needed to improve provider-level comfort and patient and surrogate understanding of CPMs. HIGHLIGHTS: While clinical prediction models (CPMs) may provide an objective means of assessing COVID-19 prognosis, provider concerns about CPM validity and the interpretation of CPM predictions may limit their clinical use.Providers felt that CPMs may be most useful for resource allocation, triage, research, or educational purposes for COVID-19.Several survivors of COVID-19 and their surrogates felt that CPMs would have been informative and may have aided them in making COVID-19 treatment decisions, while others felt the data would not have applied to them.

Discriminating Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome from other forms of respiratory failure via iterative machine learning.

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Identification of ARDS enables lung protective strategies, quality improvement interventions, and clinical trial enrolment, but remains challenging particularly in the first 24 hours of mechanical ventilation. To address this we built an algorithm capable of discriminating ARDS from other similarly presenting disorders immediately following mechanical ventilation. Specifically, a clinical team examined medical records from 1263 ICU-admitted, mechanically ventilated patients, retrospectively assigning each patient a diagnosis of "ARDS" or "non-ARDS" (e.g., pulmonary edema). Exploiting data readily available in the clinical setting, including patient demographics, laboratory test results from before the initiation of mechanical ventilation, and features extracted by natural language processing of radiology reports, we applied an iterative pre-processing and machine learning framework. The resulting model successfully discriminated ARDS from non-ARDS causes of respiratory failure (AUC = 0.85) among patients meeting Berlin criteria for severe hypoxia. This analysis also highlighted novel patient variables that were informative for identifying ARDS in ICU settings.

Prognostic models for COVID-19 needed updating to warrant transportability over time and space.

BACKGROUND: Supporting decisions for patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with COVID-19 requires accurate prognostication. We aimed to evaluate prognostic models for predicting outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, in different locations and across time. METHODS: We included patients who presented to the ED with suspected COVID-19 and were admitted to 12 hospitals in the New York City (NYC) area and 4 large Dutch hospitals. We used second-wave patients who presented between September and December 2020 (2137 and 3252 in NYC and the Netherlands, respectively) to evaluate models that were developed on first-wave patients who presented between March and August 2020 (12,163 and 5831). We evaluated two prognostic models for in-hospital death: The Northwell COVID-19 Survival (NOCOS) model was developed on NYC data and the COVID Outcome Prediction in the Emergency Department (COPE) model was developed on Dutch data. These models were validated on subsequent second-wave data at the same site (temporal validation) and at the other site (geographic validation). We assessed model performance by the Area Under the receiver operating characteristic Curve (AUC), by the E-statistic, and by net benefit. RESULTS: Twenty-eight-day mortality was considerably higher in the NYC first-wave data (21.0%), compared to the second-wave (10.1%) and the Dutch data (first wave 10.8%; second wave 10.0%). COPE discriminated well at temporal validation (AUC 0.82), with excellent calibration (E-statistic 0.8%). At geographic validation, discrimination was satisfactory (AUC 0.78), but with moderate over-prediction of mortality risk, particularly in higher-risk patients (E-statistic 2.9%). While discrimination was adequate when NOCOS was tested on second-wave NYC data (AUC 0.77), NOCOS systematically overestimated the mortality risk (E-statistic 5.1%). Discrimination in the Dutch data was good (AUC 0.81), but with over-prediction of risk, particularly in lower-risk patients (E-statistic 4.0%). Recalibration of COPE and NOCOS led to limited net benefit improvement in Dutch data, but to substantial net benefit improvement in NYC data. CONCLUSIONS: NOCOS performed moderately worse than COPE, probably reflecting unique aspects of the early pandemic in NYC. Frequent updating of prognostic models is likely to be required for transportability over time and space during a dynamic pandemic.

Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 Have Higher Plasma Aldosterone-Renin Ratio and Lower ACE Activity Than Controls.

Context: SARS-CoV-2 infects cells via the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, whose downstream effects "counterbalance" the classical renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS). Objective: We aimed to determine to what extent circulating RAAS biomarker levels differ in persons with and without COVID-19 throughout the disease course. Methods: We measured classical (renin, aldosterone, aldosterone/renin ratio [ARR], Ang2, ACE activity) and nonclassical (ACE2, Ang1,7) RAAS biomarkers in hospitalized COVID-19 patients vs SARS-CoV-2 negative controls. We compared biomarker levels in cases with contemporaneous samples from control patients with upper respiratory symptoms and a negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. To assess RAAS biomarker changes during the course of COVID-19 hospitalization, we studied cases at 2 different times points ∼ 12 days apart. We employed age- and sex-adjusted generalized linear models and paired/unpaired t tests. Results: Mean age was 51 years for both cases (31% women) and controls (50% women). ARR was higher in the first sample among hospitalized COVID-19 patients vs controls (P = 0.02). ACE activity was lower among cases at their first sample vs controls (P = <0.001). ACE2 activity, Ang 1,7, and Ang2 did not differ at the 2 COVID-19 case time points and they did not differ in COVID-19 cases vs controls. Additional adjustment for body mass index (BMI) did not change our findings. Conclusions: High ARR, independent of BMI, may be a risk marker for COVID-19 hospitalization. Serum ACE activity was lower in patients with COVID-19 vs controls at the beginning of their hospitalization and then increased to similar levels as controls, possibly due to lung injury, which improved with inpatient disease management.

A Novel Method to Improve the Identification of Time of Intubation for Retrospective EHR Data Analysis During a Time of Resource Strain, the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Accurate determinations of the time of intubation (TOI) are critical for retrospective electronic health record (EHR) data analyses. In a retrospective study, the authors developed and validated an improved query (Ti) to identify TOI across numerous settings in a large health system, using EHR data, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Further, they evaluated the affect of Ti on peri-intubation patient parameters compared to a previous method-ventilator parameters (Tv). Ti identified an earlier TOI for 84.8% (n = 1666) of cases with a mean (SD) of 3.5 hours (15.5), resulting in alternate values for: partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO 2 ) in 18.4% of patients (mean 43.95 mmHg [54.24]); PaO 2 /fractional inspired oxygen (FiO 2 ) in 17.8% of patients (mean 48.29 [69.81]), and oxygen saturation/FiO 2 in 62.7% (mean 16.75 [34.14]), using the absolute difference in mean values within the first 4 hours of intubation. Differences in PaO 2 /FiO 2 using Ti versus Tv resulted in the reclassification of 7.3% of patients into different acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) severity categories.

MUlticenter STudy of tissue plasminogen activator (alteplase) use in COVID-19 severe respiratory failure (MUST COVID): A retrospective cohort study.

Background: Few therapies exist to treat severe COVID-19 respiratory failure once it develops. Given known diffuse pulmonary microthrombi on autopsy studies of COVID-19 patients, we hypothesized that tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) may improve pulmonary function in COVID-19 respiratory failure. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective, observational study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 and severe respiratory failure who received systemic tPA (alteplase) was performed. Seventy-nine adults from seven medical centers were included in the final analysis after institutional review boards' approval; 23 were excluded from analysis because tPA was administered for pulmonary macroembolism or deep venous thrombosis. The primary outcome was improvement in the PaO2/FiO2 ratio from baseline to 48 h after tPA. Linear mixed modeling was used for analysis. Results: tPA was associated with significant PaO2/FiO2 improvement at 48 h (estimated paired difference = 23.1 ± 6.7), which was sustained at 72 h (interaction term p < 0.00). tPA administration was also associated with improved National Early Warning Score 2 scores at 24, 48, and 72 h after receiving tPA (interaction term p = 0.00). D-dimer was significantly elevated immediately after tPA, consistent with lysis of formed clot. Patients with declining respiratory status preceding tPA administration had more marked improvement in PaO2/FiO2 ratios than those who had poor but stable (not declining) respiratory status. There was one intracranial hemorrhage, which occurred within 24 h following tPA administration. Conclusions: These data suggest tPA is associated with significant improvement in pulmonary function in severe COVID-19 respiratory failure, especially in patients whose pulmonary function is in decline, and has an acceptable safety profile in this patient population.

Trajectories of hypoxemia and pulmonary mechanics of COVID-19 ARDS in the NorthCARDS dataset.

BACKGROUND: Understanding heterogeneity seen in patients with COVIDARDS and comparing to non-COVIDARDS may inform tailored treatments. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of frontline clinicians and data scientists worked to create the Northwell COVIDARDS dataset (NorthCARDS) leveraging over 11,542 COVID-19 hospital admissions. The data was then summarized to examine descriptive differences based on clinically meaningful categories of lung compliance, and to examine trends in oxygenation. FINDINGS: Of the 1536 COVIDARDS patients in the NorthCARDS dataset, there were 531 (34.6%) who had very low lung compliance (< 20 ml/cmH2O), 970 (63.2%) with low-normal compliance (20-50 ml/cmH2O), and 35 (2.2%) with high lung compliance (> 50 ml/cmH2O). The very low compliance group had double the median time to intubation compared to the low-normal group (107.3 h (IQR 25.8, 239.2) vs. 39.5 h (IQR 5.4, 91.6)). Overall, 68.8% (n = 1057) of the patients died during hospitalization. In comparison to non-COVIDARDS reports, there were less patients in the high compliance category (2.2% vs. 12%, compliance ≥ 50 mL/cmH20), and more patients with P/F ≤ 150 (59.8% vs. 45.6%). There is a statistically significant correlation between compliance and P/F ratio. The Oxygenation Index is the highest in the very low compliance group (12.51, SD(6.15)), and lowest in high compliance group (8.78, SD(4.93)). CONCLUSIONS: The respiratory system compliance distribution of COVIDARDS is similar to non-COVIDARDS. In some patients, there may be a relation between time to intubation and duration of high levels of supplemental oxygen treatment on trajectory of lung compliance.

Efficacy and Safety of Sarilumab in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Open-label platform trials and a prospective meta-analysis suggest efficacy of anti-interleukin (IL)-6R therapies in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) receiving corticosteroids. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of sarilumab, an anti-IL-6R monoclonal antibody, in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this adaptive, phase 2/3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults hospitalized with COVID-19 received intravenous sarilumab 400 mg or placebo. The phase 3 primary analysis population included patients with critical COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation (MV). The primary outcome was proportion of patients with ≥1-point improvement in clinical status from baseline to day 22. RESULTS: There were 457 and 1365 patients randomized and treated in phases 2 and 3, respectively. In phase 3, patients with critical COVID-19 receiving MV (n = 298; 28.2% on corticosteroids), the proportion with ≥1-point improvement in clinical status (alive, not receiving MV) at day 22 was 43.2% for sarilumab and 35.5% for placebo (risk difference, +7.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.4 to 21.3; P =.3261), a relative risk improvement of 21.7%. In post hoc analyses pooling phase 2 and 3 critical patients receiving MV, the hazard ratio for death for sarilumab vs placebo was 0.76 (95% CI, .51 to 1.13) overall and 0.49 (95% CI, .25 to .94) in patients receiving corticosteroids at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not establish the efficacy of sarilumab in hospitalized patients with severe/critical COVID-19. Post hoc analyses were consistent with other studies that found a benefit of sarilumab in patients receiving corticosteroids. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04315298.

Using Telehealth to Improve the Accuracy of Delirium Screening by Bedside Critical Care Nurses.

BACKGROUND: Delirium affects up to 80% of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) but is missed in up to 75% of cases. Telehealth in the ICU (tele-ICU) has become the standard for providing timely, expert care to remotely located ICUs. OBJECTIVES: This pilot study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of using tele-ICU to increase the accuracy of delirium screening and recognition by ICU nurses. METHODS: The pilot sites included 4 ICUs across 3 hospitals. A geriatrician with delirium expertise remotely observed 13 bedside ICU nurses administering the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) to patients in real time via the tele-ICU platform and subsequently provided training on CAM-ICU performance and delirium management. Training evaluation consisted of a validated spot check form, a 2-item satisfaction/change-of-practice survey, and a qualitative question on acceptability. RESULTS: Thirteen ICU nurses were observed performing 26 bedside delirium assessments. The top observed barriers to accurate delirium screening were CAM-ICU knowledge deficits, establishment of baseline cognition, and inappropriate use of the "unable to assess" designation. The mean percentage of correct observations improved from 40% (first observation) to 90% (second observation) (P < .001). All 13 nurses strongly agreed that the training was beneficial and practice changing. CONCLUSIONS: The use of tele-ICU to improve the accuracy of delirium screening by ICU nurses appears to be feasible and efficient for leveraging delirium expertise across multiple ICUs. Future studies should evaluate the effects of tele-ICU delirium training on patient-centered outcomes.

Study of Alteplase for Respiratory Failure in SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19: A Vanguard Multicenter, Rapidly Adaptive, Pragmatic, Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vascular microthrombi are a proposed mechanism of COVID-19 respiratory failure. We hypothesized that early administration of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) followed by therapeutic heparin would improve pulmonary function in these patients. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does tPA improve pulmonary function in severe COVID-19 respiratory failure, and is it safe? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Adults with COVID-19-induced respiratory failure were randomized from May14, 2020 through March 3, 2021, in two phases. Phase 1 (n = 36) comprised a control group (standard-of-care treatment) vs a tPA bolus (50-mg tPA IV bolus followed by 7 days of heparin; goal activated partial thromboplastin time [aPTT], 60-80 s) group. Phase 2 (n = 14) comprised a control group vs a tPA drip (50-mg tPA IV bolus, followed by tPA drip 2 mg/h plus heparin 500 units/h over 24 h, then heparin to maintain aPTT of 60-80 s for 7 days) group. Patients were excluded from enrollment if they had not undergone a neurologic examination or cross-sectional brain imaging within the previous 4.5 h to rule out stroke and potential for hemorrhagic conversion. The primary outcome was Pao2 to Fio2 ratio improvement from baseline at 48 h after randomization. Secondary outcomes included Pao2 to Fio2 ratio improvement of > 50% or Pao2 to Fio2 ratio of ≥ 200 at 48 h (composite outcome), ventilator-free days (VFD), and mortality. RESULTS: Fifty patients were randomized: 17 in the control group and 19 in the tPA bolus group in phase 1 and eight in the control group and six in the tPA drip group in phase 2. No severe bleeding events occurred. In the tPA bolus group, the Pao2 to Fio2 ratio values were significantly (P < .017) higher than baseline at 6 through 168 h after randomization; the control group showed no significant improvements. Among patients receiving a tPA bolus, the percent change of Pao2 to Fio2 ratio at 48 h (16.9% control [interquartile range (IQR), -8.3% to 36.8%] vs 29.8% tPA bolus [IQR, 4.5%-88.7%]; P = .11), the composite outcome (11.8% vs 47.4%; P = .03), VFD (0.0 [IQR, 0.0-9.0] vs 12.0 [IQR, 0.0-19.0]; P = .11), and in-hospital mortality (41.2% vs 21.1%; P = .19) did not reach statistically significant differences when compared with those of control participants. The patients who received a tPA drip did not experience benefit. INTERPRETATION: The combination of tPA bolus plus heparin is safe in severe COVID-19 respiratory failure. A phase 3 study is warranted given the improvements in oxygenation and promising observations in VFD and mortality. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04357730; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

The Value of Thromboelastography (TEG) in COVID-19 Critical Illness as Illustrated by a Case Series.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a practical thromboelastograph guided (TEG) anticoagulation protocol to guide the management of COVID-19 critically ill patients. DESIGN: An inter disciplinary team reviewed the current literature on hypercoagulability in critically ill COVID-19 patients, clinical management practices and challenges with high rates of thrombotic events despite anticoagulant therapies. SETTING: The largest tertiary care hospital within the Northwell Health System in New York. PATIENTS: COVID-19 invasively mechanically ventilated patients in Medical Intensive Care Unit Settings. METHODS: TEG was monitored in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Patterns were reviewed to guide the development of a treatment protocol leveraging TEG parameters to select anticoagulant therapy. Three patients are reported to highlight TEG profiles that led to the development of the algorithm. Clinical trajectory and treatment decisions were extracted retrospectively from the Electronic Health Record, with input from the intensivists. Anticoagulant use, laboratory and TEG values, and venous/arterial lower extremity (LE) ultrasound results were recorded. MAIN RESULTS: These patients demonstrated hypercoagulable TEG results despite prophylactic or therapeutic dosages of unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMHW). TEG surveillance identified functional fibrinogen and maximum amplitude in high-risk patients with hyper inflammatory markers. Anticoagulation assessment, TEG parameters, and LE ultrasound monitoring for venous and arterial thrombus were used to construct an algorithm to guide and escalate anticoagulant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: TEG provides patient-specific evidence for a hypercoagulable state in patients receiving all types of anticoagulant therapy. The proposed TEG algorithm guides anticoagulation management decisions to maintain or escalate anticoagulant dose and/or change choice of anticoagulant. A TEG algorithm may help negotiate the potential harm/benefit balance of full-dose anticoagulation in critically ill COVID-19 patients, by allowing for a more individualized approach that goes beyond the review of activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) levels.

Hypertriglyceridemia-Induced Acute Pancreatitis, Euglycemic Diabetic Ketoacidosis and COVID-19 Infection in a Patient With Type 2 Diabetes Taking a Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor.

Recent landmark trials have increased the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). A rare but serious side effect of SGLT-2i is euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis (euDKA), which usually occurs in the setting of acute illness such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We report a distinctive case of a patient with hyperlipidemia and T2D on SGLT-2i therapy who presented with hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis (HTGP) concurrently with euDKA and COVID-19. The patient's initial labs included venous blood gas pH of 7.27, a blood glucose level of 146 mg/dL, serum triglyceride (TG) greater than 8,300 mg/dL and lipase of 527 U/L. Viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) result for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was also positive. We suspect this patient has a primary disorder of lipoprotein metabolism which was exacerbated by stress from euDKA and COVID-19 infection. The patient was treated with intravenous fluids, fasting and intravenous insulin infusion. Resolution of euDKA and improvement of hypertriglyceridemia to less than 1,000 mg/dL occurred by day 6 and the patient was transitioned to subcutaneous basal-bolus insulin. On discharge, the SGLT-2i was discontinued and the patient was discharged on insulin, metformin, omega-3 fatty acids, and fenofibrate.

Improving delirium detection in intensive care units: Multicomponent education and training program.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is a common, devastating, and underrecognized syndrome in the intensive care unit (ICU). The study aimed to describe and evaluate a multicomponent education and training program utilizing a "Train-The-Trainer" (TTT) model, to improve delirium detection across a large health system. METHODS: Fourteen ICUs across nine hospitals participated in a multicomponent delirium program consisting of a 1-day workshop that included: (1) patient testimonials, (2) small group discussions, (3) didactics, and (4) role-playing. Additionally, four ICUs received direct observation/training via telehealth (tele-delirium training). The Kirkpatrick model was used for program evaluation in a pre/post-test design. RESULTS: A 1-day delirium workshop was held at two time points and included 73 ICU nurses. Of the 65 nurses completing the post-workshop satisfaction survey, most (46.2) had >10 years of clinical experience, and no or minimal delirium training (69.2%). All nurses (100%) identified lack of knowledge as a barrier to delirium detection, while time constraints and lack of importance accounted for only 25%. Overall, nurses rated the workshop positively (excellent 66.7%, and very good 23.3%), and likely to change practice (definitely 73.3% and very likely 15.0%). All validated Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) cases demonstrated improvement in number of correct responses. Delirium detection across the health system improved from 9.1% at baseline to 21.2% in ICUs that participated in the workshop and 30.1% in those ICUs that also participated in the tele-delirium training (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: A multicomponent delirium education and training program using a TTT model was rated positively, improved CAM-ICU knowledge, and increased delirium detection.

Humanizing the ICU Patient: A Qualitative Exploration of Behaviors Experienced by Patients, Caregivers, and ICU Staff.

OBJECTIVES: To understand how patients and family members experience dehumanizing or humanizing treatment when in the ICU. DESIGN: Qualitative study included web-based focus groups and open-ended surveys posted to ICU patient/family social media boards. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. Social media responses were collected and organized by stakeholder group. Data underwent qualitative analysis. SETTING: Remote focus groups and online surveys. PATIENTS: ICU patient survivors, family members, and ICU teams. INTERVENTIONS: Not available. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Semi-structured questions and open-ended survey responses. We enrolled 40 patients/family members and 31 ICU team members. Focus groups and surveys revealed three primary themes orienting humanizing/dehumanizing ICU experiences: 1) communication, 2) outcomes, and 3) causes of dehumanization. Dehumanization occurred during "communication" exchanges when ICU team members talked "over" patients, made distressing remarks when patients were present, or failed to inform patients about ICU-related care. "Outcomes" of dehumanization were associated with patient loss of trust in the medical team, loss of motivation to participate in ICU recovery, feeling of distress, guilt, depression, and anxiety. Humanizing behaviors were associated with improved recovery, well-being, and trust. "Perceived causes" of dehumanizing behaviors were linked to patient, ICU team, and healthcare system factors. CONCLUSIONS: Behaviors of ICU clinicians may cause patients and families to feel dehumanized when in the ICU. Negative behaviors are noticed by patients and families, possibly contributing to poor outcomes including mental health, recovery, and lack of trust in ICU teams. Supporting ICU clinicians may enable a more empathic environment and in turn more humanizing clinician-patient encounters.

Variation in Early Management Practices in Moderate-to-Severe ARDS in the United States: The Severe ARDS: Generating Evidence Study.

BACKGROUND: Although specific interventions previously demonstrated benefit in patients with ARDS, use of these interventions is inconsistent, and patient mortality remains high. The impact of variability in center management practices on ARDS mortality rates remains unknown. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the impact of treatment variability on mortality in patients with moderate to severe ARDS in the United States? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, observational cohort study of mechanically ventilated adults with ARDS and Pao2 to Fio2 ratio of ≤ 150 with positive end-expiratory pressure of ≥ 5 cm H2O, who were admitted to 29 US centers between October 1, 2016, and April 30, 2017. The primary outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality. Center variation in ventilator management, adjunctive therapy use, and mortality also were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 2,466 patients were enrolled. Median baseline Pao2 to Fio2 ratio was 105 (interquartile range, 78.0-129.0). In-hospital 28-day mortality was 40.7%. Initial adherence to lung protective ventilation (LPV; tidal volume, ≤ 6.5 mL/kg predicted body weight; plateau pressure, or when unavailable, peak inspiratory pressure, ≤ 30 mm H2O) was 31.4% and varied between centers (0%-65%), as did rates of adjunctive therapy use (27.1%-96.4%), methods used (neuromuscular blockade, prone positioning, systemic steroids, pulmonary vasodilators, and extracorporeal support), and mortality (16.7%-73.3%). Center standardized mortality ratios (SMRs), calculated using baseline patient-level characteristics to derive expected mortality rate, ranged from 0.33 to 1.98. Of the treatment-level factors explored, only center adherence to early LPV was correlated with SMR. INTERPRETATION: Substantial center-to-center variability exists in ARDS management, suggesting that further opportunities for improving ARDS outcomes exist. Early adherence to LPV was associated with lower center mortality and may be a surrogate for overall quality of care processes. Future collaboration is needed to identify additional treatment-level factors influencing center-level outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03021824; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Survival models to support shared decision-making about advance care planning for people with advanced stage cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: For people with advanced stage cystic fibrosis (CF), tailored survival estimates could facilitate preparation for decision-making in the event of acutely deteriorating respiratory function. METHODS: We used the US CF Foundation national database (2008-2013) to identify adult people with incident advanced stage CF (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) ≤45% predicted). Using the lasso method for variable selection, we divided the dataset into training and validation samples (2:1), and developed two multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to calculate probabilities of survival from baseline (T0 model), and from 1 year after (T12 model). We also performed Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. RESULTS: 4752 people were included. For the T0 model, FEV1; insurance; non-invasive ventilation; supplemental oxygen; Burkholderia colonisation; cirrhosis; depression; dialysis; current smoking; unclassifiable mutation class and cumulative CF exacerbations predicted increased mortality. Baseline transplant evaluation status of 'accepted, on waiting list' predicted decreased mortality. For the T12 model, interim decrease in FEV1 >10%, and pulmonary exacerbations additionally increased predicted mortality. Lung transplantation was associated with lower mortality. Of the 4752, 93.5%, 86.4%, 79.7% and 73.9% survived to 1, 2, 3 and 4 years, respectively, without considering any confounding variables. The models had moderate predictive ability indicated by the area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve (0.787, 95% CI 0.769 to 0.794 for T0 model; and 0.779, 95% CI 0.767 to 0.797 for T12 model). CONCLUSION: We have developed models predicting survival in people with incident advanced stage CF, which can be reapplied over time to support shared decision-making about end-of-life treatment choices and lung transplantation. These estimates must be updated as data become available regarding long-term outcomes for people treated with CF transmembrane conductance regulator modulators.