Long-term impact of COVID-19 hospitalisation among individuals with pre-existing airway diseases in the UK: a multicentre, longitudinal cohort study - PHOSP-COVID.

Background: The long-term outcomes of COVID-19 hospitalisation in individuals with pre-existing airway diseases are unknown. Methods: Adult participants hospitalised for confirmed or clinically suspected COVID-19 and discharged between 5 March 2020 and 31 March 2021 were recruited to the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 (PHOSP-COVID) study. Participants attended research visits at 5 months and 1 year post discharge. Clinical characteristics, perceived recovery, burden of symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of individuals with pre-existing airway disease (i.e., asthma, COPD or bronchiectasis) were compared to the non-airways group. Results: A total of 615 out of 2697 (22.8%) participants had a history of pre-existing airway diseases (72.0% diagnosed with asthma, 22.9% COPD and 5.1% bronchiectasis). At 1 year, the airways group participants were less likely to feel fully recovered (20.4% versus 33.2%, p<0.001), had higher burden of anxiety (29.1% versus 22.0%, p=0.002), depression (31.2% versus 24.7%, p=0.006), higher percentage of impaired mobility using short physical performance battery ≤10 (57.4% versus 45.2%, p<0.001) and 27% had a new disability (assessed by the Washington Group Short Set on Functioning) versus 16.6%, p=0.014. HRQoL assessed using EQ-5D-5L Utility Index was lower in the airways group (mean±SD 0.64±0.27 versus 0.73±0.25, p<0.001). Burden of breathlessness, fatigue and cough measured using a study-specific tool was higher in the airways group. Conclusion: Individuals with pre-existing airway diseases hospitalised due to COVID-19 were less likely to feel fully recovered, had lower physiological performance measurements, more burden of symptoms and reduced HRQoL up to 1 year post-hospital discharge.

Identification of Novel Isatin Derivative Bearing a Nitrofuran Moiety as Potent Multi-Isoform Aldehyde Dehydrogenase Inhibitor.

Aldehyde dehydrogenases (ALDHs) are a family of enzymes that aid in detoxification and are overexpressed in several different malignancies. There is a correlation between increased expression of ALDH and a poor prognosis, stemness, and resistance to several drugs. Several ALDH inhibitors have been generated due to the crucial role that ALDH plays in cancer stem cells. All of these inhibitors, however, are either ineffective, very toxic, or have yet to be subjected to rigorous testing on their effectiveness. Although various drug-like compounds targeting ALDH have been reported in the literature, none have made it to routine use in the oncology clinic. As a result, new potent, non-toxic, bioavailable, and therapeutically effective ALDH inhibitors are still needed. In this study, we designed and synthesized potent multi-ALDH isoform inhibitors based on the isatin and indazole pharmacophore. Molecular docking studies and enzymatic tests revealed that among all of the synthesized analogs, compound 3 is the most potent inhibitor of ALDH1A1, ALDH3A1, and ALDH1A3, exhibiting 51.32%, 51.87%, and 36.65% inhibition, respectively. The ALDEFLUOR assay further revealed that compound 3 acts as an ALDH broad spectrum inhibitor at 500 nM. Compound 3 was also the most cytotoxic to cancer cells, with an IC50 in the range of 2.1 to 3.8 µM for ovarian, colon, and pancreatic cancer cells, compared to normal and embryonic kidney cells (IC50 7.1 to 8.7 µM). Mechanistically, compound 3 increased ROS activity due to potent multi-ALDH isoform inhibition, which increased apoptosis. Taken together, this study identified a potent multi-isoform ALDH inhibitor that could be further developed as a cancer therapeutic.

Epidemiology of Renal Replacement Therapy for Critically Ill Patients across Seven Health Jurisdictions.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring treatment with renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a common complication after admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, the prevalence of RRT use and the associated outcomes in critically patients across the globe are not well described. Therefore, we describe the epidemiology and outcomes of patients receiving RRT for AKI in ICUs across several large health system jurisdictions. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis using nationally representative and comparable databases from seven health jurisdictions in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, New Zealand, Scotland, and the USA between 2006 and 2023, depending on data availability of each dataset. Patients with a history of end-stage kidney disease receiving chronic RRT and patients with a history of renal transplant were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 4,104,480 patients in the ICU cohort and 3,520,516 patients in the mechanical ventilation cohort were included. Overall, 156,403 (3.8%) patients in the ICU cohort and 240,824 (6.8%) patients in the mechanical ventilation cohort were treated with RRT for AKI. In the ICU cohort, the proportion of patients treated with RRT was lowest in Australia and Brazil (3.3%) and highest in Scotland (9.2%). The in-hospital mortality for critically ill patients treated with RRT was almost fourfold higher (57.1%) than those not receiving RRT (16.8%). The mortality of patients treated with RRT varied across the health jurisdictions from 37 to 65%. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of patients who receive RRT in ICUs throughout the world vary widely. Our research suggests that differences in access to and provision of this therapy are contributing factors.

Albumin Versus Balanced Crystalloid for the Early Resuscitation of Sepsis: An Open Parallel-Group Randomized Feasibility Trial. The ABC-Sepsis Trial.

OBJECTIVES: International guidelines recommend IV crystalloid as the primary fluid for sepsis resuscitation, with 5% human albumin solution (HAS) as the second line. However, it is unclear which fluid has superior clinical effectiveness. We conducted a trial to assess the feasibility of delivering a randomized controlled trial comparing balanced crystalloid against 5% HAS as sole early resuscitation fluid in patients with sepsis presenting to hospital. DESIGN: Multicenter, open, parallel-group randomized feasibility trial. SETTING: Emergency departments (EDs) in 15 U.K. National Health Service (NHS) hospitals. PATIENTS: Adult patients with sepsis and a National Early Warning Score 2 greater than or equal to five requiring IV fluids withing one hour of randomization. INTERVENTIONS: IV fluid resuscitation with balanced crystalloid or 5% HAS for the first 6 hours following randomization. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment rate and 30-day mortality. We successfully recruited 301 participants over 12 months. Mean (sd) age was 69 years (± 16 yr), and 151 (50%) were male. From 1303 participants screened; 502 participants were potentially eligible and 300 randomized to receive trial intervention with greater than 95% of participants receiving the intervention. The median number of participants per site was 19 (range, 1-63). Thirty-day mortality was 17.9% (n = 53). Thirty-one participants died (21.1%) within 30 days in the 5% HAS arm, compared with 22 participants (14.8%) in the crystalloid arm (adjusted odds ratio, 1.50; 95% CIs, 0.84-2.83). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest it is feasible to recruit critically ill patients to a fluid resuscitation trial in U.K. EDs using 5% HAS as a primary resuscitation fluid. There was lower mortality in the balanced crystalloid arm. Given these findings, a definitive trial is likely to be deliverable, but the point estimates suggest such a trial would be unlikely to demonstrate a significant benefit from using 5% HAS as a primary resuscitation fluid in sepsis.

Measuring the impact of maternal critical care admission on short- and longer-term maternal and birth outcomes.

PURPOSE: Factors increasing the risk of maternal critical illness are rising in prevalence in maternity populations. Studies of general critical care populations highlight that severe illness is associated with longer-term physical and psychological morbidity. We aimed to compare short- and longer-term outcomes between women who required critical care admission during pregnancy/puerperium and those who did not. METHODS: This is a cohort study including all women delivering in Scottish hospitals between 01/01/2005 and 31/12/2018, using national healthcare databases. The primary exposure was intensive care unit (ICU) admission, while secondary exposures included high dependency unit admission. Outcomes included hospital readmission (1-year post-hospital discharge, 1-year mortality, psychiatric hospital admission, stillbirth, and neonatal critical care admission). Multivariable Cox and logistic regression were used to report hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratios (OR) of association between ICU admission and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 762,918 deliveries, 1449 (0.18%) women were admitted to ICU, most commonly due to post-partum hemorrhage (225, 15.5%) followed by eclampsia/pre-eclampsia (133, 9.2%). Over-half (53.8%) required mechanical ventilation. One-year hospital readmission was more frequent in women admitted to ICU compared with non-ICU populations [24.5% (n = 299) vs 8.9% (n = 68,029)]. This association persisted after confounder adjustment (HR 1.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33, 2.81, p < 0.001). Furthermore, maternal ICU admission was associated with increased 1-year mortality (HR 40.06, 95% CI 24.04, 66.76, p < 0.001), stillbirth (OR 12.31, 95% CI 7.95,19.08, p < 0.001) and neonatal critical care admission (OR 6.99, 95% CI 5.64,8.67, p < 0.001) after confounder adjustment. CONCLUSION: Critical care admission increases the risk of adverse short-term and long-term maternal, pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. Optimizing long-term post-partum care may benefit maternal critical illness survivors.

Predicting short- to medium-term care home admission risk in older adults: a systematic review of externally validated models.

INTRODUCTION: Predicting risk of care home admission could identify older adults for early intervention to support independent living but require external validation in a different dataset before clinical use. We systematically reviewed external validations of care home admission risk prediction models in older adults. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library until 14 August 2023 for external validations of prediction models for care home admission risk in adults aged ≥65 years with up to 3 years of follow-up. We extracted and narratively synthesised data on study design, model characteristics, and model discrimination and calibration (accuracy of predictions). We assessed risk of bias and applicability using Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool. RESULTS: Five studies reporting validations of nine unique models were included. Model applicability was fair but risk of bias was mostly high due to not reporting model calibration. Morbidities were used as predictors in four models, most commonly neurological or psychiatric diseases. Physical function was also included in four models. For 1-year prediction, three of the six models had acceptable discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC)/c statistic 0.70-0.79) and the remaining three had poor discrimination (AUC < 0.70). No model accounted for competing mortality risk. The only study examining model calibration (but ignoring competing mortality) concluded that it was excellent. CONCLUSIONS: The reporting of models was incomplete. Model discrimination was at best acceptable, and calibration was rarely examined (and ignored competing mortality risk when examined). There is a need to derive better models that account for competing mortality risk and report calibration as well as discrimination.

Psychotropic prescribing after hospital discharge in survivors of critical illness, a retrospective cohort study (2012-2019).

Background: Many people survive critical illness with the burden of new or worsened mental health issues and sleep disturbances. We examined the frequency of psychotropic prescribing after critical illness, comparing critical care to non-critical care hospitalised survivors, and whether this varied in important subgroups. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 23,340 critical care and 367,185 non-critical care hospitalised adults from 2012 through 2019 in Lothian, Scotland, who survived to discharge. Results: One-third of critical care survivors (32%; 7527/23,340) received a psychotropic prescription within 90 days after hospital discharge (25% antidepressants; 14% anxiolytics/hypnotics; 4% antipsychotics/mania medicines). In contrast, 15% (54,589/367,185) of non-critical care survivors received a psychotropic prescription (12% antidepressants; 5% anxiolytics/hypnotics; 2% antipsychotics/mania medicines). Among patients without psychotropic prescriptions within 180 days prior to hospitalisation, after hospital discharge, the critical care group had a higher incidence of psychotropic prescription (10.3%; 1610/15,609) compared with the non-critical care group (3.2%; 9743/307,429); unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 3.39, 95% CI: 3.22-3.57. After adjustment for potential confounders, the risk remained elevated (adjusted HR 2.03, 95% CI: 1.91-2.16), persisted later in follow-up (90-365 days; adjusted HR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.30-1.46), and was more pronounced in those without recorded comorbidities (adjusted HR 3.49, 95% CI: 3.22-3.78). Conclusions: Critical care survivors have a higher risk of receiving psychotropic prescriptions than hospitalised patients, with a significant proportion receiving benzodiazepines and other hypnotics. Future research should focus on the requirement for and safety of psychotropic medicines in survivors of critical illness, to help guide policy for clinical practice.

EPidemiology Of Cardiogenic sHock in Scotland (EPOCHS): A multicentre, prospective observational study of the prevalence, management and outcomes of cardiogenic shock in Scotland.

Background: Despite high rates of cardiovascular disease in Scotland, the prevalence and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock are unknown. Methods: We undertook a prospective observational cohort study of consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) or coronary care unit at 13 hospitals in Scotland for a 6-month period. Denominator data from the Scottish Intensive Care Society Audit Group were used to estimate ICU prevalence; data for coronary care units were unavailable. We undertook multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with in-hospital mortality. Results: In total, 247 patients with cardiogenic shock were included. After exclusion of coronary care unit admissions, this comprised 3.0% of all ICU admissions during the study period (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6%-3.5%). Aetiology was acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 48%. The commonest vasoactive treatment was noradrenaline (56%) followed by adrenaline (46%) and dobutamine (40%). Mechanical circulatory support was used in 30%. Overall in-hospital mortality was 55%. After multivariable logistic regression, age (odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.06), admission lactate (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.19), Society for Cardiovascular Angiographic Intervention stage D or E at presentation (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.10-4.29) and use of adrenaline (OR 2.73, 95% CI 1.40-5.40) were associated with mortality. Conclusions: In Scotland the prevalence of cardiogenic shock was 3% of all ICU admissions; more than half died prior to discharge. There was significant variation in treatment approaches, particularly with respect to vasoactive support strategy.

Neurological outcome following out of hospital cardiac arrest: Evaluation of performance of existing risk prediction models in a UK cohort.

Introduction: Out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a common problem. Rates of survival are low and a proportion of survivors are left with an unfavourable neurological outcome. Four models have been developed to predict risk of unfavourable outcome at the time of critical care admission - the Cardiac Arrest Hospital Prognosis (CAHP), MIRACLE2, Out of Hospital Cardiac Arrest (OHCA), and Targeted Temperature Management (TTM) models. This evaluation evaluates the performance of these four models in a United Kingdom population and provides comparison to performance of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE-II) score. Methods: A retrospective evaluation of the performance of the models was conducted over a 43-month period in 414 adult, non-pregnant patients presenting consecutively following non-traumatic OHCA to the five units in our regional critical care network. Scores were generated for each model for where patients had complete data (CAHP = 347, MIRACLE2 = 375, OHCA = 356, TTM = 385). Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) outcome was calculated for each patient at last documented follow up and an unfavourable outcome defined as CPC ⩾ 3. Performance for discrimination of unfavourable outcome was tested by generating receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for each model and comparing the area under the curve (AUC). Results: Best performance for discrimination of unfavourable outcome was demonstrated by the high risk group of the CAHP score with an AUC of 0.87 [95% CI 0.83-0.91], specificity of 97.1% [95% CI 93.8-100] and positive predictive value (PPV) of 96.3% [95% CI 92.2-100]. The high risk group of the MIRACLE2 model, which is significantly easier to calculate, had an AUC of 0.81 [95% CI 0.76-0.86], specificity of 92.3% [95% CI 87.2-97.4] and PPV of 95.2% [95% CI 91.9-98.4]. Conclusion: The CAHP, MIRACLE2, OHCA and TTM scores all perform comparably in a UK population to the original development and validation cohorts. All four scores outperform APACHE-II in a population of patients resuscitated from OHCA. CAHP and TTM perform best but are more complex to calculate than MIRACLE2, which displays inferior performance.

Long COVID and cardiovascular disease: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) or cardiovascular risk factors have been associated with an increased risk of complications following hospitalisation with COVID-19, but their impact on the rate of recovery following discharge is not known. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the rate of patient-perceived recovery following hospitalisation with COVID-19 was affected by the presence of CVD or cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS: In a multicentre prospective cohort study, patients were recruited following discharge from the hospital with COVID-19 undertaking two comprehensive assessments at 5 months and 12 months. Patients were stratified by the presence of either CVD or cardiovascular risk factors prior to hospitalisation with COVID-19 and compared with controls with neither. Full recovery was determined by the response to a patient-perceived evaluation of full recovery from COVID-19 in the context of physical, physiological and cognitive determinants of health. RESULTS: From a total population of 2545 patients (38.8% women), 472 (18.5%) and 1355 (53.2%) had CVD or cardiovascular risk factors, respectively. Compared with controls (n=718), patients with CVD and cardiovascular risk factors were older and more likely to have had severe COVID-19. Full recovery was significantly lower at 12 months in patients with CVD (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89) and cardiovascular risk factors (aOR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.86). CONCLUSION: Patients with CVD or cardiovascular risk factors had a delayed recovery at 12 months following hospitalisation with COVID-19. Targeted interventions to reduce the impact of COVID-19 in patients with cardiovascular disease remain an unmet need. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10980107.

Large-scale phenotyping of patients with long COVID post-hospitalization reveals mechanistic subtypes of disease.

One in ten severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections result in prolonged symptoms termed long coronavirus disease (COVID), yet disease phenotypes and mechanisms are poorly understood1. Here we profiled 368 plasma proteins in 657 participants ≥3 months following hospitalization. Of these, 426 had at least one long COVID symptom and 233 had fully recovered. Elevated markers of myeloid inflammation and complement activation were associated with long COVID. IL-1R2, MATN2 and COLEC12 were associated with cardiorespiratory symptoms, fatigue and anxiety/depression; MATN2, CSF3 and C1QA were elevated in gastrointestinal symptoms and C1QA was elevated in cognitive impairment. Additional markers of alterations in nerve tissue repair (SPON-1 and NFASC) were elevated in those with cognitive impairment and SCG3, suggestive of brain-gut axis disturbance, was elevated in gastrointestinal symptoms. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) was persistently elevated in some individuals with long COVID, but virus was not detected in sputum. Analysis of inflammatory markers in nasal fluids showed no association with symptoms. Our study aimed to understand inflammatory processes that underlie long COVID and was not designed for biomarker discovery. Our findings suggest that specific inflammatory pathways related to tissue damage are implicated in subtypes of long COVID, which might be targeted in future therapeutic trials.

Alpha 2 agonists for sedation to produce better outcomes from critical illness (A2B trial): protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: An association between deep sedation and adverse short-term outcomes has been demonstrated although this evidence has been inconsistent. The A2B (alpha-2 agonists for sedation in critical care) sedation trial is designed to determine whether the alpha-2 agonists clonidine and dexmedetomidine, compared with usual care, are clinically and cost-effective. The A2B intervention is a complex intervention conducted in 39 intensive care units (ICUs) in the UK. Multicentre organisational factors, variable cultures, perceptions and practices and the involvement of multiple members of the healthcare team add to the complexity of the A2B trial. From our pretrial contextual exploration it was apparent that routine practices such as type and frequency of pain, agitation and delirium assessment, as well as the common sedative agents used, varied widely across the UK. Anticipated challenges in implementing A2B focused on the impact of usual practice, perceptions of risk, ICU culture, structure and the presence of equipoise. Given this complexity, a process evaluation has been embedded in the A2B trial to uncover factors that could impact successful delivery and explore their impact on intervention delivery and interpretation of outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed-methods process evaluation guided by the A2B intervention logic model. It includes two phases of data collection conducted during and at the end of trial. Data will be collected using a combination of questionnaires, stakeholder interviews and routinely collected trial data. A framework approach will be used to analyse qualitative data with synthesis of data within and across the phases. The nature of the relationship between delivery of the A2B intervention and the trial primary and secondary outcomes will be explored. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All elements of the A2B trial, including the process evaluation, are approved by Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (Ref. 18/SS/0085). Dissemination will be via publications, presentations and media engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03653832.

Performance of models for predicting 1-year to 3-year mortality in older adults: a systematic review of externally validated models.

Mortality prediction models support identifying older adults with short life expectancy for whom clinical care might need modifications. We systematically reviewed external validations of mortality prediction models in older adults (ie, aged 65 years and older) with up to 3 years of follow-up. In March, 2023, we conducted a literature search resulting in 36 studies reporting 74 validations of 64 unique models. Model applicability was fair but validation risk of bias was mostly high, with 50 (68%) of 74 validations not reporting calibration. Morbidities (most commonly cardiovascular diseases) were used as predictors by 45 (70%) of 64 of models. For 1-year prediction, 31 (67%) of 46 models had acceptable discrimination, but only one had excellent performance. Models with more than 20 predictors were more likely to have acceptable discrimination (risk ratio [RR] vs <10 predictors 1·68, 95% CI 1·06-2·66), as were models including sex (RR 1·75, 95% CI 1·12-2·73) or predicting risk during comprehensive geriatric assessment (RR 1·86, 95% CI 1·12-3·07). Development and validation of better-performing mortality prediction models in older people are needed.

Plasma steroid concentrations reflect acute disease severity and normalise during recovery in people hospitalised with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: Endocrine systems are disrupted in acute illness, and symptoms reported following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are similar to those found with clinical hormone deficiencies. We hypothesised that people with severe acute COVID-19 and with post-COVID symptoms have glucocorticoid and sex hormone deficiencies. DESIGN/PATIENTS: Samples were obtained for analysis from two UK multicentre cohorts during hospitalisation with COVID-19 (International Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Consortium/World Health Organisation [WHO] Clinical Characterization Protocol for Severe Emerging Infections in the UK study), and at follow-up 5 months after hospitalisation (Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study). MEASUREMENTS: Plasma steroids were quantified by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Steroid concentrations were compared against disease severity (WHO ordinal scale) and validated symptom scores. Data are presented as geometric mean (SD). RESULTS: In the acute cohort (n = 239, 66.5% male), plasma cortisol concentration increased with disease severity (cortisol 753.3 [1.6] vs. 429.2 [1.7] nmol/L in fatal vs. least severe, p < .001). In males, testosterone concentrations decreased with severity (testosterone 1.2 [2.2] vs. 6.9 [1.9] nmol/L in fatal vs. least severe, p < .001). In the follow-up cohort (n = 198, 62.1% male, 68.9% ongoing symptoms, 165 [121-192] days postdischarge), plasma cortisol concentrations (275.6 [1.5] nmol/L) did not differ with in-hospital severity, perception of recovery, or patient-reported symptoms. Male testosterone concentrations (12.6 [1.5] nmol/L) were not related to in-hospital severity, perception of recovery or symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: Circulating glucocorticoids in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 reflect acute illness, with a marked rise in cortisol and fall in male testosterone. These findings are not observed 5 months from discharge. The lack of association between hormone concentrations and common post-COVID symptoms suggests steroid insufficiency does not play a causal role in this condition.

Post-acute COVID-19 neuropsychiatric symptoms are not associated with ongoing nervous system injury.

A proportion of patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 experience a range of neuropsychiatric symptoms months after infection, including cognitive deficits, depression and anxiety. The mechanisms underpinning such symptoms remain elusive. Recent research has demonstrated that nervous system injury can occur during COVID-19. Whether ongoing neural injury in the months after COVID-19 accounts for the ongoing or emergent neuropsychiatric symptoms is unclear. Within a large prospective cohort study of adult survivors who were hospitalized for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, we analysed plasma markers of nervous system injury and astrocytic activation, measured 6 months post-infection: neurofilament light, glial fibrillary acidic protein and total tau protein. We assessed whether these markers were associated with the severity of the acute COVID-19 illness and with post-acute neuropsychiatric symptoms (as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire for depression, the General Anxiety Disorder assessment for anxiety, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment for objective cognitive deficit and the cognitive items of the Patient Symptom Questionnaire for subjective cognitive deficit) at 6 months and 1 year post-hospital discharge from COVID-19. No robust associations were found between markers of nervous system injury and severity of acute COVID-19 (except for an association of small effect size between duration of admission and neurofilament light) nor with post-acute neuropsychiatric symptoms. These results suggest that ongoing neuropsychiatric symptoms are not due to ongoing neural injury.

Non-COVID-19 intensive care admissions during the pandemic: a multinational registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a large number of critical care admissions. While national reports have described the outcomes of patients with COVID-19, there is limited international data of the pandemic impact on non-COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care treatment. METHODS: We conducted an international, retrospective cohort study using 2019 and 2020 data from 11 national clinical quality registries covering 15 countries. Non-COVID-19 admissions in 2020 were compared with all admissions in 2019, prepandemic. The primary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and standardised mortality ratio (SMR). Analyses were stratified by the country income level(s) of each registry. FINDINGS: Among 1 642 632 non-COVID-19 admissions, there was an increase in ICU mortality between 2019 (9.3%) and 2020 (10.4%), OR=1.15 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.17, p<0.001). Increased mortality was observed in middle-income countries (OR 1.25 95% CI 1.23 to 1.26), while mortality decreased in high-income countries (OR=0.96 95% CI 0.94 to 0.98). Hospital mortality and SMR trends for each registry were consistent with the observed ICU mortality findings. The burden of COVID-19 was highly variable, with COVID-19 ICU patient-days per bed ranging from 0.4 to 81.6 between registries. This alone did not explain the observed non-COVID-19 mortality changes. INTERPRETATION: Increased ICU mortality occurred among non-COVID-19 patients during the pandemic, driven by increased mortality in middle-income countries, while mortality decreased in high-income countries. The causes for this inequity are likely multi-factorial, but healthcare spending, policy pandemic responses, and ICU strain may play significant roles.

Prevalence of frailty and association with patient centered outcomes: A prospective registry-embedded cohort study from India.

PURPOSE: We aimed to study the prevalence of frailty, evaluate risk factors, and understand impact on outcomes in India. METHODS: This was a prospective registry-embedded cohort study across 7 intensive care units (ICUs) and included adult patients anticipated to stay for at least 48 h. Primary exposure was frailty, as defined by a score ≥ 5 on the Clinical Frailty Scale and primary outcome was ICU mortality. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and resource utilization. We used generalized linear models to evaluate risk factors and model association between frailty and outcomes. RESULTS: 838 patients were included, with median (IQR) age 57 (42,68) yrs.; 64.8% were male. Prevalence of frailty was 19.8%. Charlson comorbidity index (OR:1.73 (95%CI:1.39,2.15)), Subjective Global Assessment categories mild/moderate malnourishment (OR:1.90 (95%CI:1.29, 2.80)) and severe malnourishment (OR:4.76 (95% CI:2.10,10.77)) were associated with frailty. Frailty was associated with higher odds of ICU mortality (adjusted OR:2.04 (95% CI:1.25,3.33)), hospital mortality (adjusted OR:2.36 (95%CI:1.45,3.84)), development of stage2/3 AKI (unadjusted OR:2.35 (95%CI:1.60, 3.43)), receipt of non-invasive ventilation (unadjusted OR:2.68 (95%CI:1.77, 4.03)), receipt of vasopressors (unadjusted OR:1.47 (95%CI:1.04, 2.07)), and receipt of kidney replacement therapy (unadjusted OR:3.15 (95%CI:1.90, 5.17)). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is common among critically ill patients in India and is associated with worse outcomes. STUDY REGISTRATION: CTRI/2021/02/031503.

National ICU Registries as Enablers of Clinical Research and Quality Improvement.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical quality registries (CQRs) have been implemented worldwide by several medical specialties aiming to generate a better characterization of epidemiology, treatments, and outcomes of patients. National ICU registries were created almost 3 decades ago to improve the understanding of case-mix, resource use, and outcomes of critically ill patients. This narrative review describes the challenges, proposed solutions, and evidence generated by National ICU registries as facilitators for research and quality improvement. DATA SOURCES: English language articles were identified in PubMed using phrases related to ICU registries, CQRs, outcomes, and case-mix. STUDY SELECTION: Original research, review articles, letters, and commentaries, were considered. DATA EXTRACTION: Data from relevant literature were identified, reviewed, and integrated into a concise narrative review. DATA SYNTHESIS: CQRs have been implemented worldwide by several medical specialties aiming to generate a better characterization of epidemiology, treatments, and outcomes of patients. National ICU registries were created almost 3 decades ago to improve the understanding of case-mix, resource use, and outcomes of critically ill patients. The initial experience in European countries and in Oceania ensured that through locally generated data, ICUs could assess their performances by using risk-adjusted measures and compare their results through fair and validated benchmarking metrics with other ICUs contributing to the CQR. The accomplishment of these initiatives, coupled with the increasing adoption of information technology, resulted in a broad geographic expansion of CQRs as well as their use in quality improvement studies, clinical trials as well as international comparisons, and benchmarking for ICUs. CONCLUSIONS: ICU registries have provided increased knowledge of case-mix and outcomes of ICU patients based on real-world data and contributed to improve care delivery through quality improvement initiatives and trials. Recent increases in adoption of new technologies (i.e., cloud-based structures, artificial intelligence, machine learning) will ensure a broader and better use of data for epidemiology, healthcare policies, quality improvement, and clinical trials.

Alpha 2 agonists for sedation to produce better outcomes from critical illness (A2B Trial): protocol for a multicentre phase 3 pragmatic clinical and cost-effectiveness randomised trial in the UK.

INTRODUCTION: Almost all patients receiving mechanical ventilation (MV) in intensive care units (ICUs) require analgesia and sedation. The most widely used sedative drug is propofol, but there is uncertainty whether alpha2-agonists are superior. The alpha 2 agonists for sedation to produce better outcomes from critical illness (A2B) trial aims to determine whether clonidine or dexmedetomidine (or both) are clinically and cost-effective in MV ICU patients compared with usual care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Adult ICU patients within 48 hours of starting MV, expected to require at least 24 hours further MV, are randomised in an open-label three arm trial to receive propofol (usual care) or clonidine or dexmedetomidine as primary sedative, plus analgesia according to local practice. Exclusions include patients with primary brain injury; postcardiac arrest; other neurological conditions; or bradycardia. Unless clinically contraindicated, sedation is titrated using weight-based dosing guidance to achieve a Richmond-Agitation-Sedation score of -2 or greater as early as considered safe by clinicians. The primary outcome is time to successful extubation. Secondary ICU outcomes include delirium and coma incidence/duration, sedation quality, predefined adverse events, mortality and ICU length of stay. Post-ICU outcomes include mortality, anxiety and depression, post-traumatic stress, cognitive function and health-related quality of life at 6-month follow-up. A process evaluation and health economic evaluation are embedded in the trial.The analytic framework uses a hierarchical approach to maximise efficiency and control type I error. Stage 1 tests whether each alpha2-agonist is superior to propofol. If either/both interventions are superior, stages 2 and 3 testing explores which alpha2-agonist is more effective. To detect a mean difference of 2 days in MV duration, we aim to recruit 1437 patients (479 per group) in 40-50 UK ICUs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Scotland A REC approved the trial (18/SS/0085). We use a surrogate decision-maker or deferred consent model consistent with UK law. Dissemination will be via publications, presentations and updated guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03653832.

Evaluation of pragmatic oxygenation measurement as a proxy for Covid-19 severity.

Choosing optimal outcome measures maximizes statistical power, accelerates discovery and improves reliability in early-phase trials. We devised and evaluated a modification to a pragmatic measure of oxygenation function, the [Formula: see text] ratio. Because of the ceiling effect in oxyhaemoglobin saturation, [Formula: see text] ratio ceases to reflect pulmonary oxygenation function at high [Formula: see text] values. We found that the correlation of [Formula: see text] with the reference standard ([Formula: see text]/[Formula: see text] ratio) improves substantially when excluding [Formula: see text] and refer to this measure as [Formula: see text]. Using observational data from 39,765 hospitalised COVID-19 patients, we demonstrate that [Formula: see text] is predictive of mortality, and compare the sample sizes required for trials using four different outcome measures. We show that a significant difference in outcome could be detected with the smallest sample size using [Formula: see text]. We demonstrate that [Formula: see text] is an effective intermediate outcome measure in COVID-19. It is a non-invasive measurement, representative of disease severity and provides greater statistical power.