Evaluating a psychological support service focused on the needs of critical care and theatres staff in the first wave of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: In response to COVID-19, the authors used clinical psychology resources from their hospital's Pain Medicine Department to provide direct support to critical areas. AIMS: The degree to which the service met the needs of staff and managers between March and August 2020 was evaluated. METHODS: A total of 51 staff were referred. Most were nurses (43%), followed by theatre practitioners (36%), healthcare assistants (9%), consultants (8%), administrative (2%) and support staff (2%). Working status, reason for referral and presenting difficulties at first appointment and outcome were recorded. Staff were sent an anonymous survey following intervention. FINDINGS: Staff reported high rates of burnout, anxiety and low mood, with 22% experiencing exacerbation of pre-existing mental health problems. All staff reported benefit from the intervention and managers provided positive feedback. CONCLUSION: Establishing a supportive service that included psychology benefited both staff and managers at the peak of the pandemic. Recommendations are provided.

Is continuous positive airway pressure therapy in COVID-19 associated with an increased rate of pulmonary barotrauma?

An increased incidence of pulmonary barotrauma in patients receiving CPAP for #COVID19 pneumonia was observed during the second peak of infections at this centre in the UK https://bit.ly/3qeSTp9.

CPAP delivered outside critical care during the second wave of COVID-19: outcomes from a UK respiratory surge unit.

BACKGROUND: NHS England recommends non-invasive continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) as a possible treatment for type 1 respiratory failure associated with COVID-19 pneumonitis, either to avoid intubation or as a ceiling of care. However, data assessing this strategy are sparse, especially for the use of CPAP as a ceiling of care, and particularly when delivered outside of a traditional critical care environment. We describe a cohort of patients from Liverpool, UK, who received CPAP on a dedicated respiratory surge unit at the start of the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in UK. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of consecutive patients receiving CPAP for the treatment of respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 on the respiratory surge unit at the Royal Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, UK from 21 September until 30 November 2020. RESULTS: 88 patients were included in the analysis. 56/88 (64%) were deemed suitable for escalation to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and received CPAP as a trial; 32/88 (36%) received CPAP as a ceiling of care. Median age was 63 years (IQR: 56-74) and 58/88 (66%) were men. Median SpO2/FiO2 immediately prior to CPAP initiation was 95 (92-152). Among patients for escalation to IMV, the median time on CPAP was 6 days (IQR 4-7) and survival at day 30 was 84% (47/56) with 14/56 (25%) escalated to IMV. Of those patients for whom CPAP was ceiling of care, the median duration of CPAP was 9 days (IQR 7-11) and 18/32 (56%) survived to day 30. Pulmonary barotrauma occurred in 9% of the cohort. There were no associations found on multivariant analysis that were associated with all-cause 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: With adequate planning and resource redistribution, CPAP may be delivered effectively outside of a traditional critical care setting for the treatment of respiratory failure due to COVID-19. Clinicians delivering CPAP to patients with COVID-19 pneumonitis should be alert to the dangers of pulmonary barotrauma. Among patients who are for escalation of care, the use of CPAP may avoid the need for IMV in some patients. Our data support the NHS England recommendation to consider CPAP as a ceiling of care.

The rapid development and deployment of a new multidisciplinary CPAP service outside of a critical care environment during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a dramatic increase in patients presenting with type 1 respiratory failure. In order to protect our limited critical care capacity, we rapidly developed a new ward-based inpatient continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) service with direct input from the respiratory, infectious diseases and critical care teams. Close collaboration between these specialties and new innovative solutions were required to facilitate this. CPAP equipment (normally reserved for domiciliary care) was adapted to reduce the pressure on our strained oxygen infrastructure. Side rooms on the infectious diseases ward were swiftly converted into new negative pressure areas using temporary installed ventilatory equipment, reducing the viral aerosol risk for staff. Novel patient monitoring solutions were used to protect staff while also ensuring patient safety. Staff training and specialist oversight was organised within days. The resulting service was successful, with over half (17/26 (65%)) of patients avoiding invasive ventilation.

Is continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) a new standard of care for type 1 respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients? A retrospective observational study of a dedicated COVID-19 CPAP service.

The aim of this case series is to describe and evaluate our experience of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) to treat type 1 respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19. CPAP was delivered in negative pressure rooms in the newly repurposed infectious disease unit. We report a cohort of 24 patients with type 1 respiratory failure and COVID-19 admitted to the Royal Liverpool Hospital between 1 April and 30 April 2020. Overall, our results were positive; we were able to safely administer CPAP outside the walls of a critical care or high dependency unit environment and over half of patients (58%) avoided mechanical ventilation and a total of 19 out of 24 (79%) have survived and been discharged from our care.

Critical care admission for acute medical patients.

Demand for intensive care is growing. There are no contemporaneous consensus guidelines on which patients should be referred to intensive care. Prognostic scoring systems predict survival, but are of limited use for individual patients. Some groups of patients have historically been regarded as having a very high mortality after admission to intensive care, raising questions about the appropriateness of advanced organ support in these patients. We reviewed the existing literature on outcomes of patients admitted to intensive care with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, liver cirrhosis and haematological malignancies. We identified specific markers indicating a poor prognosis in each group, and also identified common risk factors predicting a high mortality across all groups. Multiple organ failure at the time of referral to intensive care predicts a very poor outcome. Physical factors indicating a limited functional capacity also predict high mortality, suggesting that frailty has a significant impact on intensive care outcome.

Prediction of invasive candidal infection in critically ill patients with severe acute pancreatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with severe acute pancreatitis are at risk of candidal infections carrying the potential risk of an increase in mortality. Since early diagnosis is problematic, several clinical risk scores have been developed to identify patients at risk. Such patients may benefit from prophylactic antifungal therapy while those patients who have a low risk of infection may not benefit and may be harmed. The aim of this study was to assess the validity and discrimination of existing risk scores for invasive candidal infections in patients with severe acute pancreatitis. METHODS: Patients admitted with severe acute pancreatitis to the intensive care unit were analysed. Outcomes and risk factors of admissions with and without candidal infection were compared. Accuracy and discrimination of three existing risk scores for the development of invasive candidal infection (Candida score, Candida Colonisation Index Score and the Invasive Candidiasis Score) were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients were identified from 2003 to 2011 and 18 (17.8%) of these developed candidal infection. Thirty patients died, giving an overall hospital mortality of 29.7%. Hospital mortality was significantly higher in patients with candidal infection (55.6% compared to 24.1%, P=0.02). Candida colonisation was associated with subsequent candidal infection on multivariate analysis. The Candida Colonisation Index Score was the most accurate test, with specificity of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 0.88), sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.87), negative predictive value of 0.91 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.97) and a positive likelihood ratio of 3.2 (95% CI 1.9 to 5.5). The Candida Colonisation Index Score showed the best discrimination with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.79 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.87). CONCLUSIONS: In this study the Candida Colonisation Index Score was the most accurate and discriminative test at identifying which patients with severe acute pancreatitis are at risk of developing candidal infection. However its low sensitivity may limit its clinical usefulness.

An evaluation of the Charlson co-morbidity score for predicting sepsis after elective major surgery.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Severe sepsis is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality following major surgery. The Charlson co-morbidity score (CCS) has been shown to be associated with severe sepsis following major surgery for cancer. This prospective observational study investigated the effect of patient factors (CCS, gender, age and malignancy) and intraoperative factors (duration of surgery and allogeneic blood transfusion) on the incidence of sepsis after elective major surgery, and the impact of patient co-morbidities on length of stay in critical care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively identified a cohort of 101 patients undergoing elective major surgery in a university teaching hospital. The CCS was calculated before surgery, and the incidence of sepsis was documented following surgery. We investigated whether age, malignancy, intraoperative allogeneic blood transfusion, length of surgery or gender were associated with sepsis following surgery. RESULTS: Twenty-seven (27%) patients developed sepsis. Using multivariate logistic regression, the duration of surgery was associated with the development of sepsis after surgery (P = 0.054, odds ratio 1.2). The CCS was not associated with sepsis in this population of cancer and non-cancer patients undergoing elective major surgery, but was associated with longer length of stay in the intensive care unit (P = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Duration of surgery, but not patient co-morbidity as assessed by the CCS, may predict the postoperative incidence of sepsis. CCS could be used as a guide to predict consumption of critical care resources by elective surgical patients. A higher CCS was associated with a longer ICU stay. Resources, such as postoperative goal directed therapy, may be useful in reducing length of stay, hospital costs and risks of infective complications in this subgroup of patients with higher CCS.

Admission factors associated with hospital mortality in patients with haematological malignancy admitted to UK adult, general critical care units: a secondary analysis of the ICNARC Case Mix Programme Database.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with haematological malignancy admitted to intensive care have a high mortality. Adverse prognostic factors include the number of organ failures, invasive mechanical ventilation and previous bone marrow transplantation. Severity-of-illness scores may underestimate the mortality of critically ill patients with haematological malignancy. This study investigates the relationship between admission characteristics and outcome in patients with haematological malignancies admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and assesses the performance of three severity-of-illness scores in this population. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) Case Mix Programme Database was conducted on admissions to 178 adult, general ICUs in England, Wales and Northern Ireland between 1995 and 2007. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with hospital mortality. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and ICNARC score were evaluated for discrimination (the ability to distinguish survivors from nonsurvivors); and the APACHE II, SAPS II and ICNARC mortality probabilities were evaluated for calibration (the accuracy of the estimated probability of survival). RESULTS: There were 7,689 eligible admissions. ICU mortality was 43.1% (3,312 deaths) and acute hospital mortality was 59.2% (4,239 deaths). ICU and hospital mortality increased with the number of organ failures on admission. Admission factors associated with an increased risk of death were bone marrow transplant, Hodgkin's lymphoma, severe sepsis, age, length of hospital stay prior to intensive care admission, tachycardia, low systolic blood pressure, tachypnoea, low Glasgow Coma Score, sedation, PaO2:FiO2, acidaemia, alkalaemia, oliguria, hyponatraemia, hypernatraemia, low haematocrit, and uraemia. The ICNARC model had the best discrimination of the three scores analysed, as assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.78, but all scores were poorly calibrated. APACHE II had the highest accuracy at predicting hospital mortality, with a standardised mortality ratio of 1.01. SAPS II and the ICNARC score both underestimated hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Increased hospital mortality is associated with the length of hospital stay prior to ICU admission and with severe sepsis, suggesting that, if appropriate, such patients should be treated aggressively with early ICU admission. A low haematocrit was associated with higher mortality and this relationship requires further investigation. The severity-of-illness scores assessed in this study had reasonable discriminative power, but none showed good calibration.