Hospital Mortality and Resource Implications of Hospitalisation with COVID-19 in London, UK: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had a significant impact on the National Health Service in the United Kingdom (UK), with over 35 000 cases reported in London by July 30, 2020. Detailed hospital-level information on patient characteristics, outcomes, and capacity strain is currently scarce but would guide clinical decision-making and inform prioritisation and planning. METHODS: We aimed to determine factors associated with hospital mortality and describe hospital and ICU strain by conducting a prospective cohort study at a tertiary academic centre in London, UK. We included adult patients admitted to the hospital with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and followed them up until hospital discharge or 30 days. Baseline factors that are associated with hospital mortality were identified via semiparametric and parametric survival analyses. RESULTS: Our study included 429 patients: 18% of them were admitted to the ICU, 52% met criteria for ICU outreach team activation, and 61% had treatment limitations placed during their admission. Hospital mortality was 26% and ICU mortality was 34%. Hospital mortality was independently associated with increasing age, male sex, history of chronic kidney disease, increasing baseline C-reactive protein level, and dyspnoea at presentation. COVID-19 resulted in substantial ICU and hospital strain, with up to 9 daily ICU admissions and 41 daily hospital admissions, to a peak census of 80 infected patients admitted in the ICU and 250 in the hospital. Management of such a surge required extensive reorganisation of critical care services with expansion of ICU capacity from 69 to 129 beds, redeployment of staff from other hospital areas, and coordinated hospital-level effort. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 is associated with a high burden of mortality for patients treated on the ward and the ICU and required substantial reconfiguration of critical care services. This has significant implications for planning and resource utilisation.

Chest radiography is a poor predictor of respiratory symptoms and functional impairment in survivors of severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: A standardised approach to assessing COVID-19 survivors has not been established, largely due to the paucity of data on medium- and long-term sequelae. Interval chest radiography is recommended following community-acquired pneumonia; however, its utility in monitoring recovery from COVID-19 pneumonia remains unclear. METHODS: This was a prospective single-centre observational cohort study. Patients hospitalised with severe COVID-19 pneumonia (admission duration ≥48 h and oxygen requirement ≥40% or critical care admission) underwent face-to-face assessment at 4-6 weeks post-discharge. The primary outcome was radiological resolution of COVID-19 pneumonitis (Radiographic Assessment of Lung Oedema score <5). Secondary outcomes included clinical outcomes, symptom questionnaires, mental health screening (Trauma Screening Questionnaire, seven-item Generalised Anxiety Disorder assessment and nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire) and physiological testing (4-m gait speed (4MGS) and 1-min Sit-to-Stand (STS) tests). RESULTS: 119 patients were assessed between June 3, 2020 and July 2, 2020 at median (interquartile range (IQR)) 61 (51-67) days post-discharge: mean±sd age 58.7±14.4 years, median (IQR) body mass index 30.0 (25.9-35.2) kg·m-2, 62% male and 70% ethnic minority. Despite radiographic resolution of pulmonary infiltrates in 87%, modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea (breathlessness) scale grades were above pre-COVID-19 baseline in 44%, and patients reported persistent fatigue (68%), sleep disturbance (57%) and breathlessness (32%). Screening thresholds were breached for post-traumatic stress disorder (25%), anxiety (22%) and depression (18%). 4MGS was slow (<0.8 m·s-1) in 38% and 35% desaturated by ≥4% during the STS test. Of 56 thoracic computed tomography scans performed, 75% demonstrated COVID-19-related interstitial and/or airways disease. CONCLUSIONS: Persistent symptoms, adverse mental health outcomes and physiological impairment are common 2 months after severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Follow-up chest radiography is a poor marker of recovery; therefore, holistic face-to-face assessment is recommended to facilitate early recognition and management of post-COVID-19 sequelae.

The influence of training and experience on memory strategy.

This paper investigates whether, and if so how much, prior training and experience overwrite the influence of the constraints of the task environment on strategy deployment. This evidence is relevant to the theory of soft constraints that focuses on the role of constraints in the task environment (Gray, Simms, Fu, & Schoelles, Psychological Review, 113: 461-482, 2006). The theory explains how an increase in the cost of accessing information induces a more memory-based strategy involving more encoding and planning. Experiments 1 and 3 adopt a traditional training and transfer design using the Blocks World Task in which participants were exposed to training trials involving a 2.5-s delay in accessing goal-state information before encountering transfer trials in which there was no access delay. The effect of prior training was assessed by the degree of memory-based strategy adopted in the transfer trials. Training with an access delay had a substantial carry-over effect and increased the subsequent degree of memory-based strategy adopted in the transfer environment. However, such effects do not necessarily occur if goal-state access cost in training is less costly than in transfer trials (Experiment 2). Experiment 4 used a fine-grained intra-trial design to examine the effect of experiencing access cost on one, two, or three occasions within the same trial and found that such experience on two consecutive occasions was sufficient to induce a more memory-based strategy. This paper establishes some effects of training that are relevant to the soft constraints theory and also discusses practical implications.

Improving memory after interruption: exploiting soft constraints and manipulating information access cost.

Forgetting what one was doing prior to interruption is an everyday problem. The recent soft constraints hypothesis (Gray, Sims, Fu, & Schoelles, 2006) emphasizes the strategic adaptation of information processing strategy to the task environment. It predicts that increasing information access cost (IAC: the time, and physical and mental effort involved in accessing information) encourages a more memory-intensive strategy. Like interruptions, access costs are also intrinsic to most work environments, such as when opening documents and e-mails. Three experiments investigated whether increasing IAC during a simple copying task can be an effective method for reducing forgetting following interruption. IAC was designated Low (all information permanently visible), Medium (a mouse movement to uncover target information), or High (an additional few seconds to uncover such information). Experiment 1 found that recall improved across all three levels of IAC. Subsequent experiments found that High IAC facilitated resumption after interruption, particularly when interruption occurred on half of all trials (Experiment 2), and improved prospective memory following two different interrupting tasks, even when one involved the disruptive effect of using the same type of resource as the primary task (Experiment 3). The improvement of memory after interruption with increased IAC supports the prediction of the soft constraints hypothesis. The main disadvantage of a high access cost was a reduction in speed of task completion. The practicality of manipulating IAC as a design method for inducing a memory-intensive strategy to protect against forgetting is discussed.