Assessing the cost-effectiveness of capnography for end-tidal CO2 monitoring during in-hospital cardiac arrest: A middle-income country perspective analysis.

Study objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of EtCO2 monitoring during in-hospital cardiorespiratory arrest (CA) care outside the intensive care unit (ICU) and emergency room department. Design: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis based on a simple decision model cost analysis and reported the study using the CHEERS checklist. Model inputs were derived from a retrospective Brazilian cohort study, complemented by information obtained through a literature review. Cost inputs were gathered from both literature sources and contacts with hospital suppliers. Setting: The analysis was carried out from the perspective of a tertiary referral hospital in a middle-income country. Participants: The study population comprised individuals experiencing in-hospital CA who received cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) by rapid response team (RRT) in a hospital ward, not in the ICU or emergency room department. Interventions: Two strategies were assumed for comparison: one with an RRT delivering care without capnography during CPR and the other guiding CPR according to the EtCO2 waveform. Main outcome measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness rate (ICER) to return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), hospital discharge, and hospital discharge with good neurological outcomes. Results: The ICER for EtCO2 monitoring during CPR, resulting in an absolute increase of one more case with ROSC, hospital discharge, and hospital discharge with good neurological outcome, was calculated at Int$ 515.78 (361.57-1201.12), Int$ 165.74 (119.29-248.4), and Int$ 240.55, respectively. Conclusion: In managing in-hospital CA in the hospital ward, incorporating EtCO2 monitoring is likely a cost-effective measure within the context of a middle-income country hospital with an RRT.

Anticipating ICU discharge and long-term follow-up.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to summarize recent literature findings on long-term outcomes following critical illness and to highlight potential strategies for preventing and managing health deterioration in survivors of critical care. RECENT FINDINGS: A substantial number of critical care survivors experience new or exacerbated impairments in their physical, cognitive or mental health, commonly named as postintensive care syndrome (PICS). Furthermore, those who survive critical illness often face an elevated risk of adverse outcomes in the months following their hospital stay, including infections, cardiovascular events, rehospitalizations and increased mortality. These findings underscore the need for effective prevention and management of long-term health deterioration in the critical care setting. While robust evidence from well designed randomized clinical trials is limited, potential interventions encompass sedation limitation, early mobilization, delirium prevention and family presence during intensive care unit (ICU) stay, as well as multicomponent transition programs (from ICU to ward, and from hospital to home) and specialized posthospital discharge follow-up. SUMMARY: In this review, we offer a concise overview of recent insights into the long-term outcomes of critical care survivors and advancements in the prevention and management of health deterioration after critical illness.

Long-Term Mortality and Health-Related Quality of Life After Continuous Versus Intermittent Renal Replacement Therapy in ICU Survivors: A Secondary Analysis of the Quality of Life After ICU Study.

Purpose: We assessed long-term outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors with acute kidney injury (AKI) submitted to intermittent or continuous renal replacement therapy (RRT) for comparisons between groups. Methods: The multicenter prospective cohort study included 195 adult ICU survivors with an ICU stay >72 h in 10 ICUs that had at least one episode of AKI treated with intermittent RRT (IRRT) or continuous RRT (CRRT) during ICU stay. The main outcomes were mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Hospital readmissions and physical dependence were also assessed. Results: Regarding RRT, 83 (42.6%) patients received IRRT and 112 (57.4%) received CRRT. Despite the similarity regarding sociodemographic characteristics, pre-ICU state of health and type of admission between groups, the risk of death (23.5% vs 42.7%; P < .001), the prevalence of sepsis (60.7%) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (17%) were higher at ICU admission among CRRT patients. The severity of critical illness was higher among CRRT patients, regarding the need for mechanical ventilation (75.0% vs 50.6%, P = .002) and vasopressors (91.1% vs 63.9%, P < .001). One year after ICU discharge, 67 of 195 ICU survivors died (34.4%) and, after adjustment for confounders, there were no significant differences in mortality when comparing IRRT and CRTT patients (34.9% vs 33.9%; P = .590), on HRQoL in both physical (41.9% vs 42.2%; P = .926) and mental dimensions (57.6% vs 56.6%; P = .340), and on the number of hospital readmissions and physical dependence. Conclusions: Our study suggests that among ICU survivors RRT modality (IRRT vs CRRT) in the ICU does not impact long-term outcomes after ICU discharge.

Evidence-Based Checklist to Delay Cardiac Arrest in Brain-Dead Potential Organ Donors: The DONORS Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effectiveness of goal-directed care to reduce loss of brain-dead potential donors to cardiac arrest is unclear. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist in the clinical management of brain-dead potential donors in the intensive care unit (ICU). Design, Setting, and Participants: The Donation Network to Optimize Organ Recovery Study (DONORS) was an open-label, parallel-group cluster randomized clinical trial in Brazil. Enrollment and follow-up were conducted from June 20, 2017, to November 30, 2019. Hospital ICUs that reported 10 or more brain deaths in the previous 2 years were included. Consecutive brain-dead potential donors in the ICU aged 14 to 90 years with a condition consistent with brain death after the first clinical examination were enrolled. Participants were randomized to either the intervention group or the control group. The intention-to-treat data analysis was conducted from June 15 to August 30, 2020. Interventions: Hospital staff in the intervention group were instructed to administer to brain-dead potential donors in the intervention group an evidence-based checklist with 13 clinical goals and 14 corresponding actions to guide care, every 6 hours, from study enrollment to organ retrieval. The control group provided or received usual care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was loss of brain-dead potential donors to cardiac arrest at the individual level. A prespecified sensitivity analysis assessed the effect of adherence to the checklist in the intervention group. Results: Among the 1771 brain-dead potential donors screened in 63 hospitals, 1535 were included. These patients included 673 males (59.2%) and had a median (IQR) age of 51 (36.3-62.0) years. The main cause of brain injury was stroke (877 [57.1%]), followed by trauma (485 [31.6%]). Of the 63 hospitals, 31 (49.2%) were assigned to the intervention group (743 [48.4%] brain-dead potential donors) and 32 (50.8%) to the control group (792 [51.6%] brain-dead potential donors). Seventy potential donors (9.4%) at intervention hospitals and 117 (14.8%) at control hospitals met the primary outcome (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.46-1.08; P = .11). The primary outcome rate was lower in those with adherence higher than 79.0% than in the control group (5.3% vs 14.8%; RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.78; P = .006). Conclusions and Relevance: This cluster randomized clinical trial was inconclusive in determining whether the overall use of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist reduced brain-dead potential donor loss to cardiac arrest. The findings suggest that use of such a checklist has limited effectiveness without adherence to the actions recommended in this checklist. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03179020.

Impact of vertical positioning on lung aeration among mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients: a randomized crossover clinical trial / Impacto do posicionamento vertical na aeração pulmonar em pacientes de unidades de terapia intensiva ventilados mecanicamente: um estudo clínico transversal randomizado

ABSTRACT Objective: To assess the impact of different vertical positions on lung aeration in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. Methods: An open-label randomized crossover clinical trial was conducted between January and July 2020. Adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for > 24 hours and < 7 days with hemodynamic, respiratory and neurological stability were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to the sitting position followed by passive orthostasis condition or the passive orthostasis followed by the sitting position condition. The primary outcome was lung aeration assessed using the lung ultrasound score (score ranges from 0 [better] to 36 [worse]). Results: A total of 186 subjects were screened; of these subjects, 19 were enrolled (57.8% male; mean age, 73.2 years). All participants were assigned to receive at least one verticalization protocol. Passive orthostasis resulted in mean lung ultrasound scores that did not differ significantly from the sitting position (11.0 versus 13.7; mean difference, -2.7; [95%CI -6.1 to 0.71; p = 0.11). Adverse events occurred in three subjects in the passive orthostasis group and in one in the sitting position group (p = 0.99). Conclusion: This analysis did not find significant differences in lung aeration between the sitting and passive orthostasis groups. A randomized crossover clinical trial assessing the impact of vertical positioning on lung aeration in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation is feasible. Unfortunately, the study was interrupted due to the need to treat COVID-19 patients. ClinicalTrials.gov registry: NCT04176445

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar o impacto de diferentes posicionamentos verticais na aeração pulmonar em pacientes em ventilação mecânica invasiva. Métodos: Trata-se de ensaio clínico aberto, randomizado e transversal, realizado entre janeiro e julho de 2020. Adultos em ventilação mecânica invasiva por mais de 24 horas e menos de 7 dias com estabilidade hemodinâmica, respiratória e neurológica foram distribuídos aleatoriamente em uma proporção de 1:1 à postura sentada seguida da condição de ortostatismo passivo ou o ortostatismo passivo seguido de postura sentada. O desfecho primário foi a aeração pulmonar avaliada pelo lung ultrasound score. O escore varia de zero (melhor) a 36 (pior). Resultados: Foram selecionados 186 indivíduos; destes, 19 foram incluídos (57,8% do sexo masculino; média idade de 73,2 anos). Todos os participantes foram selecionados para receber pelo menos um protocolo de verticalização. O ortostatismo passivo resultou em escores médios de aeração pulmonar por ultrassonografia que não diferiram significativamente da postura sentada (11,0 versus 13,7; diferença média, -2,7; IC95% -6,1 a 0,71; p = 0,11). Ocorreram eventos adversos em três indivíduos no grupo ortostatismo passivo e em um no grupo postura sentada (p = 0,99). Conclusão: Esta análise não encontrou diferenças significativas na aeração pulmonar entre os grupos ortostatismo passivo e postura sentada. É factível conduzir um estudo clínico transversal randomizado para avaliar o impacto do posicionamento vertical na aeração pulmonar em pacientes em ventilação mecânica invasiva. Infelizmente, o estudo foi interrompido devido à necessidade de tratar pacientes com COVID-19. Registro ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04176445

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia.

OBJECTIVE: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. CONCLUSION: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

Long-term Health-Related Quality of Life and Outcomes after Hospitalization for COVID-19 in Brazil: Post-COVID Brazil 1 Study Protocol. / Qualidade de Vida em Longo Prazo e Desfechos após Internação por COVID-19 no Brasil: Protocolo do Estudo Pós-COVID Brasil 1.

BACKGROUND: The long-term impact of hospitalization for COVID-19 on patients' physical, mental, and cognitive health still needs further assessment. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate factors associated with quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes 12 months after hospitalization for COVID-19. METHODS: This prospective multicenter study intends to enroll 611 patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 (NCT05165979). Centralized telephone interviews are scheduled to occur at three, six, nine, and 12 months after hospital discharge. The primary endpoint is defined as the health-related quality-of-life utility score assessed by the EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary endpoints are defined as the EQ-5D-3L at three, six and nine months, return to work or education, persistent symptoms, new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms, major cardiovascular events, rehospitalization, as well as all-cause mortality at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A p-value <0.05 will be assumed as statistically significant for all analyses. RESULTS: The primary endpoint will be presented as the frequency of the EQ-5D-3L score 12 months after COVID-19 hospitalization. A sub-analysis to identify possible associations of independent variables with study outcomes will be presented. CONCLUSIONS: This study will determine the impact of COVID-19 on the quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes of hospitalized patients 12 months after discharge providing insights to the public health system in Brazil.

FUNDAMENTO: O impacto em longo prazo da hospitalização por COVID-19 sobre a saúde física, mental e cognitiva dos pacientes requer mais investigação. OBJETIVOS: Este artigo visa avaliar os fatores associados com a qualidade de vida e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares 12 meses após a internação hospitalar por COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Este estudo multicêntrico prospectivo pretende incluir 611 pacientes internados por COVID-19 (NCT05165979). Entrevistas telefônicas centralizadas estão programadas para ocorrer em três, seis, nove e 12 meses após a alta hospitalar. O desfecho primário é definido como o escore de utilidade de qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde avaliada pelo questionário EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) aos 12 meses. Desfechos secundários são definidos como o EQ-5D-3L aos três, seis e nove meses, retorno ao trabalho ou à escola, sintomas persistentes, novas incapacidades em atividades instrumentais diárias, déficit cognitivo, ansiedade, depressão, e sintomas de transtorno do estresse pós-traumático, eventos cardiovasculares maiores, reinternação, e mortalidade por todas as causas aos três, seis, nove e 12 meses após a infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. Um valor de p<0,05 será considerado estatisticamente significativo para as análises. RESULTADOS: O desfecho primário será apresentado como frequência do escore EQ-5D-3L 12 meses após a internação por COVID-19. Uma subanálise para identificar possíveis associações das variáveis independentes com desfechos do estudo será apresentada. CONCLUSÃO: Este estudo determinará o impacto da COVID-19 sobre a qualidade de vida e de desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de pacientes internados 12 meses após a alta, e fornecerá novas informações ao sistema público de saúde no Brasil.

Health-Related Quality of Life and Long-Term Outcomes after Mildly Symptomatic COVID-19: The Post-COVID Brazil Study 2 Protocol. / Qualidade de Vida Relacionada à Saúde e Desfechos em Longo Prazo após COVID-19 Sintomática Leve: Protocolo do Estudo Pós-COVID Brasil 2.

BACKGROUND: The long-term effects of mild COVID-19 on physical, cognitive, and mental health are not yet well understood. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to describe the protocol for the ongoing "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2, which aims to evaluate the factors associated with health-related quality of life and long-term cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes one year after a mild episode of symptomatic COVID-19. METHODS: The "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2 is a prospective multicenter study that plans to enroll 1047 patients (NCT05197647). Centralized, structured telephone interviews are conducted at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcome is the health-related quality-of-life utility score, assessed using the EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary endpoints include the EQ-5D-3L at 3, 6, and 9 months, as well as all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, hospitalization, return to work or education, persistent symptoms, new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant for all analyses. RESULTS: The primary endpoint will be presented as the overall frequency of the EQ-5D-3L domains 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main analysis will explore the association of independent variables with the study outcomes. CONCLUSION: The "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2 aims to clarify the impact of long COVID on the quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes of Brazilian patients who have had mild COVID-19.

FUNDAMENTO: Os efeitos em longo prazo da COVID-19 leve sobre a saúde física, mental e cognitiva ainda não são bem conhecidos. OBJETIVO: Este artigo visa descrever o protocolo para o estudo em andamento Pós-COVID Brasil 2, o qual tem como objetivo avaliar os fatores associados à qualidade de vida associada à saúde e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de longo prazo um ano após um episódio de COVID-19 sintomática leve. MÉTODOS: O estudo "Pós-COVID Brasil 2" é um estudo multicêntrico prospectivo que pretende incluir 1047 pacientes (NCT05197647). Entrevistas estruturas, centralizadas são conduzidas em um mês, e aos três, seis, nove e 12 meses após o diagnóstico de COVID-19. O desfecho primário é o escore de utilidade da qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde, avaliado usando o questionário EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) aos 12 meses. Desfechos secundários incluem o EQ-5D-3L aos três, seis e nove meses, mortalidade por todas as causas, eventos cardiovasculares maiores, hospitalização, retorno ao trabalho ou à escola, sintomas persistentes, novas incapacidades em atividades instrumentais diárias, déficit cognitivo, ansiedade, depressão, e sintomas de transtorno do estresse pós-traumático as três, seis, nove e doze meses após a infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. Um valor de p<0,05 será considerado estatisticamente significativo para as análises. RESULTADOS: O desfecho primário será apresentado como frequência dos domínios do EQ-5D-3L doze meses após a infecção por SARS-CoV-2. A análise principal explorará a associação das variáveis independentes com os desfechos do estudo. CONCLUSÃO: O estudo "Pós-COVID Brasil 2" tem como objetivo elucidar o impacto da COVID longa sobre a qualidade de vida e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de brasileiros pacientes que apresentaram COVID-19 leve.

Predictive factors of functional limitation after cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Functional limitation is relatively common and can negatively influence the postoperative outcome of patients after cardiac surgery. OBJECTIVE: To identify the predictive factors of functional limitation in patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study was performed to evaluate patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery. All patients underwent a cardiovascular rehabilitation protocol. Functional limitation was defined based on performance in the rehabilitation protocol following cardiac surgery. Poor performance in the cardiac surgery rehabilitation protocol defined functional limitation, whereas good performance indicated no limitation. RESULTS: Data were collected from 548 patients; of these, 190 (34.7%) had functional limitation. In multivariate analysis, the factors associated with postoperative functional limitation were as follows: hospitalization by the public healthcare system [OR: 2.14; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.73, 2.65]; age (OR 1.23; 95% CI: 1.15, 1.31); length of hospitalization in the intensive care unit (OR 1.03; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.05); history of previous acute myocardial infarction (OR 1.40; 95% CI: 1.13, 1.73); presence of previous comorbidities [chronic kidney disease (OR 1.56; 95% CI: 1.15, 2.10); cerebrovascular disease (OR 1.57; 95% CI: 1.19, 2.07)]; presence of expiratory muscle weakness (OR 1.54; 95% CI: 1.08, 2.20); and intercurrence of cardiorespiratory arrest during hospitalization (OR 1.76; 95% CI: 1.40, 2.22). CONCLUSION: Functional limitation after cardiac surgery could be predicted by multiple pre and postoperative factors, except for preoperative functionality, which does not suggest to be an independent factor for functional limitation after surgery.

Does an educational website improve psychological outcomes and satisfaction among family members of intensive care unit patients?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of an educational website on satisfaction and symptoms of anxiety and depression among family members of critically ill adult patients. METHODS: We embedded an analysis of website access in a cohort study conducted in intensive care units with flexible visiting hours in Brazil. Family members were guided to access an educational website designed to help them understand the processes and emotions associated with an intensive care unit stay. Subjects were evaluated for baseline data within the first 48 hours following enrollment and outcome assessment at up to 7 days after patient discharge from the intensive care unit, death, or until the 30th day of the study. The main outcomes were satisfaction using the Critical Care Family Needs Inventory and the presence of anxiety and depression symptoms using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. RESULTS: A total of 532 family members were evaluated during the study period. Of these, 61 (11.5%) accessed the website. After adjustments, family members who accessed the website had significantly better mean Critical Care Family Needs Inventory scores (152.8 versus 145.2, p = 0.01) and a lower prevalence of probable clinical anxiety (prevalence ratio 0.35; 95%CI 0.14 - 0.89) than family members who did not access the website. There were no differences regarding symptoms of depression. CONCLUSION: Access to an educational website was associated with higher family satisfaction with care and a lower prevalence of clinical anxiety.

Effects of participation in interdisciplinary rounds in the intensive care unit on family satisfaction: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether family participation in intensive care unit interdisciplinary bedside rounds affects family satisfaction. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at a 56-bed, adult, mixed intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital in Southern Brazil. From May to June 2019, family members of patients who stayed in the intensive care unit for at least 48 hours were invited to participate in the study at the time of patient discharge. The main exposure variable was participation in intensive care unit bedside rounds during the intensive care unit stay. Family satisfaction was assessed by using the Brazilian version of the Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit questionnaire. RESULTS: Of the 234 screened individuals, 118 were included. Eleven participants withdrew consent. A total of 107 individuals were assessed; 58 (54%) reported being present during bedside rounds, and 49 (46%) reported never being present. General satisfaction and satisfaction with the decision-making process were higher among families who were present during rounds than among families who were not (p = 0.01 and p = 0.007, respectively). CONCLUSION: The presence during interdisciplinary rounds was associated with improved general satisfaction and satisfaction with the decision-making aspect. This outcome indicates that efforts must be directed to conduct studies with more robust methodologies to confirm this association.

The II Brazilian Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 Joint Guidelines of the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia and Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia / II Diretrizes Brasileiras para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 Diretriz conjunta da Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, Associação Médica Brasileira, Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia, Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia e Sociedade Brasileira de Reumatologia

ABSTRACT Objective: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. Conclusion: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.

RESUMO Objetivo: Atualizar as recomendações para embasar as decisões para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: A elaboração desta diretriz foi feita por especialistas, incluindo representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas. O método utilizado para o desenvolvimento rápido de diretrizes baseou-se na adoção e/ou adaptação de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) e contou com o apoio da plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Chegaram-se a 21 recomendações, incluindo recomendações fortes quanto ao uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar e recomendações condicionais para o uso de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe, em pacientes com oxigênio suplementar ou ventilação não invasiva, e de anticoagulantes, para prevenção de tromboembolismo. Devido à suspensão da autorização de uso, não foi possível fazer recomendações para o tratamento com casirivimabe + imdevimabe. Foram feitas recomendações fortes contra o uso de azitromicina em pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana, hidroxicloroquina, plasma convalescente, colchicina e lopinavir + ritonavir, além de recomendações condicionais contra o uso de ivermectina e rendesivir. Conclusão: Foram criadas novas recomendações para o tratamento de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19, como as recomendações de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe. Ainda são recomendados corticosteroides e profilaxia contra tromboembolismo, esta em caráter condicional. Vários medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes e não devem ser usados, no intuito de proporcionar o melhor tratamento segundo os princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover a economia de recursos.

BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 against symptomatic Omicron infection following a mass vaccination campaign in southern Brazil: A prospective test-negative design study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence regarding effectiveness of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against Omicron in Latin America is limited. We estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 in Brazil when Omicron was predominant. METHODS: This prospective test-negative, case-control study was conducted in Toledo, Brazil, following a mass COVID-19 vaccination with BNT162b2. Patients were included if they were aged ≥12 years, sought care for acute respiratory symptoms in the public health system between November 3, 2021 and June 20, 2022, and were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR. In the primary analysis, we determined the effectiveness of two doses of BNT162b2 against symptomatic COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 4,574 were enrolled; of these, 1,758 patients (586 cases and 1,172 controls) were included in the primary analysis. Mean age was 27.7 years, 53.8 % were women, and 90.1 % had a Charlson comorbidity index of zero. Omicron accounted for >97 % of all identified SARS-CoV-2 variants, with BA.1 and BA.2 accounting for 84.3 % and 12.6 %, respectively. Overall adjusted estimate of two-dose vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was 46.7 % (95 %CI, 19.9 %-64.6 %) after a median time between the second dose and the beginning of COVID-19 symptoms of 94 days (IQR, 60-139 days). Effectiveness waned from 77.7 % at 7-29 days after receipt of a second dose to <30 % (non-significant) after ≥120 days. CONCLUSION: In a relatively young and healthy Brazilian population, two doses of BNT162b2 provided protection against symptomatic Omicron infection. However, this protection waned significantly over time, underscoring the need for boosting with variant-adapted vaccines in this population prior to waves of disease activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05052307 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05052307).

Reply to the letter "Understanding lactate and its clearance during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for supporting refractory cardiogenic shock patients".

This is a reply to the letter titled "Understanding lactate and its clearance during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for supporting refractory cardiogenic shock patients" by Eva Rully Kurniawati et al. In response to the concerns raised about our paper published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, titled "Association between serum lactate levels and mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock receiving mechanical circulatory support: a multicenter retrospective cohort study," we have addressed the confounding bias on the population included and the use of VA-ECMO and Impella CP. Furthermore, we have provided new data on the correlation of oxygen supply and lactate levels at admission of cardiogenic shock.

Hydroxychloroquine for Non-Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. / Hidroxicloroquina para Pacientes com COVID-19 não Hospitalizados: Uma Revisão Sistemática e Metanálise de Ensaios Clínicos Randomizados.

BACKGROUND: Previous systematic reviews have identified no benefit of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients. After publication of these reviews, the results of COPE, the largest randomized trial conducted to date, became available. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to synthesize the evidence on the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients compared to placebo or standard of care. METHODS: Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov complemented by manual search. Pairwise meta-analyses, risk of bias, and evidence certainty assessments were conducted, including optimal information size analysis (OIS). A level of significance of 0.05 was adopted in the meta-analysis. PROSPERO: CRD42021265427. RESULTS: Eight RCTs with 3,219 participants were included. COVID-19 hospitalization and any adverse events rates were not significantly different between hydroxychloroquine (5.6% and 35.1%) and control (7.4% and 20.4%) (risk ratio, RR, 0.77, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.57-1.04, I2: 0%; RR 1.78, 95%-CI 0.90; 3.52, I2: 93%, respectively). The OIS (7,880) was not reached for COVID-19 hospitalization, independently of the simulation for anticipated event rate and RR reduction estimate. CONCLUSION: Evidence of very low certainty showed lack of benefit with hydroxychloroquine in preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations. Despite being the systematic review with the largest number of participants included, the OIS, considering pre-vaccination response to infection, has not yet been reached.

FUNDAMENTO: Revisões sistemáticas anteriores não identificaram benefício do uso da hidroxicloroquina ou da cloroquina em pacientes com COVID-19 não hospitalizados. Após a publicação dessas revisões, os resultados do COPE, o maior ensaio clínico randomizado até hoje, tornaram-se disponíveis. OBJETIVOS: Conduzir uma revisão sistemática e metanálise de ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECRs) para sintetizar as evidências sobre a eficácia e a segurança da hidroxicloroquina e da cloroquina em pacientes com COVID-19 não hospitalizados em comparação a controle ou tratamento padrão. MÉTODOS: As buscas foram conduzidas nos bancos de dados PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library e ClinicalTrials.gov, e complementadas por busca manual. Foram realizadas metanálises diretas e avaliações de risco de viés e certeza da evidência, incluindo análise do tamanho ótimo da informação (OIS, optimal information size). Um nível de significância de 0,05 foi adotado na metanálise. PROSPERO: CRD42021265427. RESULTADOS: Oito ECRs com 3219 participantes foram incluídos. As taxas de internação por COVID-19 e de eventos adversos não foram significativamente diferentes entre hidroxicloroquina (5,6% e 5,1%) e controle (7,4% e 20,4%) [risco relativo (RR) 0,77, intervalo de confiança 95% (IC95%), 0,57-1,04, I2: 0%; RR 1,78, IC95% 0,90; 3,52, I2: 93%, respectivamente)]. O OIS (7880) não foi alcançado para hospitalização por COVID-19, independentemente da simulação para a taxa de evento e redução do RR estimados. CONCLUSÃO: A evidência de muito baixa qualidade indicou falta de benefício com hidroxicloroquina em prevenir internações por COVID-19. Apesar de ser a revisão sistemática com o maior número de participantes incluídos, o OIS, considerando a resposta à infecção anterior à vacinação, não foi atingido.

Association between acute disease severity and one-year quality of life among post-hospitalisation COVID-19 patients: Coalition VII prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To assess the association between acute disease severity and 1-year quality of life in patients discharged after hospitalisation due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study nested in 5 randomised clinical trials between March 2020 and March 2022 at 84 sites in Brazil. Adult post-hospitalisation COVID-19 patients were followed for 1 year. The primary outcome was the utility score of EuroQol five-dimension three-level (EQ-5D-3L). Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, and new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living. Adjusted generalised estimating equations were used to assess the association between outcomes and acute disease severity according to the highest level on a modified ordinal scale during hospital stay (2: no oxygen therapy; 3: oxygen by mask or nasal prongs; 4: high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy or non-invasive ventilation; 5: mechanical ventilation). RESULTS: 1508 COVID-19 survivors were enrolled. Primary outcome data were available for 1156 participants. At 1 year, compared with severity score 2, severity score 5 was associated with lower EQ-5D-3L utility scores (0.7 vs 0.84; adjusted difference, - 0.1 [95% CI - 0.15 to - 0.06]); and worse results for all-cause mortality (7.9% vs 1.2%; adjusted difference, 7.1% [95% CI 2.5%-11.8%]), major cardiovascular events (5.6% vs 2.3%; adjusted difference, 2.6% [95% CI 0.6%-4.6%]), and new disabilities (40.4% vs 23.5%; adjusted difference, 15.5% [95% CI 8.5%-22.5]). Severity scores 3 and 4 did not differ consistently from score 2. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 patients who needed mechanical ventilation during hospitalisation have lower 1-year quality of life than COVID-19 patients who did not need mechanical ventilation during hospitalisation.

Does an educational website improve psychological outcomes and satisfaction among family members of intensive care unit patients? / Um portal educativo melhora os resultados psicológicos e a satisfação de familiares de pacientes em unidades de terapia intensiva?

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the impact of an educational website on satisfaction and symptoms of anxiety and depression among family members of critically ill adult patients. Methods: We embedded an analysis of website access in a cohort study conducted in intensive care units with flexible visiting hours in Brazil. Family members were guided to access an educational website designed to help them understand the processes and emotions associated with an intensive care unit stay. Subjects were evaluated for baseline data within the first 48 hours following enrollment and outcome assessment at up to 7 days after patient discharge from the intensive care unit, death, or until the 30th day of the study. The main outcomes were satisfaction using the Critical Care Family Needs Inventory and the presence of anxiety and depression symptoms using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Results: A total of 532 family members were evaluated during the study period. Of these, 61 (11.5%) accessed the website. After adjustments, family members who accessed the website had significantly better mean Critical Care Family Needs Inventory scores (152.8 versus 145.2, p = 0.01) and a lower prevalence of probable clinical anxiety (prevalence ratio 0.35; 95%CI 0.14 - 0.89) than family members who did not access the website. There were no differences regarding symptoms of depression. Conclusion: Access to an educational website was associated with higher family satisfaction with care and a lower prevalence of clinical anxiety.

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar o efeito de um portal educativo na satisfação e nos sintomas de ansiedade e depressão de familiares de pacientes adultos em estado crítico. Métodos: Inserimos uma análise de acesso a um portal num estudo de coorte realizado em unidades de terapia intensiva com horários de visita flexíveis no Brasil. Os familiares foram orientados a acessar um portal educativo concebido para os ajudá-los a compreender os processos e as emoções associados à internação em unidades de terapia intensiva. Os sujeitos foram avaliados quanto às informações basais nas primeiras 48 horas após a inclusão e quanto aos desfechos até 7 dias após a alta do paciente da unidade de terapia intensiva, morte ou até o 30º dia do estudo. Os principais desfechos foram a satisfação por meio do Inventário das Necessidades da Família em Cuidados Intensivos e a presença de sintomas de ansiedade e depressão utilizando a Escala Hospitalar de Ansiedade e Depressão. Resultados: Avaliaram-se 532 familiares durante o período do estudo. Destes, 61 (11,5%) acessaram o portal. Após ajustes, os familiares que acessaram o portal apresentaram médias significativamente melhores dos valores do Inventário de Necessidades da Família em Cuidados Intensivos (152,8 versus 145,2; p = 0,01) e menor prevalência de provável ansiedade clínica (razão de prevalência de 0,35; IC95% 0,14 - 0,89) do que familiares que não acessaram o portal. Não houve diferença em relação aos sintomas de depressão. Conclusão: O acesso a um portal educativo foi associado a maior satisfação familiar com os cuidados e menor prevalência de ansiedade clínica.

Qualidade de Vida Relacionada à Saúde e Desfechos em Longo Prazo após COVID-19 Sintomática Leve: Protocolo do Estudo Pós-COVID Brasil 2 / Health-Related Quality of Life and Long-Term Outcomes after Mildly Symptomatic COVID-19: The Post-COVID Brazil Study 2 Protocol

Resumo Fundamento Os efeitos em longo prazo da COVID-19 leve sobre a saúde física, mental e cognitiva ainda não são bem conhecidos. Objetivo Este artigo visa descrever o protocolo para o estudo em andamento Pós-COVID Brasil 2, o qual tem como objetivo avaliar os fatores associados à qualidade de vida associada à saúde e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de longo prazo um ano após um episódio de COVID-19 sintomática leve. Métodos O estudo "Pós-COVID Brasil 2" é um estudo multicêntrico prospectivo que pretende incluir 1047 pacientes (NCT05197647). Entrevistas estruturas, centralizadas são conduzidas em um mês, e aos três, seis, nove e 12 meses após o diagnóstico de COVID-19. O desfecho primário é o escore de utilidade da qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde, avaliado usando o questionário EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) aos 12 meses. Desfechos secundários incluem o EQ-5D-3L aos três, seis e nove meses, mortalidade por todas as causas, eventos cardiovasculares maiores, hospitalização, retorno ao trabalho ou à escola, sintomas persistentes, novas incapacidades em atividades instrumentais diárias, déficit cognitivo, ansiedade, depressão, e sintomas de transtorno do estresse pós-traumático as três, seis, nove e doze meses após a infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. Um valor de p<0,05 será considerado estatisticamente significativo para as análises. Resultados O desfecho primário será apresentado como frequência dos domínios do EQ-5D-3L doze meses após a infecção por SARS-CoV-2. A análise principal explorará a associação das variáveis independentes com os desfechos do estudo. Conclusão O estudo "Pós-COVID Brasil 2" tem como objetivo elucidar o impacto da COVID longa sobre a qualidade de vida e desfechos cardiovasculares e não cardiovasculares de brasileiros pacientes que apresentaram COVID-19 leve.

Abstract Background The long-term effects of mild COVID-19 on physical, cognitive, and mental health are not yet well understood. Objective The purpose of this paper is to describe the protocol for the ongoing "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2, which aims to evaluate the factors associated with health-related quality of life and long-term cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes one year after a mild episode of symptomatic COVID-19. Methods The "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2 is a prospective multicenter study that plans to enroll 1047 patients (NCT05197647). Centralized, structured telephone interviews are conducted at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcome is the health-related quality-of-life utility score, assessed using the EuroQol-5D-3L (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire at 12 months. Secondary endpoints include the EQ-5D-3L at 3, 6, and 9 months, as well as all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, hospitalization, return to work or education, persistent symptoms, new disabilities in instrumental activities of daily living, cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress symptoms at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. A p-value < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant for all analyses. Results The primary endpoint will be presented as the overall frequency of the EQ-5D-3L domains 12 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Main analysis will explore the association of independent variables with the study outcomes. Conclusion The "Post-COVID Brazil" study 2 aims to clarify the impact of long COVID on the quality of life and cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular outcomes of Brazilian patients who have had mild COVID-19.