RESUMO
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 survivors may develop long-term symptoms of fatigue, dyspnea, mental health issues, and functional limitations: a condition termed post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC). Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a recommended treatment for PASC; however, there is a lack of data regarding PR's effect on multiple health indices and the factors that influence patient outcomes. The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation on functional and psychological parameters in patients diagnosed with Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC), thereby offering insights into the efficacy of such interventions in improving the quality of life and clinical outcomes for these individuals. METHODS: We extracted patient demographic, comorbidity, and outcome data from Allegheny Health Network's electronic medical records. Functionality test results were compared before and after PR, including 6-minute walk test (6MWT), chair rise repetitions (CR reps), timed up and go test (TUG), gait speed (Rehab gait), modified medical research council scale (MMRC), shortness of breath questionnaire (SOBQ), hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease assessment test (CAT) scores. Multiple regression analysis was done to evaluate the effect of comorbidities and patient factors on patient responses to PR. RESULTS: The 55 patients included in this study had a mean time of 4 months between the initial COVID-19 diagnosis and the subsequent PASC diagnosis. Following pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), significant improvements were observed across various metrics. The distance covered in the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) increased markedly from a pre-rehabilitation average of 895 feet (SD 290) to 1,300 feet (SD 335) post-rehabilitation, with a mean change of 405 feet (95% CI [333, 477]). Chair rise repetitions (CR reps) saw an increase from 9 (SD 3) reps to 13 (SD 3) reps, with a change of 4 reps (95% CI [3.7, 4.9]). The timed up and go test (TUG) time decreased significantly from 13 s (SD 5) to 10 s (SD 2), reflecting a mean reduction of 3 s (95% CI [-4.5, -2.5]). Rehabilitation gait speed improved from 1.0 m/s to 1.3 m/s, changing by 0.3 m/s (95% CI [0.2, 0.3]). The Modified Medical Research Council (MMRC) dyspnea scale showed a notable decrease from a mean of 2 (SD 1) to 1 (SD 1), a change of -1 (95% CI [-1.5, -1]). The Shortness of Breath Questionnaire (SOBQ) scores reduced significantly from 51 (SD 21) to 22 (SD 18), with a change of -29 (95% CI [-34, -23]). The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores decreased from 11 (SD 7) to 8 (SD 7), a reduction of -4 (95% CI [-5, -2]). Lastly, the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Assessment Test (CAT) scores significantly dropped from 18 (SD 7) to 9 (SD 7), changing by -10 (95% CI [-11, -8]). However, the presence of hypertension, diabetes, chronic lung diseases, outpatient status, and receipt of specific pharmacologic treatments (decadron, decadron + remdesivir, and decadron + remdesivir + tocilizumab) were identified as factors associated with a poor response to PR. CONCLUSION: Our study supports PR as an integrated model of care for PASC patients to improve several physical and mental health indices. The long-term effects of PR on patients' functional status should be investigated in the future.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Síndrome de COVID-19 Pós-Aguda , Qualidade de Vida , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/reabilitação , COVID-19/psicologia , COVID-19/complicações , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Teste de Caminhada , Dispneia/etiologia , Dispneia/reabilitação , Dispneia/psicologia , Dispneia/fisiopatologia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Spontaneous pneumothorax (PTX) is more prevalent among COVID-19 patients than other critically ill patients, but studies on this are limited. This study compared clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes among COVID-19 patients with concomitant PTX to provide insight into how PTX affects health care utilization and complications, which informs clinical decisions and healthcare resource allocation. METHODS: The 2020 Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used analyze patient demographics and outcomes, including age, race, sex, insurance status, median income, length of hospital stay, mortality rate, hospitalization costs, comorbidities, mechanical ventilation, and vasopressor support. Propensity score matching was employed for additional analysis. RESULTS: Among 1,572,815 COVID-19 patients, 1.41% had PTX. These patients incurred significantly higher hospitalization costs ($435,508 vs. $96,668, p < 0.001) and longer stays (23.6 days vs. 8.6 days, p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was substantially elevated for PTX patients (65.8% vs. 14.4%, p < 0.001), with an adjusted odds ratio of 14.3 (95% CI 12.7-16.2). Additionally, these patients were more likely to require vasopressors (16.6% vs. 3.3%), mechanical circulatory support (3.5% vs. 0.3%), hemodialysis (16.6% vs. 5.6%), invasive mechanical ventilation (76.9% vs. 15.1%), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (19.1% vs. 5.8%), tracheostomy (13.3% vs. 1.1%), and chest tube placement (59.8% vs. 0.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the severe impact of PTX on COVID-19 patients, characterized by higher mortality, more complications, and increased resource utilization. Also, being Hispanic, male, or obese increased the risk of developing concomitant PTX with COVID-19.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Pneumotórax , Pontuação de Propensão , Humanos , COVID-19/mortalidade , COVID-19/terapia , COVID-19/complicações , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Pneumotórax/mortalidade , Pneumotórax/terapia , Adulto , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Bases de Dados Factuais , Respiração Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , Respiração Artificial/economia , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Hospitalização/economia , Comorbidade , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Background: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of mortality than those without COVID-19. However, it is unclear how SOT patient outcomes compare to the general population without SOT who contract COVID-19. Methods: We used the National Inpatient Sample from January to December 2020 to investigate inpatient outcomes seen in SOT recipients after contracting COVID-19 compared to nontransplant patients. We identified our study sample using ICD-10 CM and excluded those <18 years of age and those with dual organ transplants. Inpatient outcomes were compared in SOT and non-SOT COVID cohorts, and we further evaluated predictors of mortality in the SOT with COVID population. Results: Out of the 1,416,445 COVID-19 admissions included in the study, 8315 (0.59%) were single SOT recipients. Our analysis that adjusted for multiple baseline characteristics and comorbidities demonstrated that COVID-19 in SOT patients was associated with higher rates of acute kidney injury (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.81-3.02, P < 0.01), lower rates of acute respiratory distress syndrome (aOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54-0.85, P < 0.01), and similar rates of cardiac arrest, pulmonary embolism, circulatory shock, cerebrovascular events, and in-hospital mortality. Age >65 was associated with mortality in SOT patients. Conclusion: In this nationally representative sample, SOT patients presenting with COVID-19 experienced similar rates of mortality compared to those without SOT. SOT patients were more likely to develop acute kidney injury. Further research is needed to understand the complex relationship between transplant patient outcomes and COVID-19.
RESUMO
Background: The available literature indicates a link between SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and a heightened probability of experiencing negative outcomes for both the pregnant patient and the developing fetus. We compared clinical outcomes of pregnant patients with or without COVID-19 hospitalized during delivery. Methods: Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to compare outcomes and was adjusted for patient-related, hospital-related, and illness severity indicators. Results: We identified a total of 3,447,771 pregnant patients admitted between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020; 1.3% (n = 46,050) had COVID-19. COVID-19-positive patients had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (0.15% vs 0.05%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5-14.25, P < 0.001), mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs 0.05%, aOR 14.2, 95% CI 10.7-18.76, P < 0.001), vasopressor use (0.26% vs 0.14%, aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.07-2.02, P = 0.01), and perinatal maternal complications like preeclampsia (9.66% vs 7.04%, aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.2-1.39, P < 0.001) and hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, and low platelet count (HELLP) syndrome (0.53% vs 0.26%, aOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.43-2.61, P < 0.001) than COVID-19-negative patients. Discussion: Clinicians should be aware of the heightened risk of complications in pregnant patients with COVID-19 and consider strategies to mitigate them.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to characterize the gender distribution of first authors, senior authors, and editorial board members across several high-impact factor journals in PCCM. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we analysed gender disparities in critical care authorship and editorial boards, based on publications from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2021 from the top 20 high impact journals based on the Journal of Citation Reports. RESULTS: Among 20 journals (median impact factor of 6.66), 25% of editors-in-chief and 28.8% of editorial board members were female. From 2019 to 2021, a total of 23,994 articles were published. Female first authors and last authors made up 29.1% and 21.2% of the authorship, respectively (n = 6637 articles). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates significant gender disparities in critical care authorship and editorial boards, with males predominantly filling the roles of editors in chief, editorial members, and first and senior authors. Despite this significant difference in gender distribution, there was no statistically significant correlation between authorship and editor gender.
Assuntos
Autoria , Cuidados Críticos , Equidade de Gênero , Pneumologia , Humanos , Editoração , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Diversidade, Equidade, Inclusão , LiderançaRESUMO
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is one the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in patients with COVID-19 and Influenza, with only small number of studies comparing these two viral illnesses in the setting of ARDS. Given the pathogenic differences in the two viruses, this study shows trends in national hospitalization and outcomes associated with COVID-19- and Influenza-related ARDS. To evaluate and compare the risk factors and rates of the adverse clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19 associated ARDS (C-ARDS) relative to Influenza-related ARDS (I-ARDS), we utilized the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database 2020. Our sample includes 106,720 patients hospitalized with either C-ARDS or I-ARDS between January and December 2020, of which 103,845 (97.3%) had C-ARDS and 2875 (2.7%) had I-ARDS. Propensity-matched analysis demonstrated a significantly higher in-hospital mortality (aOR 3.2, 95% CI 2.5-4.2, p < 0.001), longer mean length of stay (18.7 days vs. 14.5 days, p < 0.001), higher likelihood of requiring vasopressors (aOR 1.7, 95% CI 2.5-4.2) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) (aOR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3-2.1) in C-ARDS patients. Our study shows that COVID-19-related ARDS patients had a higher rate of complications, including higher in-hospital mortality and a higher need for vasopressors and invasive mechanical ventilation relative to Influenza-related ARDS; however, it also showed an increased utilization of mechanical circulatory support and non-invasive ventilation in Influenza-related ARDS. It emphasizes the need for early detection and management of COVID-19.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Influenza Humana , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório , Humanos , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/terapia , Influenza Humana/complicações , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/terapia , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/etiologia , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/terapia , Respiração Artificial , MorbidadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Current knowledge regarding the association between trimester-specific changes during pregnancy and COVID-19 infection is limited. We utilized the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database to investigate trimester-specific outcomes among hospitalized pregnant women diagnosed with COVID-19. RESULTS: Out of 3,447,771 pregnant women identified, those with COVID-19 exhibited higher in-hospital mortality rates in their third trimester compared with those without the virus. Notably, rates of mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, and perinatal complications (preeclampsia, HELLP syndrome, and preterm birth) were significantly elevated across all trimesters for COVID-19 patients. COVID-19 was found to be more prevalent among low-income, Hispanic pregnant women. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that COVID-19 during pregnancy is associated with increased risk of maternal mortality and complications, particularly in the third trimester. Furthermore, we observed significant racial and socioeconomic disparities in both COVID-19 prevalence and pregnancy outcomes. These findings emphasize the need for equitable healthcare strategies to improve care for diverse and socioeconomically marginalized groups, ultimately aiming to reduce adverse COVID-19-associated maternal and fetal outcomes.
RESUMO
The Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic of 2019 has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality, especially from severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). As of September 2022, more than 6.5 million patients have died globally, and up to 5% required intensive care unit treatment. COVID-19-associated ARDS (CARDS) differs from the typical ARDS due to distinct pathology involving the pulmonary vasculature endothelium, resulting in diffuse thrombi in the pulmonary circulation and impaired gas exchange. The National Institute of Health and the Society of Critical Care Medicine recommend lung-protective ventilation, prone ventilation, and neuromuscular blockade as needed. Further, a trial of pulmonary vasodilators is suggested for those who develop refractory hypoxemia. A review of the prior literature on inhaled pulmonary vasodilators in ARDS suggests only a transient improvement in oxygenation, with no mortality benefit. This narrative review aims to highlight the fundamental principles in ARDS management, delineate the fundamental differences between CARDS and ARDS, and describe the comprehensive use of inhaled pulmonary vasodilators. In addition, with the differing pathophysiology of CARDS from the typical ARDS, we sought to evaluate the current evidence regarding the use of inhaled pulmonary vasodilators in CARDS.