Prone positioning for patients intubated for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) secondary to COVID-19: a retrospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The role of repeated prone positioning in intubated subjects with acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by COVID-19 remains unclear. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of critically ill intubated patients with COVID-19 who were placed in the prone position between March 18, 2020 and March 31, 2020. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, reintubation, and previous prone positioning at a referring hospital. Patients were followed up until hospital discharge. The primary outcome was oxygenation assessed by partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (Pao2/Fio2) ratio. A positive response to proning was defined as an increase in Pao2/Fio2 ratio ≥20%. Treatment failure of prone positioning was defined as death or requirement for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). RESULTS: Forty-two subjects (29 males; age: 59 [52-69] yr) were eligible for analysis. Nine subjects were placed in the prone position only once, with 25 requiring prone positioning on three or more occasions. A total of 31/42 (74%) subjects survived to discharge, with five requiring ECMO; 11/42 (26%) subjects died. After the first prone positioning session, Pao2/Fio2 (mean (standard deviation)) ratio increased from 17.9 kPa (7.2) to 28.2 kPa (12.2) (P<0.01). After the initial prone positioning session, subjects who were discharged from hospital were more likely to have an improvement in Pao2/Fio2 ratio ≥20%, compared with those requiring ECMO or who died. CONCLUSION: Patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome frequently responded to initial prone positioning with improved oxygenation. Subsequent prone positioning in subjects discharged from hospital was associated with greater improvements in oxygenation.

Practical strategies to reduce nosocomial transmission to healthcare professionals providing respiratory care to patients with COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an emerging viral infection that is rapidly spreading across the globe. SARS-CoV-2 belongs to the same coronavirus class that caused respiratory illnesses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). During the SARS and MERS outbreaks, many frontline healthcare workers were infected when performing high-risk aerosol-generating medical procedures as well as when providing basic patient care. Similarly, COVID-19 disease has been reported to infect healthcare workers at a rate of ~ 3% of cases treated in the USA. In this review, we conducted an extensive literature search to develop practical strategies that can be implemented when providing respiratory treatments to COVID-19 patients, with the aim to help prevent nosocomial transmission to the frontline workers.

Evaluation of a Closed Suction System With Integrated Tube-Scraping Technology.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal tube (ETT) scraping or sweeping refers to mucus removal from an ETT that can increase airway resistance. The study objective was to evaluate the effect of ETT scraping on the duration of mechanical ventilation, time to first successful spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), duration of hospital stay, and occurrence of ventilator-associated events (VAEs). METHODS: This was a single-center, randomized clinical trial of adult subjects intubated between October 2019-October 2021. Subjects were randomly assigned to either ETT suctioning via a standard in-line suction catheter (control group) or ETT suctioning and scraping via a suction catheter with balloon-sweeping technology (experimental group). Airway suctioning was performed as clinically indicated, and the ETT was scraped every time a respiratory therapist suctioned the subject. The study outcome was duration of mechanical ventilation, time to first successful SBT, hospital length of stay, and VAE rate. Intent-to-treat statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: Of 272 randomized subjects, the median age was 63 (interquartile range [IQR] 52-73) y; 143 (53%) were males, and 154 (57%) had a primary diagnosis of acute respiratory failure. There were no significant differences between the groups in median duration (h) of mechanical ventilation (72 [37-187] vs 70.6 [37-148], P = .58). There was no significant difference between the study groups in median time (h) to the first successful SBT (46.7 [IQR 30-87] vs 45.7 [IQR 27-95], P = .81), length of hospital stay (P = .76), the incidences of ventilator-associated conditions (P = .13), or infection-related ventilator-associated complications (P = .47). CONCLUSIONS: ETT suctioning plus scraping, compared to ETT suctioning alone, did not significantly improve the duration of mechanical ventilation, time to first successful SBT, length of hospital stay, and VAEs. These study findings do not support the routine use of ETT scraping for mechanically ventilated patients.

COVID-19 Lessons Learned: Prone Positioning With and Without Invasive Ventilation.

Prone positioning (PP) has been used extensively for patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for hypoxemic respiratory failure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence suggests that PP was beneficial during the pandemic, as it improves oxygenation and might improve chances of survival, especially in those with a continuum of positive oxygenation responses to the procedure. Additionally, the pandemic drove innovation regarding PP, as it brought attention to awake PP (APP) and the value of an interdisciplinary team approach to PP during a pandemic. APP appears to be safe and effective at improving oxygenation; APP may also reduce the need for intubation in patients requiring advanced respiratory support like high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive ventilation. Teams specifically assembled for PP during a pandemic also appear useful and can provide needed assistance to bedside clinicians in the time of crisis. Complications associated with PP can be mitigated, and a multidisciplinary approach to reduce the incidence of complications is recommended.

A Multidisciplinary Team-Based Approach to Improve Communication With Surrogates of Patients With Chronic Critical Illness.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians need to deliver prognostic information to surrogates of nondecisional, critically ill patients so that surrogates can make informed medical decisions that reflect the patient's values. Our objective was to implement a new approach for communicating with surrogates of patients with chronic critical illness. METHODS: Surrogate decision makers of patients who were difficult to liberate from mechanical ventilation were prospectively enrolled. Surrogates met with different members of the intensive care unit treatment team for sequential 15-minute appointments to receive patient-specific assessments and education on chronic critical illness. The feasibility and acceptability of this approach were determined. A 24-question comprehension instrument was developed to assess a participant's understanding that a family member was displaying features of chronic critical illness. Each question was scored from 1 to 5, with larger scores indicating greater comprehension. RESULTS: Over a 15-week period, educational sessions for 9 mechanically ventilated patients were conducted. On average, 2 surrogates per patient (range: 1-4) and 6 members of the interdisciplinary team (range: 4-6) were at each meeting. Surrogates and clinicians had very positive impressions of the communication intervention. The average preintervention comprehension score was 85 of 120 (standard deviation [SD]: 8, range: 71-101). The postintervention comprehension score was greater by 5 points on average (SD: 9, range: -11 to +20 points, P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Surrogates of critically ill patients approved of this novel communication approach and had a greater understanding of the patient's medical condition after the intervention.