Dataset Information

Respiratory failure, clinical course and community management of COVID-19 patients in a large Australian cohort.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has wreaked health and economic damage globally. A thorough understanding of the characteristics of COVID-19 patients in Australia plus the strategies that successfully 'flatten the curve' are vitally important to contain this pandemic.

Aim

To describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 patients in the Sutherland Shire, and the management model adopted to manage these patients.

Methods

A retrospective case series of COVID-19 patients monitored in the Sutherland Shire between 19 March and 15 May 2020 was performed. Demographic, clinical and outcome data of COVID-19 inpatients at the Sutherland Hospital and demographic data of COVID-19 patients in the Sutherland Shire community were obtained. The Sutherland Hospital COVID-19 Management Model involved close collaboration among the Sutherland Fever Clinic, Sutherland COVID-19 community telemonitoring team (CTAC) and Sutherland COVID-19 inpatient team.

Results

Ninety-nine COVID-19 cases (median age, 49 years, 50 (51%) male) were monitored in Sutherland Shire, with 19 cases (median age, 54 years, 10 (53%) male) requiring inpatient management. Common comorbidities included obesity, asthma, hypertension and Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Six (32%) patients required supplemental oxygen and three (16%) patients required intensive care admission. There was one mortality. The CTAC team identified five (5%) patients requiring admission, and three (3%) patients requiring re-admission. The majority of COVID-19 source was from overseas travel (67%), with nine (9%) cases having unknown source.

Conclusion

A comprehensive COVID-19 management model is needed to successfully manage COVID-19 patients in both outpatient and inpatient settings in order to 'squash the curve'.

SUBMITTER: Louie T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8014440 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The Greater Glasgow & Clyde NHS Trust Community Respiratory Response Team was established to manage patients with chronic respiratory disease at home during the COVID-19 pandemic. The team aimed to avert hospital admission while maximally utilising remote consultations. This observational study analysed outcomes of the triage pathway used, use of remote consultations, hospital admissions and mortality among patients managed by the team. Patients' electronic health records were retrospectively reviewed. Rates of emergency department attendance, hospital admission and death within 28 days of referral were compared across triage pathways. Segmented linear regression was carried out for emergency admissions in Greater Glasgow and Clyde pre- and post- Community Respiratory Response Team implementation, using emergency admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the rest of Scotland as control and adjusting for all-cause emergency admissions. The triage category correlated with hospital admission and death. The red pathway had the highest proportion attending the emergency department (21%), significantly higher than the amber and green pathways (p = 0.03 and p = 0.004, respectively). The highest number of deaths were in the blue "end-of-life" pathway (p < 0.001). 87% of interactions were undertaken remotely. Triage severity appropriately led to targeted home visits. No nosocomial COVID-19 infections occurred among patients or staff. The Community Respiratory Response Team was associated with a significant decrease in emergency admissions (RR = 0.96 for each additional month under the Poisson model) compared to the counterfactual if the service had not been in place, suggesting a benefit in reducing secondary care pressures. The Community Respiratory Response Team effectively managed patients with chronic respiratory disease in the community, with an associated reduction in secondary care pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundDespite expanding use, knowledge on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support during the COVID-19 pandemic remains limited. The objective was to report characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation with a diagnosis of COVID-19 in France and to identify pre-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation factors associated with in-hospital mortality. A hypothesis of similar mortality rates and risk factors for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was made.MethodsThe Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Respiratory Failure and/or Heart failure related to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (ECMOSARS) registry included COVID-19 patients supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in France. This study analyzed patients included in this registry up to October 25, 2020, and supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for respiratory failure with a minimum follow-up of 28 days after cannulation. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Risk factors for in-hospital mortality were analyzed.ResultsAmong 494 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients included in the registry, 429 were initially supported by venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and followed for at least 28 days. The median (interquartile range) age was 54 yr (46 to 60 yr), and 338 of 429 (79%) were men. Management before extracorporeal membrane oxygenation cannulation included prone positioning for 411 of 429 (96%), neuromuscular blockage for 419 of 427 (98%), and NO for 161 of 401 (40%). A total of 192 of 429 (45%) patients were cannulated by a mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation unit. In-hospital mortality was 219 of 429 (51%), with a median follow-up of 49 days (33 to 70 days). Among pre-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation modifiable exposure variables, neuromuscular blockage use (hazard ratio, 0.286; 95% CI, 0.101 to 0.81) and duration of ventilation (more than 7 days compared to less than 2 days; hazard ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.07 to 2.83) were independently associated with in-hospital mortality. Both age (per 10-yr increase; hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.50) and total bilirubin at cannulation (6.0 mg/dl or more compared to less than 1.2 mg/dl; hazard ratio, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.09 to 6.5) were confounders significantly associated with in-hospital mortality.ConclusionsIn-hospital mortality was higher than recently reported, but nearly half of the patients survived. A high proportion of patients were cannulated by a mobile extracorporeal membrane oxygenation unit. Several factors associated with mortality were identified. Venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support should be considered early within the first week of mechanical ventilation initiation.Editor’s perspective

Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice.MethodsUsing a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable).ResultsAgreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment.ConclusionUsing a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited.Trial registrationThe study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.