Dataset Information

Safety and Feasibility of an Interdisciplinary Treatment Approach to Optimize Recovery From Critical Coronavirus Disease 2019.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Examine the safety and feasibility of a multimodal in-person or telehealth treatment program, administered in acute recovery phase for patients surviving critical coronavirus disease 2019.

Design

Pragmatic, pre-post, nonrandomized controlled trial with patients electing enrollment into one of the two recovery pathways.

Setting

ICU Recovery Clinic in an academic medical center.

Patients

Adult patients surviving acute respiratory failure due to critical coronavirus disease 2019.

Interventions

Patients participated in combined ICU Recovery clinic and 8 weeks of physical rehabilitation delivered: 1) in-person or 2) telehealth. Patients received medical care by an ICU Recovery Clinic interdisciplinary team and physical rehabilitation focused on aerobic, resistance, and respiratory muscle training.

Measurements and main results

Thirty-two patients enrolled with mean age 57 ± 12, 62% were male, and the median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 9.5. There were no differences between the two groups except patients in telehealth pathway (n = 10) lived further from clinic than face-to-face patients (162 ± 60 vs 31 ± 47 kilometers, t = 6.06, p < 0.001). Four safety events occurred: one minor adverse event in the telehealth group, two minor adverse events, and one major adverse event in the in-person group. Three patients did not complete the study (two in-person and one telehealth). Six-minute walk distance increased to 101 ± 91 meters from pre to post (n = 29, t = 6.93, p < 0.0001), which was similar between the two groups (110 vs 80 meters, t = 1.34, p = 0.19). Self-reported levels of anxiety, depression, and distress were high in both groups with similar self-report quality of life.

Conclusions

A multimodal treatment program combining care from an interdisciplinary team in an ICU Recovery Clinic with physical rehabilitation is safe and feasible in patients surviving the ICU for coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory failure.

SUBMITTER: Mayer KP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8378791 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been implicated in a wide spectrum of cardiac manifestations following the acute phase of the disease.ObjectivesTo assess the range of cardiac sequelae after COVID-19 recovery.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Scopus (inception through 17 February 2021) and Google scholar (2019 through 17 February 2021).Study eligibility criteriaProspective and retrospective studies, case reports and case series.ParticipantsAdult patients assessed for cardiac manifestations after COVID-19 recovery.ExposureSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection diagnosed by PCR.MethodsSystematic review.ResultsThirty-five studies (fifteen prospective cohort, seven case reports, five cross-sectional, four case series, three retrospective cohort and one ambidirectional cohort) evaluating cardiac sequelae in 52 609 patients were included. Twenty-nine studies used objective cardiac assessments, mostly cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in 16 studies, echocardiography in 15, electrocardiography (ECG) in 16 and cardiac biomarkers in 18. Most studies had a fair risk of bias. The median time from diagnosis/recovery to cardiac assessment was 48 days (1-180 days). Common short-term cardiac abnormalities (<3 months) included increased T1 (proportion: 30%), T2 (16%), pericardial effusion (15%) and late gadolinium enhancement (11%) on CMR, with symptoms such as chest pain (25%) and dyspnoea (36%). In the medium term (3-6 months), common changes included reduced left ventricular global longitudinal strain (30%) and late gadolinium enhancement (10%) on CMR, diastolic dysfunction (40%) on echocardiography and elevated N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide (18%). In addition, COVID-19 survivors had higher risk (risk ratio 3; 95% CI 2.7-3.2) of developing heart failure, arrythmias and myocardial infarction.ConclusionsCOVID-19 appears to be associated with persistent/de novo cardiac injury after recovery, particularly subclinical myocardial injury in the earlier phase and diastolic dysfunction later. Larger well-designed and controlled studies with baseline assessments are needed to better measure the extent of cardiac injury and its clinical impact.

Project description:There a lot of review papers addressing specific COVID-19 research sectors, then devoted to specialists. This review provides an in-depth summary of the available information about SARS-CoV-2 and the corresponding disease (also known as COVID-19), with a multi-disciplinary approach. After the paper introduction, the first section treats the virological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2, the medical implications of the infection, and the human susceptivity. Great attention is devoted to the factor affecting the infection routes, distinguishing among the possible human-to-human, environmental-to-human, and pollution-to-human transmission mechanisms. The second section is devoted to reporting the impact of SARS-CoV-2 not only on the healthcare systems but also on the economy and society. The third section is devoted to non-pharmaceutical behaviours against COVID-19. In this context, this review section presents an analysis of the European second wave allowing not only to focalize the importance of some restrictions, but also the relevance of social acceptance of some measures. The data reassumed in this work are very useful for interdisciplinary researchers that work in a team to find the basic available information about all the aspects connected with this pandemic (from virus diffusion mechanism to health information, from economic and social impacts to measures to reduce the pandemic spread), with great attention to social acceptance of restriction measures and of vaccines (that currently results to be insufficient to achieve community immunity). Then, this review paper highlights the fundamental role of the trans-multi-disciplinary research that is devoted not only to understand the basics of the pandemic to propose solutions but has also the commitment to find strategies to increase population resilience. For this aim, the authors strongly suggest the establishment of an international health-care trans-multi-disciplinary workforce devoted to investigate, mitigate, and control also future viral events.