Search

This rapid practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the use of awake proning in adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The panel included 20 experts from 12 countries, including one patient representative, and used a strict conflict of interest policy for potential financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the guidelines in intensive care, development, and evaluation (GUIDE) group. Based on an updated systematic review, and the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. We conducted an electronic vote, requiring >80% agreement amongst the panel for a recommendation to be adopted. The panel made a strong recommendation for a trial of awake proning in adult patients with COVID-19 related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure who are not invasively ventilated. Awake proning appears to reduce the risk of tracheal intubation, although it may not reduce mortality. The panel judged that most patients would want a trial of awake proning, although this may not be feasible in some patients and some patients may not tolerate it. However, given the high risk of clinical deterioration amongst these patients, awake proning should be conducted in an area where patients can be monitored by staff experienced in rapidly detecting and managing clinical deterioration. This RPG panel recommends a trial of awake prone positioning in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19., (© 2023 Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Objective: This study intends to compare the clinical characteristics and the prevalence and spectrum of bacterial pathogens in COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU during the first and second waves at a tertiary care, teaching and referral hospital of eastern India., Method: This is a hospital-based retrospective study which analysed demographic details, clinical profile and bacterial culture results of severe and critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted in intensive care units (ICU) during April -Oct 2020 (1st wave) and April -July 2021 (2nd wave)., Result: The patients admitted during the 2nd wave were comparatively older and had multiple comorbidities compared to the 1st wave. (23.8%) (45/189) and 50% (173/346) of the COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU developed bacterial infection during the 1st and 2nd wave respectively. Overall, there was predominance of multidrug resistant Gram negative bacilli in both the waves. There was increased isolation of intrinsic colistin resistant microorganisms., Conclusion: Multidrug resistant Gram negative bacterial infections, remain a dreaded complication in severe and critically ill hospitalised COVID-19 patients requiring ICU care and high usage of colistin spirals the emergence and spread of pathogens intrinsically resistant to colistin., (© Journal of the Association of Physicians of India 2011.)

Aim: During the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the physicians are using various off-label therapeutics to manage COVID-19. We undertook a cross-sectional survey to study the current variation in therapeutic strategies for managing severe COVID-19 in India., Methods: From January 4 to January 18, 2021, an online cross-sectional survey was conducted among physicians involved in the management of severe COVID-19. The survey had three sections: 1. Antiviral agents, 2. Immunomodulators, and 3. Adjuvant therapies., Results: 1055 respondents (from 24 states and five union territories), of which 64.2% were consultants, 54.3% working in private hospitals, and 39.1% were from critical care medicine completed the survey. Remdesivir (95.2%), antithrombotics (94.2%), corticosteroids (90.3%), vitamins (89.7%) and empirical antibiotics (85.6%) were the commonly used therapeutics. Ivermectin (33%), convalescent plasma (28.6%) and favipiravir (17.6%) were other antiviral agents used. Methylprednisolone (50.2%) and dexamethasone (44.1%) were preferred corticosteroids and at a dose equivalent of 8 mg of dexamethasone phosphate (70.2%). There was significant variation among physicians from different medical specialities in the use of favipiravir, corticosteroids, empirical antibiotics and vitamins., Conclusion: There is a considerable variation in the physicians' choice of therapeutic strategies for the management of severe COVID-19 in India, as compared with the available evidence., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has left footprints across all ages and socio-economic strata. The deaths because of COVID-19 are usually multi-factorial. The study aimed to assess the health system factors related to COVID-19-related deaths. Materials and Methods: A hospital-based retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital of eastern India. A total of 272 COVID-19 deaths that occurred between April and November 2020 were investigated. Data were extracted from Medical Record Department, and telephonic interviews were conducted to assess the different delays related to death. Data were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences. Travel time, travel distance, delay in testing, and delay in receiving quality care were presented as median with inter-quartile range. Results: Complete information could be collected from 243 COVID deaths of the 272 deaths (89.3%). The duration of hospital stay was 1-7 days for 42% of the deceased. The median travel time was 120 min, and the median distance travelled was 60 km. The median time to receive first attention of health care workers was 10 minutes. There was hardly any delay in reporting of test results, whereas the median time from symptoms to test and the median time from symptoms to admission were 4 days each. Conclusion: Health system factors related to death of COVID-19 need to be addressed to avoid the avoidable deaths during the pandemic situation. The resilience of the health system can be helpful in reducing death toll in a low-resource country like India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The impact of disruption to the care of non-coronavirus disease (COVID) patients (COVID collateral damage syndrome-CCDS) is largely unknown in resource-limited settings. We investigated CCDS as perceived by healthcare workers (HCWs) providing acute and critical care services in India. Materials and methods: A clinician and nurse codesigned and validated an internet-based survey, which was disseminated to HCWs using a multiple frame sampling technique. Results: Responses were received from 468 HCWs (completion rate 84%); at the time of the survey, 48% were working in critical care, 41% aged 30-40 years, and 53% represented public institutions. Respondents perceived a decrease in service utilization and disruption to time-sensitive acute interventions (60.1% and 40.8%, respectively), with fear of infection (score, 63.0; standard deviation (SD), 31.8) and restrictions due to lockdown (61.4; SD 32.5) being cited as the causes of service disruption. Being overwhelmed or lack of protective equipment was perceived to contribute less to CCDS. Insistence on COVID test results χ² (p = 0.02) and duty-avoidance (p < 0.01) was perceived as significant causes for CCDS by HCWs from private hospitals and those in leadership roles, respectively. Conclusions: Fear of infection and the effect of lockdown were perceived as important contributors to CCDS resulting in disruption to services and decreased service utilization. Perceptions were influenced by HCWs' role and hospital organizational structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A 65-year-old known diabetic, hypertensive, and asthmatic patient was admitted for suspected coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) infection following complaints of breathlessness. He tested positive for COVID-19 and was put on ventilation. He developed severe follicular conjunctivitis of the right eye while on a ventilator, which was treated conservatively. The resolution of ocular signs was noted over 2 weeks without any complications. This case highlights the timeline of events and discusses the late ophthalmic manifestations in patients with COVID-19 infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]