Search

Background: Traditional models to predict intensive care outcomes do not perform well in COVID‐19. We undertook a comprehensive study of factors affecting mortality and functional outcome after severe COVID‐19. Methods: In this prospective multicentre cohort study, we enrolled laboratory‐confirmed, critically ill COVID‐19 patients at six ICUs in the Skåne Region, Sweden, between May 11, 2020, and May 10, 2021. Demographics and clinical data were collected. ICU burden was defined as the total number of ICU‐treated COVID‐19 patients in the region on admission. Surviving patients had a follow‐up at 90 days for assessment of functional outcome using the Glasgow Outcome Scale‐Extended (GOSE), an ordinal scale (1–8) with GOSE ≥5 representing a favourable outcome. The primary outcome was 90‐day mortality; the secondary outcome was functional outcome at 90 days. Results: Among 498 included patients, 74% were male with a median age of 66 years and a median body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2. Invasive mechanical ventilation was employed in 72%. Mortality in the ICU, in‐hospital and at 90 days was 30%, 38% and 39%, respectively. Mortality increased markedly at age 60 and older. Increasing ICU burden was independently associated with a two‐fold increase in mortality. Higher BMI was not associated with increased mortality. Besides age and ICU burden, smoking status, cortisone use, PaCO2 >7 kPa, and inflammatory markers on admission were independent factors of 90‐day mortality. Lower GOSE at 90 days was associated with a longer stay in the ICU. Conclusion: In critically ill COVID‐19 patients, the 90‐day mortality was 39% and increased considerably at age 60 or older. The ICU burden was associated with mortality, whereas a high BMI was not. A longer stay in the ICU was associated with unfavourable functional outcomes at 90 days. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A working group representing the Swedish Society for Infectious Diseases, the Swedish Society for Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, the Swedish Society for Emergency Medicine, and the Swedish Intensive Care Registry have reached consensus on how to adopt the new sepsis definition, Sepsis-3, in Sweden. The recommendation is to implement the new definitions and diagnostic criteria for sepsis and septic shock, but not the use of the new screening tool for sepsis, quick-SOFA, as it needs prospective validation and since it is not clear if quick-SOFA is more useful than the currently used general triage and early warning score systems. The group recommends the use of the sfollowing ICD-10 codes: R65.1 for sepsis and R57.2 for septic shock.