Search

Background. COVID‐19 disease, a pandemic for more than two years, has major morbidity and mortality related to pulmonary involvement. Chest radiography is the main imaging tool for critically-ill patients. As the availability of arterial blood gas analysis is limited in the Level I and II healthcare centres, major partners in providing healthcare in resource‐limited times, we planned the present study. Objective. To assess the role of chest radiography in predicting the need for oxygen/ventilator support in critically ill COVID‐19 patients. Methods. This hospital‐based, retrospective study included 135 patients who needed oxygen/ventilator support and had optimal‐quality chest radiographs at admission. All the chest X‐rays were evaluated and a severity score was calculated on a predesigned pro forma. Statistical evaluation of the data obtained was done using appropriate tools and methods. Results. Males outnumbered females, with a mean age of 54.35 ± 14.49 years. More than 72% of patients included in our study needed ventilator support while the rest needed oxygen support. There was a significant statistical correlation between the chest radiograph severity score and SPO2/PaO2 levels in our study. Using a cut‐off value >8 for the chest radiograph severity score in predicting the need for ventilator support in a Covid‐19 patient, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy was 85.7%, 92.5% and 89.5%, respectively. Conclusions. Chest radiography remains the mainstay of imaging in critically ill COVID‐19 patients when they are on multiple life‐support systems. Though arterial blood gas analysis is the gold standard tool for assessing the need for oxygen/ventilator support in these patients, the severity score obtained from the initial chest radiograph at the time of admission may also be used as a screening tool. Chest radiography may predict the need for oxygen/ventilator support, allowing time for patients to be moved to an appropriate‐level healthcare centre, thus limiting morbidity and mortality.

Abstract During the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, lockdowns and movement restrictions were thought to negatively impact population mental health, since depression and anxiety symptoms were frequently reported. This study investigates the effect of COVID-19 mitigation measures on mental health across the United States, at county and state levels using difference-in-differences analysis. It examines the effect on mental health facility usage and the prevalence of mental illnesses, drawing on large-scale medical claims data for mental health patients joined with publicly available state- and county-specific COVID-19 cases and lockdown information. For consistency, the main focus is on two types of social distancing policies, stay-at-home and school closure orders. Results show that lockdown has significantly and causally increased the usage of mental health facilities in regions with lockdowns in comparison to regions without such lockdowns. Particularly, resource usage increased by 18% in regions with a lockdown compared to 1% decline in regions without a lockdown. Also, female populations have been exposed to a larger lockdown effect on their mental health. Diagnosis of panic disorders and reaction to severe stress significantly increased by the lockdown. Mental health was more sensitive to lockdowns than to the presence of the pandemic itself. The effects of the lockdown increased over an extended time to the end of December 2020.