Search

Background: Despite the variability and complexity of geriatric conditions, few COVID-19 reports of clinical characteristic prognostication provide data specific to oldest-old adults (over age 85), and instead generally report broadly as 65 and older., Objective: To examine metabolic syndrome criteria in adults across 25 hospitals with variation in chronological age., Design and Participants: This cohort study examined 39,564 hospitalizations of patients aged 18 or older with COVID-19 who received inpatient care between March 13, 2020, and February 28, 2022., Exposure: ICU admission and/or in-hospital mortality., Main Measures: Metabolic syndrome criteria and patient demographics were examined as risk factors. The main outcomes were admission to ICU and hospital mortality., Key Results: Oldest old patients (≥ 85 years) hospitalized with COVID-19 accounted for 7.0% (2758/39,564) of all adult hospitalizations. They had shorter ICU length of stay, similar overall hospitalization duration, and higher rates of discharge destinations providing healthcare services (i.e., home health, skilled nursing facility) compared to independent care. Chronic conditions varied by age group, with lower proportions of diabetes and uncontrolled diabetes in the oldest-old cohort compared with young-old (65-74 years) and middle-old (75-84 years) groups. Evaluations of the effect of metabolic syndrome and patient demographics (i.e., age, sex, race) on ICU admission demonstrate minimal change in the magnitude of effect for metabolic syndrome on ICU admission across the different models., Conclusions: Metabolic syndrome measures are important individual predictors of COVID-19 outcomes. Building on prior examinations that metabolic syndrome is associated with death and ARDS across all ages, this analysis supports that metabolic syndrome criteria may be more relevant than chronological age as risk factors for poor outcomes attributed to COVID-19., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Background: In previous studies, there was an increase in mortality with secondary coinfections in all COVID-19 variants. However, no prior study has explored the association of coinfection with outcomes of hospitalized patients among the COVID-19 variants (Alpha, Delta, and Omicron)., Methods: This observational cohort study involved 21,186 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in 25 hospitals in Texas. Patients were divided into groups by surges of COVID-19: Alpha (November 1, 2020-February 10, 2021), Delta (July 10, 2021-October 14, 2021), and Omicron (December 21, 2021-March 3, 2022). Data were collected from electronic health records using methodology from the Viral Respiratory Illness Universal Study COVID-19 registry (NCT04323787) of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Multivariable Cox-proportional hazard regression model assessed the adjusted effect of different surge periods on mortality., Results: Bacterial coinfections varied among hospitalization surges associated with Alpha (8.5%), Delta (11.7%), and Omicron (11.9%) variants. Adjusted analyses showed a higher 30-day and 90-day mortality in all variants when coinfections were present compared with isolated COVID-19 infection. In particular, 30-day and 90-day mortality were significantly worse with Delta compared to Alpha and Omicron., Conclusions: All variants were associated with a higher mortality when bacterial coinfections were present. Delta was associated with a higher risk-adjusted mortality at 30 days and thereafter., (Copyright © 2024 Baylor University Medical Center.)

Background: Since publication of the 2012 Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), several developments have supported the need for an expansion of the definition, including the use of high-flow nasal oxygen, the expansion of the use of pulse oximetry in place of arterial blood gases, the use of ultrasound for chest imaging, and the need for applicability in resource-limited settings. Methods: A consensus conference of 32 critical care ARDS experts was convened, had six virtual meetings (June 2021 to March 2022), and subsequently obtained input from members of several critical care societies. The goal was to develop a definition that would 1 ) identify patients with the currently accepted conceptual framework for ARDS, 2 ) facilitate rapid ARDS diagnosis for clinical care and research, 3 ) be applicable in resource-limited settings, 4 ) be useful for testing specific therapies, and 5 ) be practical for communication to patients and caregivers. Results: The committee made four main recommendations: 1 ) include high-flow nasal oxygen with a minimum flow rate of ⩾30 L/min; 2 ) use Pa O 2 :Fi O 2  ⩽ 300 mm Hg or oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry Sp O 2 :Fi O 2  ⩽ 315 (if oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry is ⩽97%) to identify hypoxemia; 3 ) retain bilateral opacities for imaging criteria but add ultrasound as an imaging modality, especially in resource-limited areas; and 4 ) in resource-limited settings, do not require positive end-expiratory pressure, oxygen flow rate, or specific respiratory support devices. Conclusions: We propose a new global definition of ARDS that builds on the Berlin definition. The recommendations also identify areas for future research, including the need for prospective assessments of the feasibility, reliability, and prognostic validity of the proposed global definition.

Objective: The leadership team invited surgical team members to participate in educational sessions that created self and other awareness as well as gathered baseline information about these topics: communication, conflict management, emotional intelligence, and teamwork., Design: Each educational session included an inventory that was completed to help participants understand their own characteristics and the characteristics of their team members. The results from these inventories were aggregated, relationships were identified, and the intervention was evaluated., Setting: A level 1 trauma center, Baylor Scott and White Health, in central Texas; a 636-bed tertiary care main hospital and an affiliated children's hospital., Participants: An open invitation for all surgical team members yielded 551 interprofessional OR team members including anesthesia, attending physicians, nursing, physician assistants, residents, and administration., Results: Surgeons' communication styles were individual focused, while other team members were group focused. The most common conflict management mode for surgical team members on average was avoiding, and the least common was collaborating. Surgeons primarily used competing mode for conflict management, with avoiding coming in a close second. Finally, the 5 dysfunctions of a team inventory revealed low accountability scores, meaning the participants struggled with holding team members accountable., Conclusions: Helping team members understand their own and others' strengths and blind spots will help create opportunity for more purposeful and clear communication. Additionally, this knowledge should improve efficiency and safety in the high-stakes environment of the operating room., (Copyright © 2023 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Many COVID-19 studies are constructed to report hospitalization outcomes, with few large multi-center population-based reports on the time course of intra-hospitalization characteristics, including daily oxygenation support requirements. Comprehensive epidemiologic profiles of oxygenation methods used by day and by week during hospitalization across all severities are important to illustrate the clinical and economic burden of COVID-19 hospitalizations., Methods: This was a retrospective, multi-center observational cohort study of 15,361 consecutive hospitalizations of patients with COVID-19 at 25 adult acute care hospitals in Texas participating in the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Respiratory Illness Universal Study COVID-19 registry., Results: At initial hospitalization, the majority required nasal cannula (44.0%), with an increasing proportion of invasive mechanical ventilation in the first week and particularly the weeks to follow. After 4 weeks of acute illness, 69.9% of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 required intermediate (eg, high-flow nasal cannula, noninvasive ventilation) or advanced respiratory support (ie, invasive mechanical ventilation), with similar proportions that extended to hospitalizations that lasted ≥ 6 weeks., Conclusions: Data representation of intra-hospital processes of care drawn from hospitals with varied size, teaching and trauma designations is important to presenting a balanced perspective of care delivery mechanisms employed, such as daily oxygen method utilization., Competing Interests: The authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 by Daedalus Enterprises.)

Background: The RAPID [Renal (urea), Age, fluid Purulence, Infection source, Dietary (albumin)] score is a validated scoring system which allows risk stratification in patients with pleural infection at presentation. Surgical intervention plays a key role in managing pleural empyema., Methods: A retrospective study of patients with complicated pleural effusions and/or empyema undergoing thoracoscopic or open decortication admitted to multiple affiliated Texas hospitals from September 1, 2014 to September 30, 2018. The primary outcome was all-cause 90-day mortality. The secondary outcomes were organ failure, length of stay and 30-day readmission rate. The outcomes were compared between early surgery (≤3 days from diagnosis) and late surgery (>3 days from diagnosis) and low [0-3] vs. high [4-7] RAPID scores., Results: We enrolled 182 patients. Late surgery was associated with increased organ failure (64.0% vs. 45.6%, P=0.0197) and longer length of stay (16 vs. 10 days, P<0.0001). High RAPID scores were associated with a higher 90-day mortality (16.3% vs. 2.3%, P=0.0014), and organ failure (81.6% vs. 49.6%, P=0.0001). High RAPID scores with early surgery were associated with higher 90-day mortality (21.4% vs. 0%, P=0.0124), organ failure (78.6% vs. 34.9%, P=0.0044), 30-day readmission (50.0% vs. 16.3%, P=0.027) and length of stay (16 vs. 9 days, P=0.0064). High vs. low RAPID scores with late surgery was associated with a higher rate of organ failure (82.9% vs. 56.7%, P=0.0062), but there was not a significant association with mortality., Conclusions: We found a significant association between RAPID scores and surgical timing with new organ failure. Patients with complicated pleural effusions who had early surgery and low RAPID scores experienced better outcomes including decreased length of stay and organ failure compared with those who had late surgery and low RAPID scores. This suggests that using the RAPID score may help identify those who would benefit from early surgery., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://jtd.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/jtd-22-747/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2023 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.)

Background: COVID-19 symptom reports describe varying levels of disease severity with differing periods of recovery and symptom trajectories. Thus, there are a multitude of disease and symptom characteristics clinicians must navigate and interpret to guide care., Objective: To find natural groups of patients with similar constellations of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) symptoms., Design: Cohort SETTING: Outpatient COVID-19 recovery clinic with patient referrals from 160 primary care clinics serving 36 counties in Texas., Patients: Adult patients seeking COVID-19 recovery clinic care between November 15, 2020, and July 31, 2021, with laboratory-confirmed mild (not hospitalized), moderate (hospitalized), or severe (hospitalized with critical care) COVID-19., Main Measures: Demographics, COVID illness onset, and duration of persistent PASC symptoms via semi-structured medical assessments., Key Results: Four hundred forty-one patients (mean age 51.5 years; 295 [66.9%] women; 99 [22%] Hispanic, and 170 [38.5%] non-White, racial minority) met inclusion criteria. Using a k-medoids algorithm, we found that PASC symptoms cluster into two distinct groups: neuropsychiatric (N = 186) (e.g., subjective cognitive dysfunction) and pulmonary (N = 255) (e.g., dyspnea, cough). The neuropsychiatric cluster had significantly higher incidences of otolaryngologic (X 2 = 14.3, p < 0.001), gastrointestinal (X 2 = 6.90, p = 0.009), neurologic (X 2 = 441, p < 0.001), and psychiatric sequelae (X 2 = 40.6, p < 0.001) with more female (X 2 = 5.44, p = 0.020) and younger age (t = 2.39, p = 0.017) patients experiencing longer durations of PASC symptoms before seeking care (t = 2.44, p = 0.015). Patients in the pulmonary cluster were more often hospitalized for COVID-19 (X 2 = 3.98, p = 0.046) and had significantly higher comorbidity burden (U = 20800, p = 0.019) and pulmonary sequelae (X 2 = 13.2, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Health services clinic data from a large integrated health system offers insights into the post-COVID symptoms associated with care seeking for sequelae that are not adequately managed by usual care pathways (self-management and primary care clinic visits). These findings can inform machine learning algorithms, primary care management, and selection of patients for earlier COVID-19 recovery referral., Trial Registration: N/A., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Competing Interests: The authors report no funding or conflicts of interest.

Importance: Hypotension is common during tracheal intubation of critically ill adults and increases the risk of cardiac arrest and death. Whether administering an intravenous fluid bolus to critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation prevents severe hypotension, cardiac arrest, or death remains uncertain., Objective: To determine the effect of fluid bolus administration on the incidence of severe hypotension, cardiac arrest, and death., Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial enrolled 1067 critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation with sedation and positive pressure ventilation at 11 intensive care units in the US between February 1, 2019, and May 24, 2021. The date of final follow-up was June 21, 2021., Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 500-mL intravenous fluid bolus (n = 538) or no fluid bolus (n = 527)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was cardiovascular collapse (defined as new or increased receipt of vasopressors or a systolic blood pressure <65 mm Hg between induction of anesthesia and 2 minutes after tracheal intubation, or cardiac arrest or death between induction of anesthesia and 1 hour after tracheal intubation). The secondary outcome was the incidence of death prior to day 28, which was censored at hospital discharge., Results: Among 1067 patients randomized, 1065 (99.8%) completed the trial and were included in the primary analysis (median age, 62 years [IQR, 51-70 years]; 42.1% were women). Cardiovascular collapse occurred in 113 patients (21.0%) in the fluid bolus group and in 96 patients (18.2%) in the no fluid bolus group (absolute difference, 2.8% [95% CI, -2.2% to 7.7%]; P = .25). New or increased receipt of vasopressors occurred in 20.6% of patients in the fluid bolus group compared with 17.6% of patients in the no fluid bolus group, a systolic blood pressure of less than 65 mm Hg occurred in 3.9% vs 4.2%, respectively, cardiac arrest occurred in 1.7% vs 1.5%, and death occurred in 0.7% vs 0.6%. Death prior to day 28 (censored at hospital discharge) occurred in 218 patients (40.5%) in the fluid bolus group compared with 223 patients (42.3%) in the no fluid bolus group (absolute difference, -1.8% [95% CI, -7.9% to 4.3%]; P = .55)., Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation, administration of an intravenous fluid bolus compared with no fluid bolus did not significantly decrease the incidence of cardiovascular collapse., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03787732.

In December 2019, China witnessed the emergence of a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. Its ability to spread quickly made it a global pandemic. The United States has been greatly affected, with more than 980,000 lives lost so far. Diagnosis is made primarily through nasopharyngeal swab for polymerase chain reaction. Point-of-care testing by antigen is less sensitive and specific and may require polymerase chain reaction confirmation. Management of the COVID-19 patient remains largely supportive. Steroids are now a therapy mainstay if the patient is hypoxic. Direct antivirals, such as nirmatrelvir/ritonavir, remdesivir, or molnupirivir, can be used if certain criteria are met. SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted primarily by inhalation of large droplets, though transmission by aerosolization may occur, particularly via certain procedures. In the hospital setting, use of personal protective equipment for the care of COVID-19 patients has largely remained the same, with full use of gowns, gloves, respirators, and eye protection. Inadequate supply at the start of the pandemic required innovative ways to reprocess and extend the use of personal protective equipment. Three vaccines are now available in the US, all with excellent efficacy against severe disease and hospitalization, though booster doses are needed to bolster waning antibody levels. The possibility of emerging variants continues to remain a threat to control of the pandemic. The leader of the World Health Organization, Dr. Tedros, has stated, "The pandemic will not be over anywhere until it's over everywhere.", (Copyright © 2022 Baylor University Medical Center.)

Background: Evidence for vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza-associated pneumonia has varied by season, location, and strain. We estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified influenza-associated pneumonia during 2015-2016 to 2017-2018 seasons in the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN)., Methods: Among adults aged ≥18 years admitted to 10 US hospitals for acute respiratory illness (ARI), clinician-investigators used keywords from reports of chest imaging performed during 3 days around hospital admission to assign a diagnosis of "definite/probable pneumonia." We used a test-negative design to estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia, comparing reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza cases with test-negative subjects. Influenza vaccination status was documented in immunization records or self-reported, including date and location. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for age, site, season, calendar-time, and other factors., Results: Of 4843 adults hospitalized with ARI included in the primary analysis, 266 (5.5%) had "definite/probable pneumonia" and confirmed influenza. Adjusted VE against hospitalization for any radiographically confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia was 38% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17-53%); by type/subtype, it was 74% (95% CI, 52-87%) influenza A (H1N1)pdm09, 25% (95% CI, -15% to 50%) A (H3N2), and 23% (95% CI, -32% to 54%) influenza B. Adjusted VE against intensive care for any influenza was 57% (95% CI, 19-77%)., Conclusions: Influenza vaccination was modestly effective among adults in preventing hospitalizations and the need for intensive care associated with influenza pneumonia. VE was significantly higher against A (H1N1)pdm09 and was low against A (H3N2) and B., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The multifaceted long-term impairments resulting from critical illness and COVID-19 require interdisciplinary management approaches in the recovery phase of illness. Operational insights into the structure and process of recovery clinics (RCs) from heterogeneous health systems are needed. This study describes the structure and process characteristics of existing and newly implemented ICU-RCs and COVID-RCs in a subset of large health systems in the United States., Design: Cross-sectional survey., Setting: Thirty-nine RCs, representing a combined 156 hospitals within 29 health systems participated., Patients: None., Interventions: None., Measurement and Main Results: RC demographics, referral criteria, and operating characteristics were collected, including measures used to assess physical, psychologic, and cognitive recoveries. Thirty-nine RC surveys were completed (94% response rate). ICU-RC teams included physicians, pharmacists, social workers, physical therapists, and advanced practice providers. Funding sources for ICU-RCs included clinical billing ( n = 20, 77%), volunteer staff support ( n = 15, 58%), institutional staff/space support ( n = 13, 46%), and grant or foundation funding ( n = 3, 12%). Forty-six percent of RCs report patient visit durations of 1 hour or longer. ICU-RC teams reported use of validated scales to assess psychologic recovery (93%), physical recovery (89%), and cognitive recovery (86%) more often in standard visits compared with COVID-RC teams (psychologic, 54%; physical, 69%; and cognitive, 46%)., Conclusions: Operating structures of RCs vary, though almost all describe modest capacity and reliance on volunteerism and discretionary institutional support. ICU- and COVID-RCs in the United States employ varied funding sources and endorse different assessment measures during visits to guide care coordination. Common features include integration of ICU clinicians, interdisciplinary approach, and focus on severe critical illness. The heterogeneity in RC structures and processes contributes to future research on the optimal structure and process to achieve the best postintensive care syndrome and postacute sequelae of COVID outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.)

As surges in the COVID-19 pandemic have continued worldwide, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has mutated, spawning several new variants, and impacting, to various degrees, transmission, disease severity, diagnostics, therapeutics, and natural and vaccine-induced immunity. Baylor Scott & White Health has implemented, along with laboratory diagnosis, SARS-CoV-2 sequencing to identify variants in its geographical service area. We analyzed virus sequencing results of specimens collected across Central Texas and found dramatic changes in variant distribution in the first half of 2021. The alpha variant (B 1.1.7) became predominant at week 13 and continued dominance until week 25. A growth rate of 1.20 (R 2  = 0.92) for the first 15 weeks was noted and this growth gradually declined to -0.55 (R 2  = 0.99) for the final 13 weeks. Currently, B.1.1.7 is being displaced with B.1.617.2 at a 0.58 growth rate (R 2  = 0.97). We also investigated vaccine breakthrough cases (VBCs) within our healthcare system and present clinical data on 28 symptomatic patients., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose: We sought to examine changes in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) management over a 12-year period of two successive randomized trials., Methods: Analyses included baseline data, from eligible patients, prior to influence of trial protocols, and daily study data, from randomized patients, of variables not determined by trial protocols. Mixed linear regressions examined changes in practice year-on-year., Results: A total of 2376 patients met the inclusion criteria. Over the 12-year period, baseline tidal volume index decreased (9.0 to 7.0 ml/kg, p < 0.001), plateau pressures decreased (30.8 to 29.0 cmH 2 O, p < 0.05), and baseline positive end-expiratory pressures increased (10.8 to 13.2 cmH 2 O, p < 0.001). Volume-controlled ventilation declined from 29.4 to 14.0% (p < 0.01). Use of corticosteroids increased (baseline: 7.7 to 30.3%; on study: 32.6 to 61.2%; both p < 0.001), as did neuromuscular blockade (baseline: 12.3 to 24.5%; on study: 55.5 to 70.0%; both p < 0.01). Inhaled nitric oxide use increased (24.9 to 65.8%, p < 0.05). We observed no significant change in prone positioning (16.2 to 18.9%, p = 0.70)., Conclusions: Clear trends were apparent in tidal volume, airway pressures, ventilator modes, adjuncts and rescue therapies. With the exception of prone positioning, and outside the context of rescue therapy, these trends appear consistent with the evolving literature on ARDS management., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All the other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The epidemiology and organ-specific sequelae following acute illness due to COVID-19 and prompting patients to seek COVID recovery care are not yet well characterized. This cross-sectional study reviewed data on 200 adult patients with prolonged symptoms of COVID-19 (>14 days after symptom onset) not resolved by usual primary care or specialist care who were referred for COVID-specific follow-up. Most patients sought COVID recovery clinic visits within the first 2 months of initial onset of symptoms (median 37 days), with some seeking care for sequelae persisting up to 10 months (median 82 days). At the time of telehealth evaluation, 13% of patients were using home oxygen, and 10% of patients had been unable to return to work due to persistent fatigue and/or subjective cognitive dysfunction ("brain fog"). The prominent specific symptom sequelae prompting patients to seek COVID-specific evaluation beyond usual primary care and specialist referrals were dyspnea, fatigue/weakness, and subjective cognitive dysfunction, irrespective of whether patients had required hospitalization or time since COVID-19 symptom onset., (Copyright © 2021 Baylor University Medical Center.)

Background: Adverse reactions, including anaphylaxis, to messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines rarely occur. Because of the need to administer a timely second dose in subjects who reported a reaction to their first dose, a panel of health-care professionals developed a safe triage of the employees and health care providers (EHCP) at a large health-care system to consider administration of future dosing. Methods: There were 28,544 EHCPs who received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccines between December 15, 2020, and March 8, 2021. The EHCPs self-reported adverse reactions to a centralized COVID-19 command center (CCC). The CCC screened and collected information on the quality of reaction, symptoms, and timing of the onset of the reaction. Results: Of 1253 calls to the CCC, 113 were identified as requiring consideration by a panel of three (American Board of Allergy and Immunology) ABAI-certified allergists for future dosing or formal in-person assessment. Of the 113 EHCPs, 94 (83.2%) were recommended to get their second dose. Eighty of 94 received their second planned dose without a severe or immediate reaction. Of the 14 of 113 identified as needing further evaluation, 6 were evaluated by a physician and subsequently received their second dose without a serious adverse reaction. Eight of 14 did not receive their second dose. Only 5 of the 113 EHCPs reported reactions (4.4%) were recommended to not take the second dose: 3 (2.6%) because of symptoms consistent with anaphylaxis, and 2 because of neurologic complications (seizure, stroke). Conclusion: The panel demonstrated that, by consideration of reaction history alone, the ECHPs could be appropriately triaged to receive scheduled second dosing of COVID-19 vaccines without delays for in-person evaluation and allergy testing.