Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a large number of critical care admissions. While national reports have described the outcomes of patients with COVID-19, there is limited international data of the pandemic impact on non-COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care treatment., Methods: We conducted an international, retrospective cohort study using 2019 and 2020 data from 11 national clinical quality registries covering 15 countries. Non-COVID-19 admissions in 2020 were compared with all admissions in 2019, prepandemic. The primary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and standardised mortality ratio (SMR). Analyses were stratified by the country income level(s) of each registry., Findings: Among 1 642 632 non-COVID-19 admissions, there was an increase in ICU mortality between 2019 (9.3%) and 2020 (10.4%), OR=1.15 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.17, p<0.001). Increased mortality was observed in middle-income countries (OR 1.25 95% CI 1.23 to 1.26), while mortality decreased in high-income countries (OR=0.96 95% CI 0.94 to 0.98). Hospital mortality and SMR trends for each registry were consistent with the observed ICU mortality findings. The burden of COVID-19 was highly variable, with COVID-19 ICU patient-days per bed ranging from 0.4 to 81.6 between registries. This alone did not explain the observed non-COVID-19 mortality changes., Interpretation: Increased ICU mortality occurred among non-COVID-19 patients during the pandemic, driven by increased mortality in middle-income countries, while mortality decreased in high-income countries. The causes for this inequity are likely multi-factorial, but healthcare spending, policy pandemic responses, and ICU strain may play significant roles., Competing Interests: Competing interests: DP and Dr EL are members of the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Centre for Outcome and Resources Evaluation management committee. AB is funded by Wellcome. JS and MS are cofounders and shareholders of Epimed Solutions, a healthcare cloud-based analytics company. They are also supported in part by individual research grants from CNPq and FAPERJ. SB is the current chair, and MR is the past chair of the Finnish Intensive Care Consortium (both unpaid). DAD is unpaid chair of NICE foundation. NI's primary affiliation is the Department of Healthcare Quality Assessment, which is a social collaboration department at the University of Tokyo supported by National Clinical Database, Johnson & Johnson K.K., and Nipro corporation. BKTV is the National Coordinator for the Indian Registry of IntenSive care (IRIS) and is supported for 0.5 FTE by funding from the Wellcome Trust, UK. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

With the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic, there is growing interest in utilizing adaptive platform clinical trials (APTs), in which multiple drugs are compared with a single common control group, such as a placebo or standard‐of‐care group. APTs evaluate several drugs for one disease and accept additions or exclusions of drugs as the trials progress; however, little is known about the efficiency of APTs over multiple stand‐alone trials. In this study, we simulated the total development period, total sample size, and statistical operating characteristics of APTs and multiple stand‐alone trials in drug development settings for hospitalized patients with COVID‐19. Simulation studies using selected scenarios reconfirmed several findings regarding the efficiency of APTs. The APTs without staggered addition of drugs showed a shorter total development period than stand‐alone trials, but the difference rapidly diminished if patient's enrollment was accelerated during the trials owing to the spread of infection. APTs with staggered addition of drugs still have the possibility of reducing the total development period compared with multiple stand‐alone trials in some cases. Our study demonstrated that APTs could improve efficiency relative to multiple stand‐alone trials regarding the total development period and total sample size without undermining statistical validity; however, this improvement varies depending on the speed of patient enrollment, sample size, presence/absence of family‐wise error rate adjustment, allocation ratio between drug and placebo groups, and interval of staggered addition of drugs. Given the complexity of planning and implementing APT, the decision to implement APT during a pandemic must be made carefully. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, it has remained unknown whether conventional risk prediction tools used in intensive care units are applicable to patients with COVID-19. Therefore, we assessed the performance of established risk prediction models using the Japanese Intensive Care database. Discrimination and calibration of the models were poor. Revised risk prediction models are needed to assess the clinical severity of COVID-19 patients and monitor healthcare quality in ICUs overwhelmed by patients with COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

REMAP-CAP, a randomized, embedded, multifactorial adaptive platform trial for community-acquired pneumonia, is an international clinical trial that is rapidly expanding its scope and scale in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Japan is now joining REMAP-CAP with endorsement from Japanese academic societies. Commitment to REMAP-CAP can significantly contribute to population health through timely identification of optimal COVID-19 therapeutics. Additionally, it will promote the establishment of a national and global network of clinical trials to tackle future pandemics of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases, in collaboration with multiple stakeholders, including front-line healthcare workers, governmental agencies, regulatory authorities, and academic societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]