Dataset Information

What changed between the peak and plateau periods of the first COVID-19 pandemic wave? A multicentric Portuguese cohort study in intensive care.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To analyze and compare COVID-19 patient characteristics, clinical management and outcomes between the peak and plateau periods of the first pandemic wave in Portugal.

Methods

This was a multicentric ambispective cohort study including consecutive severe COVID-19 patients between March and August 2020 from 16 Portuguese intensive care units. The peak and plateau periods, respectively, weeks 10 - 16 and 17 - 34, were defined.

Results

Five hundred forty-one adult patients with a median age of 65 [57 - 74] years, mostly male (71.2%), were included. There were no significant differences in median age (p = 0.3), Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (40 versus 39; p = 0.8), partial arterial oxygen pressure/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (139 versus 136; p = 0.6), antibiotic therapy (57% versus 64%; p = 0.2) at admission, or 28-day mortality (24.4% versus 22.8%; p = 0.7) between the peak and plateau periods. During the peak period, patients had fewer comorbidities (1 [0 - 3] versus 2 [0 - 5]; p = 0.002) and presented a higher use of vasopressors (47% versus 36%; p < 0.001) and invasive mechanical ventilation (58.1 versus 49.2%; p < 0.001) at admission, prone positioning (45% versus 36%; p = 0.04), and hydroxychloroquine (59% versus 10%; p < 0.001) and lopinavir/ritonavir (41% versus 10%; p < 0.001) prescriptions. However, a greater use of high-flow nasal cannulas (5% versus 16%, p < 0.001) on admission, remdesivir (0.3% versus 15%; p < 0.001) and corticosteroid (29% versus 52%, p < 0.001) therapy, and a shorter ICU length of stay (12 days versus 8, p < 0.001) were observed during the plateau.

Conclusion

There were significant changes in patient comorbidities, intensive care unit therapies and length of stay between the peak and plateau periods of the first COVID-19 wave.

SUBMITTER: Pereira RA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9987006 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What changed between the peak and plateau periods of the first COVID-19 pandemic wave? A multicentric Portuguese cohort study in intensive care.

Pereira Rui Antunes RA Sousa Marta M Cidade José Pedro JP Melo Luís L Lopes Diogo D Ventura Sara S Aragão Irene I Lima Neto Raul Miguel de Freitas RMF Molinos Elena E Marques Ana A Cardoso Nelson N Marino Flávio F Monteiro Filipa Brás FB Oliveira Ana Pinho AP Silva Rogério C RC Real André Miguel Neto AMN Banheiro Bruno Sarmento BS Reis Renato R Adão-Serrano Maria M Cracium Ana A Valadas Ana A Ribeiro João Miguel JM Póvoa Pedro P Tapadinhas Camila C Mendes Vítor V Coelho Luís L Maia Raquel R Freitas Paulo Telles PT Ferreira Isabel Amorim IA Ramires Tiago T Val-Flores Luís Silva LS Cascão Mariana M Alves Rita R Rodeia Simão C SC Barrigoto Cleide C Cardiga Rosa R Silva Maria João Ferreira da MJFD Vale Bruno B Fonseca Tatiana T Rios Ana Lúcia AL Camões João J Pérez Danay D Cabral Susana S Ribeiro Maria Inês MI Mendes João João JJ Gouveia João J Fernandes Susana Mendes SM

Revista Brasileira de terapia intensiva 20221001 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To analyze and compare COVID-19 patient characteristics, clinical management and outcomes between the peak and plateau periods of the first pandemic wave in Portugal.<h4>Methods</h4>This was a multicentric ambispective cohort study including consecutive severe COVID-19 patients between March and August 2020 from 16 Portuguese intensive care units. The peak and plateau periods, respectively, weeks 10 - 16 and 17 - 34, were defined.<h4>Results</h4>Five hundred forty-one adult pat ...[more]

PMID: 36888823

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 outbreak and the community mitigation strategies implemented to reduce new SARS-CoV-2 infections can be regarded as powerful stressors with negative consequences on people's mental health. Although it has been shown that negative emotional symptoms subside during lockdown, it is likely the existence of inter-individual differences in stress, anxiety and depression trajectories throughout lockdown.ObjectivesWe aimed to cluster participants' according to their trajectories of stress, anxiety and depression scores throughout lockdown, and identify the sociodemographic, clinical, and lifestyle factors that may distinguish the subjects included in the different clusters.MethodsFrom March 23, 2020, to May 31, 2020, participants completed weekly online questionnaires on sociodemographic information (age, sex, education level, and employment status), psychological functioning (DASS-21, NEO-FFI-20), and clinical data (psychiatric disorders, psychiatric medication, physical disorders). Data regarding smoking status, alcohol consumption, physical activity, and time spent daily looking for COVID-19-related information were also collected. Stress, anxiety and depression trajectories were determined using latent class mixed models.ResultsA total of 2040 participants answered the survey at baseline and 603 participants answered all surveys. Three groups ("Resilient," "Recovered," and "Maladaptive") with distinct mental health trajectories were identified. Younger participants, women, participants with lower education level, not working, studying, diagnosed with a mental disorder, taking psychiatric medication, smokers, those who spent more time consuming COVID-19-related information and those with higher neuroticism tended to cluster in the "Maladaptive" group, placing them at higher risk of persistent negative emotional symptoms during compulsory confinement.ConclusionAccordingly, a tailored approach to emotional suffering for vulnerable subjects during the COVID-19 and future pandemics must be devised.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic wave, an unprecedented number of patients with respiratory failure due to a new, highly contagious virus needed hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The aim of the present study was to describe the communication and visiting policies of Italian intensive care units (ICUs) during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave and national lockdown and compare these data with prepandemic conditions.MethodsA national web-based survey was conducted among 290 Italian hospitals. Each ICU (active between February 24 and May 31, 2020) was encouraged to complete an individual questionnaire inquiring the hospital/ICU structure/organization, communication/visiting habits and the role of clinical psychology prior to, and during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave.ResultsTwo hundred and nine ICUs from 154 hospitals (53% of the contacted hospitals) completed the survey (202 adult and 7 pediatric ICUs). Among adult ICUs, 60% were dedicated to COVID-19 patients, 21% were dedicated to patients without COVID-19 and 19% were dedicated to both categories (Mixed). A total of 11,102 adult patients were admitted to the participating ICUs during the study period and only approximately 6% of patients received at least one visit. Communication with family members was guaranteed daily through an increased use of electronic devices and was preferentially addressed to the same family member. Compared to the prepandemic period, clinical psychologists supported physicians more often regarding communication with family members. Fewer patients received at least one visit from family members in COVID and mixed-ICUs than in non-COVID ICUs, l (0 [0-6]%, 0 [0-4]% and 11 [2-25]%, respectively, p < 0.001). Habits of pediatric ICUs were less affected by the pandemic.ConclusionsVisiting policies of Italian ICUs dedicated to adult patients were markedly altered during the first COVID-19 wave. Remote communication was widely adopted as a surrogate for family meetings. New strategies to favor a family-centered approach during the current and future pandemics are warranted.

Project description:BackgroundAs the COVID-19 pandemic swept across the globe at the beginning of 2020, healthcare systems were forced to rapidly adapt and expand to meet the sudden surge in demand for intensive care services. This study is the first systematic analysis of the strategies employed by German hospitals to recruit personnel and expand bed capacities during the first wave of the pandemic, and to evaluate the effectiveness of those recruitment measures.Methods152 German hospitals with intensive care capacities were selected and invited to participate in an online-based retrospective survey. Factors like the geographic distribution, individual COVID burden and level of care were considered for inclusion in the sample. The data were analyzed descriptively.ResultsA total of 41 hospitals participated in the survey. The additional demand for intensive care beds was met primarily by activating intensive care beds that were previously considered as non-operational in existing intensive care units (81% of respondents) and by upgrading recovery rooms (73%). The physician staffing requirements were met at approximately 75%, while the nursing staffing requirements were only met by about 45%. Staffing needs were met through reallocations/transfers (85%), staff recruitment from parental leave or retirement (49%), increased hours worked by internal staff (49%), new staff hiring (44%) and increased use of temporary staff (32%). Staff reallocations/transfers to critical care within a hospital were rated as the most effective measure. In this context, specialized personnel mostly from anesthesiology departments were appointed to intensive care medicine.ConclusionsDespite multiple recruitment efforts, the pandemic has exacerbated the nursing staff shortage. The reallocation of existing staff within hospitals was a key element in covering the staffing needs. However, additional measures and efforts are required in order to ensure that critically ill patients can be cared for without compromise. The results of this study may have important implications for healthcare providers and policymakers, offering an evidence-based foundation for responding to future public health emergencies with agility, efficiency, and success.

Dataset Information

What changed between the peak and plateau periods of the first COVID-19 pandemic wave? A multicentric Portuguese cohort study in intensive care.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

What changed between the peak and plateau periods of the first COVID-19 pandemic wave? A multicentric Portuguese cohort study in intensive care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets