Post-acute COVID-19 neuropsychiatric symptoms are not associated with ongoing nervous system injury

A proportion of patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 experience a range of neuropsychiatric symptoms months after infection, including cognitive deficits, depression and anxiety. The mechanisms underpinning such symptoms remain elusive. Recent research has demonstrated that nervous system injury can occur during COVID-19. Whether ongoing neural injury in the months after COVID-19 accounts for the ongoing or emergent neuropsychiatric symptoms is unclear. Within a large prospective cohort study of adult survivors who were hospitalized for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, we analysed plasma markers of nervous system injury and astrocytic activation, measured 6 months post-infection: neurofilament light, glial fibrillary acidic protein and total tau protein. We assessed whether these markers were associated with the severity of the acute COVID-19 illness and with post-acute neuropsychiatric symptoms (as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire for depression, the General Anxiety Disorder assessment for anxiety, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment for objective cognitive deficit and the cognitive items of the Patient Symptom Questionnaire for subjective cognitive deficit) at 6 months and 1 year post-hospital discharge from COVID-19. No robust associations were found between markers of nervous system injury and severity of acute COVID-19 (except for an association of small effect size between duration of admission and neurofilament light) nor with post-acute neuropsychiatric symptoms. These results suggest that ongoing neuropsychiatric symptoms are not due to ongoing neural injury.</p

Critical care work during COVID-19: a qualitative study of staff experiences in the UK

Objective: To understand National Health Service (NHS) staff experiences of working in critical care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Design: Qualitative study using semistructured telephone interviews and rapid analysis, interpreted using Baehr’s sociological lens of ‘communities of fate’. Participants: Forty NHS staff working in critical care, including 21 nurses, 10 doctors and advanced critical care practitioners, 4 allied health professionals, 3 operating department practitioners and 2 ward clerks. Participants were interviewed between August and October 2020; we purposefully sought the experiences of trained and experienced critical care staff and those who were redeployed. Setting: Four hospitals in the UK. Results: COVID-19 presented staff with a situation of extreme stress, duress and social emergency, leading to a shared set of experiences which we have characterised as a community of fate. This involved not only fear and dread of working in critical care, but also a collective sense of duty and vocation. Caring for patients and families involved changes to usual ways of working, revolving around: reorganisation of space and personnel, personal protective equipment, lack of evidence for treating COVID-19, inability for families to be physically present, and the trauma of witnessing extreme patient acuity and death on a large scale. The stress and isolation of working in critical care during COVID-19 was mitigated by strong teamwork, camaraderie, pride and fulfilment. Conclusion: COVID-19 has changed working practices in critical care and profoundly affected staff physically, mentally and emotionally. Attention needs to be paid to the social and organisational conditions in which individuals work, addressing both practical resourcing and the interpersonal dynamics of critical care provision.Peer reviewe

Remaking critical care:Place, body work and the materialities of care in the COVID intensive care unit

© 2023 The Authors. Sociology of Health & Illness published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Foundation for the Sociology of Health & Illness. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY), https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/In this article, we take forward sociological ways of knowing care-in-practice, in particular work in critical care. To do so, we analyse the experiences of staff working in critical care during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. This moment of exception throws into sharp relief the ways in which work and place were reconfigured during conditions of pandemic surge, and shows how critical care depends at all times on the co-constitution of place, practices and relations. Our analysis draws on sociological and anthropological work on the material culture of health care and its sensory instantiations. Pursuing this through a study of the experiences of 40 staff across four intensive care units (ICUs) in 2020, we provide an empirical and theoretical elaboration of how place, body work and care are mutually co-constitutive. We argue that the ICU does not exist independently of the constant embodied work of care and place-making which iteratively constitute critical care as a total system of relations.Peer reviewe

Early Troponin I in critical illness and its association with hospital mortality: a cohort study:Early Troponin I in ICU and hospital mortality

Background: Troponin I (TnI) is frequently elevated in critical illness, but its interpretation is unclear. Our primary objectives in this study were to evaluate whether TnI is associated with hospital mortality and if this association persists after adjusting for potential confounders. We also aimed to ascertain whether addition of TnI to the Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) risk prediction model improves its performance in general intensive care unit (ICU) populations. Methods: We performed an observational cohort study with independent derivation and validation cohorts in two general level 3 ICU departments in the United Kingdom. The derivation cohort was a 4.5-year cohort (2010–2014) of general ICU index admissions (n = 1349). The validation cohort was used for secondary analysis of a prospective study dataset (2010) (n = 145). The primary exposure was plasma TnI concentration taken within 24 h of ICU admission. The primary outcome was hospital mortality. We performed multivariate regression, adjusting for components of the APACHE II model. We derived the risk prediction score from the multivariable model with TnI. Results: Hospital mortality was 37.3% (n = 242) for patients with detectable TnI, compared with 14.6% (n = 102) for patients without detectable TnI. There was a significant univariate association between TnI and hospital mortality (OR per doubling TnI 1.16, 95% CI 1.13–1.20, p &lt; 0.001). This persisted after adjustment for APACHE II model components (TnI OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01–1.09, p = 0.003). TnI correlated most strongly with the acute physiology score (APS) component of APACHE II (r = 0.39). Addition of TnI to the APACHE II model did not improve discrimination (APACHE II concordance statistic [c-index] 0.835, 95% CI 0.811–0.858; APACHE II + TnI c-index 0.837, 95% CI 0.813–0.860; p = 0.330) or other measures of model performance. Conclusions: TnI is an independent predictor of hospital mortality and correlates most highly with the APS component of APACHE II. It does not improve risk prediction. We would not advocate the adoption of routine troponin analysis on admission to ICU, and we recommend that troponin be measured only if clinically indicate