Severe Acute Respiratory Infection-Preparedness: Protocol for a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study of Viral Respiratory Infections

OBJECTIVES: Respiratory virus infections cause significant morbidity and mortality ranging from mild uncomplicated acute respiratory illness to severe complications, such as acute respiratory distress syndrome, multiple organ failure, and death during epidemics and pandemics. We present a protocol to systematically study patients with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI), including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, due to respiratory viral pathogens to evaluate the natural history, prognostic biomarkers, and characteristics, including hospital stress, associated with clinical outcomes and severity. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Multicenter cohort of patients admitted to an acute care ward or ICU from at least 15 hospitals representing diverse geographic regions across the United States. PATIENTS: Patients with SARI caused by infection with respiratory viruses that can cause outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Measurements include patient demographics, signs, symptoms, and medications; microbiology, imaging, and associated tests; mechanical ventilation, hospital procedures, and other interventions; and clinical outcomes and hospital stress, with specimens collected on days 0, 3, and 7-14 after enrollment and at discharge. The primary outcome measure is the number of consecutive days alive and free of mechanical ventilation (VFD) in the first 30 days after hospital admission. Important secondary outcomes include organ failure-free days before acute kidney injury, shock, hepatic failure, disseminated intravascular coagulation, 28-day mortality, adaptive immunity, as well as immunologic and microbiologic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: SARI-Preparedness is a multicenter study under the collaboration of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery, Resilience Intelligence Network, and National Emerging Special Pathogen Training and Education Center, which seeks to improve understanding of prognostic factors associated with worse outcomes and increased resource utilization. This can lead to interventions to mitigate the clinical impact of respiratory virus infections associated with SARI

Angiopoietin-Like4 Is a Novel Marker of COVID-19 Severity

IMPORTANCE: Vascular dysfunction and capillary leak are common in critically ill COVID-19 patients, but identification of endothelial pathways involved in COVID-19 pathogenesis has been limited. Angiopoietin-like 4 (ANGPTL4) is a protein secreted in response to hypoxic and nutrient-poor conditions that has a variety of biological effects including vascular injury and capillary leak. OBJECTIVES: To assess the role of ANGPTL4 in COVID-19-related outcomes. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred twenty-five COVID-19 ICU patients were enrolled from April 2020 to May 2021 in a prospective, multicenter cohort study from three different medical centers, University of Washington, University of Southern California and New York University. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Plasma ANGPTL4 was measured on days 1, 7, and 14 after ICU admission. We used previously published tissue proteomic data and lung single nucleus RNA (snRNA) sequencing data from specimens collected from COVID-19 patients to determine the tissues and cells that produce ANGPTL4. RESULTS: Higher plasma ANGPTL4 concentrations were significantly associated with worse hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio per log CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: ANGPTL4 is expressed in pulmonary epithelial cells and fibroblasts and is associated with clinical prognosis in critically ill COVID-19 patients

National Psoriasis Foundation COVID-19 Task Force guidance for management of psoriatic disease during the pandemic: Version 2—Advances in psoriatic disease management, COVID-19 vaccines, and COVID-19 treatments

This article is made available for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.Objective To update guidance regarding the management of psoriatic disease during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study Design The task force (TF) includes 18 physician voting members with expertise in dermatology, rheumatology, epidemiology, infectious diseases, and critical care. The TF was supplemented by nonvoting members, which included fellows and National Psoriasis Foundation staff. Clinical questions relevant to the psoriatic disease community were informed by inquiries received by the National Psoriasis Foundation. A Delphi process was conducted. Results The TF updated evidence for the original 22 statements and added 5 new recommendations. The average of the votes was within the category of agreement for all statements, 13 with high consensus and 14 with moderate consensus. Limitations The evidence behind many guidance statements is variable in quality and/or quantity. Conclusions These statements provide guidance for the treatment of patients with psoriatic disease on topics including how the disease and its treatments affect COVID-19 risk, how medical care can be optimized during the pandemic, what patients should do to lower their risk of getting infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (including novel vaccination), and what they should do if they develop COVID-19. The guidance is a living document that is continuously updated by the TF as data emerge

National Psoriasis Foundation COVID-19 Task Force Guidance for Management of Psoriatic Disease During the Pandemic: Version 1

Objective To provide guidance about management of psoriatic disease during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Study design A task force (TF) of 18 physician voting members with expertise in dermatology, rheumatology, epidemiology, infectious diseases, and critical care was convened. The TF was supplemented by nonvoting members, which included fellows and National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF) staff. Clinical questions relevant to the psoriatic disease community were informed by questions received by the NPF. A Delphi process was conducted. Results The TF approved 22 guidance statements. The average of the votes was within the category of agreement for all statements. All guidance statements proposed were recommended, 9 with high consensus and 13 with moderate consensus. Limitations The evidence behind many guidance statements is limited in quality. Conclusion These statements provide guidance for the management of patients with psoriatic disease on topics ranging from how the disease and its treatments impact COVID-19 risk and outcome, how medical care can be optimized during the pandemic, what patients should do to lower their risk of getting infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and what they should do if they develop COVID-19. The guidance is intended to be a living document that will be updated by the TF as data emerge

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Hospital Strain and Variation in Sepsis ICU Admission Practices and Associated Outcomes

OBJECTIVES:. To understand how strain-process-outcome relationships in patients with sepsis may vary among hospitals. DESIGN:. Retrospective cohort study using a validated hospital capacity strain index as a within-hospital instrumental variable governing ICU versus ward admission, stratified by hospital. SETTING:. Twenty-seven U.S. hospitals from 2013 to 2018. PATIENTS:. High-acuity emergency department patients with sepsis who do not require life support therapies. INTERVENTIONS:. None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:. The mean predicted probability of ICU admission across strain deciles ranged from 4.9% (lowest ICU-utilizing hospital for sepsis without life support) to 61.2% (highest ICU-utilizing hospital for sepsis without life support). The difference in the predicted probabilities of ICU admission between the lowest and highest strain deciles ranged from 9.0% (least strain-sensitive hospital) to 45.2% (most strain-sensitive hospital). In pooled analyses, emergency department patients with sepsis (n = 90,150) experienced a 1.3-day longer median hospital length of stay (LOS) if admitted initially to the ICU compared with the ward, but across the 27 study hospitals (n = 517-6,564), this effect varied from 9.0 days shorter (95% CI, –10.8 to –7.2; p < 0.001) to 19.0 days longer (95% CI, 16.7–21.3; p < 0.001). Corresponding ranges for inhospital mortality with ICU compared with ward admission revealed odds ratios (ORs) from 0.16 (95% CI, 0.03–0.99; p = 0.04) to 4.62 (95% CI, 1.16–18.22; p = 0.02) among patients with sepsis (pooled OR = 1.48). CONCLUSIONS:. There is significant among-hospital variation in ICU admission rates for patients with sepsis not requiring life support therapies, how sensitive those ICU admission decisions are to hospital capacity strain, and the association of ICU admission with hospital LOS and hospital mortality. Hospital-level heterogeneity should be considered alongside patient-level heterogeneity in critical and acute care study design and interpretation