Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method
-
Published:2021-03-16
Issue:1
Volume:25
Page:
-
ISSN:1364-8535
-
Container-title:Critical Care
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Crit Care
Author:
Nasa Prashant, Azoulay Elie, Khanna Ashish K., Jain Ravi, Gupta Sachin, Javeri Yash, Juneja Deven, Rangappa Pradeep, Sundararajan Krishnaswamy, Alhazzani Waleed, Antonelli Massimo, Arabi Yaseen M., Bakker Jan, Brochard Laurent J., Deane Adam M., Du Bin, Einav Sharon, Esteban Andrés, Gajic Ognjen, Galvagno Samuel M., Guérin Claude, Jaber Samir, Khilnani Gopi C., Koh Younsuck, Lascarrou Jean-Baptiste, Machado Flavia R., Malbrain Manu L. N. G., Mancebo Jordi, McCurdy Michael T., McGrath Brendan A., Mehta Sangeeta, Mekontso-Dessap Armand, Mer Mervyn, Nurok Michael, Park Pauline K., Pelosi Paolo, Peter John V., Phua Jason, Pilcher David V., Piquilloud Lise, Schellongowski Peter, Schultz Marcus J., Shankar-Hari Manu, Singh Suveer, Sorbello Massimiliano, Tiruvoipati Ravindranath, Udy Andrew A., Welte Tobias, Myatra Sheila N.ORCID
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice.
Methods
Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable).
Results
Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16–24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment.
Conclusion
Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited.
Trial registration: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
Reference79 articles.
1. Docherty AB, Harrison EM, Green CA, Hardwick HE, Pius R, Norman L, et al. Features of 20 133 UK patients in hospital with covid-19 using the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol: prospective observational cohort study. BMJ. 2020;369:m1985. 2. Kim L, Garg S, O'Halloran A, Whitaker M, Pham H, Anderson EJ, et al. Risk Factors for Intensive Care Unit Admission and In-hospital Mortality among Hospitalized Adults Identified through the U.S. Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET). Clin Infect Dis. 2020: ciaa1012. 3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). COVID-19 Surveillance Report (Week 44, 2020). https://covid19-surveillance-report.ecdc.europa.eu Accessed 11 November 2020. 4. Armstrong RA, Kane AD, Cook TM. Outcomes from intensive care in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Anaesthesia. 2020;75:1340–9. 5. Grasselli G, Pesenti A, Cecconi M. Critical care utilization for the COVID-19 outbreak in Lombardy, Italy: early experience and forecast during an emergency response. JAMA. 2020;323:1545–6.
Cited by
137 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|