P184 Is continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) effective in the management of COVID-19 in patients aged 75 and over? A retrospective observational study of a respiratory COVID-19 CPAP unit through its second wave

H. Alexander, R. McGow, S. Makwana, S. Al-Hakeem, A. Adeyeye, A. Ashish
{"title":"P184 Is continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) effective in the management of COVID-19 in patients aged 75 and over? A retrospective observational study of a respiratory COVID-19 CPAP unit through its second wave","authors":"H. Alexander, R. McGow, S. Makwana, S. Al-Hakeem, A. Adeyeye, A. Ashish","doi":"10.1136/thorax-2021-btsabstracts.293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"IntroductionThere remains significant variation in treatment of COVID-19 associated respiratory failure. Although Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) has shown to improve outcome in single centre studies, inclusion criteria for commencement of CPAP varies significantly (Ashish et al., 2020;Nightingale et al., 2020). This respiratory-led ward-level dedicated CPAP unit provided CPAP to COVID-19 patients through the ‘second wave’. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and appropriateness of CPAP for COVID-19 management in an elderly population.MethodsThis retrospective observational study included all patients aged 75 and over who received CPAP for COVID-19 infection, admitted to a district general hospital between 1 October 2020 and 16 February 2021. Fifty-seven patients were included. Data were collected from computerised clinical notes for analysis.ResultsOf 57 patients (39 male and mean age 80), 47 (82.5%) patients died during admission or within 5 days of discharge. 10 (17.5%) patients survived to discharge. Non-survivors had a median CFS of 4;IQR 3–5, as did survivors (median CFS 4;IQR 3–4). Non-survivors had a median of 3 (IQR 2–4) significant comorbidities, and survivors had 2.5 (IQR 2–3.8). Median P/F (PaO2/FiO2) ratio prior to commencing CPAP was 10.5 (IQR 8.4–12.6) for non-survivors and 14.4 (IQR 12.9–18.8) for survivors. The odds of death were 6.8 (p value <0.01) in those with a severe P/F ratio (<13.3).ConclusionThis evidence indicates that CPAP used in patients aged 75 and over, particularly those with a severe P/F ratio prior to commencing CPAP, does not improve mortality. These findings can inform future decision-making and CPAP protocol development to potentially limit its use in this group. Further study of less invasive alternative management options, such as nasal high flow oxygen, is recommended.","PeriodicalId":143926,"journal":{"name":"Fighting back: optimising treatment for COVID-19","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fighting back: optimising treatment for COVID-19","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/thorax-2021-btsabstracts.293","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

IntroductionThere remains significant variation in treatment of COVID-19 associated respiratory failure. Although Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) has shown to improve outcome in single centre studies, inclusion criteria for commencement of CPAP varies significantly (Ashish et al., 2020;Nightingale et al., 2020). This respiratory-led ward-level dedicated CPAP unit provided CPAP to COVID-19 patients through the ‘second wave’. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and appropriateness of CPAP for COVID-19 management in an elderly population.MethodsThis retrospective observational study included all patients aged 75 and over who received CPAP for COVID-19 infection, admitted to a district general hospital between 1 October 2020 and 16 February 2021. Fifty-seven patients were included. Data were collected from computerised clinical notes for analysis.ResultsOf 57 patients (39 male and mean age 80), 47 (82.5%) patients died during admission or within 5 days of discharge. 10 (17.5%) patients survived to discharge. Non-survivors had a median CFS of 4;IQR 3–5, as did survivors (median CFS 4;IQR 3–4). Non-survivors had a median of 3 (IQR 2–4) significant comorbidities, and survivors had 2.5 (IQR 2–3.8). Median P/F (PaO2/FiO2) ratio prior to commencing CPAP was 10.5 (IQR 8.4–12.6) for non-survivors and 14.4 (IQR 12.9–18.8) for survivors. The odds of death were 6.8 (p value <0.01) in those with a severe P/F ratio (<13.3).ConclusionThis evidence indicates that CPAP used in patients aged 75 and over, particularly those with a severe P/F ratio prior to commencing CPAP, does not improve mortality. These findings can inform future decision-making and CPAP protocol development to potentially limit its use in this group. Further study of less invasive alternative management options, such as nasal high flow oxygen, is recommended.
持续气道正压通气(CPAP)对75岁及以上患者的COVID-19治疗有效吗?呼吸道COVID-19 CPAP装置的第二波回顾性观察研究
对COVID-19相关呼吸衰竭的治疗仍存在显著差异。尽管在单中心研究中,持续气道正压通气(CPAP)已显示出改善预后的效果,但开始使用CPAP的纳入标准差异很大(Ashish等,2020;Nightingale等,2020)。这个由呼吸引导的病房级专用CPAP单元通过“第二波”为COVID-19患者提供了CPAP。本研究旨在评估CPAP在老年人群COVID-19治疗中的有效性和适宜性。方法本回顾性观察性研究纳入了2020年10月1日至2021年2月16日期间在一家地区综合医院住院的所有75岁及以上接受CPAP治疗COVID-19感染的患者。纳入了57例患者。从计算机化的临床记录中收集数据进行分析。结果57例患者中,男性39例,平均年龄80岁,47例(82.5%)在入院或出院5天内死亡。10例(17.5%)存活出院。非幸存者的中位CFS为4;IQR为3-5,幸存者的中位CFS为4;IQR为3-4。非幸存者有3个(IQR 2-4)显著合并症,幸存者有2.5个(IQR 2-3.8)。开始CPAP前,非幸存者的中位P/F (PaO2/FiO2)比为10.5 (IQR 8.4-12.6),幸存者为14.4 (IQR 12.9-18.8)。严重p /F比(<13.3)者死亡几率为6.8 (p值<0.01)。结论:该证据表明,在75岁及以上的患者中使用CPAP,特别是那些在开始CPAP之前有严重P/F比的患者,并没有改善死亡率。这些发现可以为未来的决策和CPAP协议的制定提供信息,以潜在地限制其在该组中的使用。建议进一步研究侵入性较小的替代治疗方案,如鼻腔高流量氧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信