ArticleCritical care explorations2020
Tracheostomy for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: Maintaining the Standard of Care.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of tracheostomy outcomes in COVID-19 patients.The British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Association of Tracheostomy With Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 Transmission Among Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery · 2021Pooled it
- The COVID-19 Tracheostomy Experience at a Large Academic Medical Center in New York during the First Year.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Predictors of Mortality in Patients With COVID-19 Undergoing Tracheotomy.The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo respond to the new recommendations for delaying tracheostomy for coronavirus disease 2019 patients to day 21 post-intubation to ensure viral clearance.
designProspective observational cohort from April 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020, with 60 days follow-up.
settingAcademic medical center with nine adult ICUs dedicated to caring for coronavirus disease 2019 patients requiring mechanical ventilation. PATIENTS: Mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia requiring tracheostomy for prolonged ventilatory support.
interventionsAdherence to the standard of care for timing of tracheostomy as deemed necessary by the intensivist without delay and utilizing the existing tracheostomy team in performing the needed procedures within 1 day of the request. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsOne hundred eleven patients with coronavirus disease 2019 received tracheostomy in the month of April 2020. Median time to tracheostomy was 11 days. All procedures were performed percutaneously at bedside under bronchoscopic guidance. Sixty-three percent of patients who received tracheostomy either weaned or discharged alive within 60 days of the procedure. Performing tracheostomy on these patients without delay did not lead to coronavirus disease 2019 viral transmission to the tracheostomy team as evident by lack of symptoms and negative antibody testing.
conclusionsAdherence to standard of care in timing of tracheostomy is safe. Recommending delaying the procedure may lead to harmful consequences from prolonging mechanical ventilation and sedation without apparent benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.