ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2020
Bronchoscopy on Intubated COVID-19 Patients is Associated with Low Infectious Risk to Operators at a High-Volume Center Using an Aerosol-minimizing Protocol.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic raised concern for exposure to healthcare providers through aerosol generating procedures, such as bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). Current society guidelines recommended limiting use of BAL to reduce operators' risk for infection, yet data on the infection rate for providers after BAL is sparse. Since March 2020, our institution used a modified protocol to perform over 450 BALs on intubated COVID-19 patients. We therefore sought to describe the subsequent infectious risks to providers associated with BAL.
methodsFifty-two pulmonary and critical care providers (faculty and fellows) at our tertiary-care, urban medical center were surveyed. Survey participants were asked to provide the number of BALs on COVID-19 patients they performed, the number of weeks they cared for intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19, and the results of any SARS-CoV-2 testing that they received. Participants were asked to assess the difficulty of BAL on intubated COVID-19 patients as compared to routine ICU BAL using a numeric perceived difficulty score ranging from 1 (easier) to 10 (harder).
resultsWe received forty-seven responses from fifty-two surveyed (90% response rate), with 2 declining to participate. Many respondents (19/45, 42%) spent >5 weeks on an ICU service with COVID-19 patients. The number of BALs performed by providers ranged from 0 to >60. Sixteen of the 35 providers (46%) who performed BALs underwent at least one nasopharyngeal (NP) swab to test for SARS-CoV-2, but none were positive. Twenty-seven of the 35 providers (77%) who performed BALs underwent SARS-CoV-2 serology testing, and only one (3.7%) was positive. Respondents indicated occasionally not being able to follow aerosol-minimizing steps but overall felt BALs in COVID-19 patients was only slightly more difficult than routine ICU BAL. DISCUSSION: At a high-volume center having performed >450 BALs on intubated COVID-19 patients with aerosol-limiting precautions, our survey of bronchoscopists found no positive NP SARS-CoV-2 tests and only one positive antibody test result. While the optimal role for COVID-19 BAL remains to be determined, these data suggest that BAL can be safely performed in intubated COVID-19 patients if experienced providers take precautions to limit aerosol generation and wear personal protective equipment.
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.