ArticleDer Anaesthesist2022
[Escalation and de-escalation concept for intensive care beds in hospitals reserved for COVID-19].
Article in Der Anaesthesist, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince the spread of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrom Corona Virus 2 (SARS-CoV‑2) in Germany, intensive care beds have been kept free for patients suffering from Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19). Also, after the number of infections had declined, intensive care beds were kept free prophylactically; however, the percentage of beds reserved for COVID-19 differ in the individual federal states in Germany. The aim of this article is to define a necessary clearance quota of intensive beds for COVID-19 patients in Germany. An escalation and de-escalation scheme was created for rising and falling numbers of infected patients.
methodsData from the COVID-19 resource board of the state of Baden-Württemberg, the daily situation report of the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), the register of COVID-19 intensive care beds of the German Interdisciplinary Association for Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (DIVI) as well as the daily report of COVID-19 Baden-Württemberg from April to November 2020 were used for the calculation.
resultsAt the end of November 2020 approximately 13.5% of intensive care beds in Germany were used by COVID-19 patients. Of all persons tested positive for SARS-CoV‑2, 1.5% were admitted to an intensive care unit. The hospitalization rate was 6% and the mean age of infected persons was 43 years. Based on these numbers hospitals are recommended to keep 10% of intensive care beds available for COVID-19 patients in the case of less than 35 new infections/100,000 in the catchment area, 20% should be kept free in case of an advanced warning level of 35 new infections/100,000 inhabitants and 30% for a critical limit of 50 new infections/100,000 inhabitants. Further internal hospital triggers, such as the occupancy of the intensive care beds with COVID-19 patients, should be considered.
conclusionIf the number of infections is low a general nationwide retention rate of more than 10% of intensive care beds for COVID-19 patients is not justified. Locally increasing numbers of infections require a local dynamic approach. If the number of infections increases, the free holding capacity should be increased according to a step by step concept in close coordination with the local health authorities and other internal hospital triggers. In order not to overwhelm hospital capacities in the event of local outbreaks, a corresponding relocation concept should be considered at an early stage.
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.