ArticleRespiration; international review of thoracic diseases2023
Analysis of an Individualised Stepwise Approach to Non-Pharmacological Therapy in COVID-19.
Article in Respiration; international review of thoracic diseases, 2023. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly intubation versus use of conventional or high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (COT/HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been debated throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Our centre followed a stepwise approach, in concordance with German national guidelines, escalating non-invasive modalities prior to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), rather than early or late intubation.
objectivesThe aims of the study were to investigate the real-life usage of these modalities and analyse patient characteristics and survival.
methodA retrospective monocentric observation was conducted of all consecutive COVID-19 hospital admissions between March 2020 and December 2021 at a university-affiliated pulmonary centre in Germany. Anthropometric data, therapy, and survival status were descriptively analysed.
resultsFrom 1,052 COVID-19-related admissions, 835 patients were included (54% male, median 58 years). Maximum therapy was as follows: 34% (n = 284) no therapy, 40% (n = 337) COT, 3% (n = 22) HFNC, 9% (n = 73) CPAP, 7% (n = 56) NIV, 4% (n = 34) IMV, and 3% (n = 29) ECMO. Of 551 patients treated with at least COT, 12.3% required intubation. Overall, 183 patients required intensive unit care, and 106 (13%) died. Of the 68 patients who received IMV/ECMO, 48 died (74%). The strategy for non-pharmacological therapy was individual but remained consistent throughout the studied period.
conclusionsThis study provides valuable insight into COVID-19 care in Germany and shows how the majority of patients could be treated with the maximum treatment required according to disease severity following the national algorithm. Escalation of therapy modality is interlinked with disease severity and thus associated with mortality.
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.