ArticleCureus2024
Impact of Tracheostomy on COVID-19 ICU Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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, 0 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
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted the development of novel medical interventions, including tracheostomy, a surgical procedure for a direct airway. This study investigates the intricacies of managing critically ill patients in the ICU, focusing on its debated utility in the global crisis. Methods The study assessed the impact of tracheostomy on COVID-19 patients at Al-Ahsa Hospital, Saudi Arabia, using a retrospective cohort design and data from electronic health records and databases. It aimed to provide insights into treatment outcomes and practices. Results The findings of this study shed light on the significant impact of tracheostomy on the course of ICU treatment for COVID-19 patients. Total number of participants were 1389. The study cohort consisted of predominantly non-pregnant individuals with an average body mass index reflective of the regional population. Among the COVID-19 patients, only a small percentage, 63 (4.5%), required tracheostomy, while the majority, 1326 (95.5%), did not undergo this procedure. Analysis of ICU outcomes revealed that a substantial proportion of patients, 223 (16.1%), achieved total cure, while the remaining patients did not. After a 28-day ICU stay, the majority of individuals, 1287 (92.7%), were discharged, while a smaller percentage remained in the ICU, with 77 (5.5%) still requiring mechanical ventilation. Notably, patients who underwent tracheostomy had a significantly longer ICU stay compared to those who did not, with an average of 59 days versus 19 days, respectively. Furthermore, the study found that tracheostomy did not significantly impact ICU discharge outcomes, including death, discharge home, and transfer to another facility. However, it did influence hospital discharge outcomes, with lower mortality rates and a higher rate of transfer to another facility among patients who underwent tracheostomy. These results provide valuable insights into the management and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients in the ICU, particularly in relation to the use of tracheostomy as a treatment intervention. Conclusion The study highlights the dual benefits of tracheostomy in COVID-19 care, extending hospital stays but not increasing ICU discharge rates, emphasizing the need for tailored clinical strategies.
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.