Prone positioning is one of the few interventions in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) which has a proven mortality reduction [1]. Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, severe ARDS cases have sharply increased worldwide, increasing the need for proning. Some centers have also encouraged non-intubated patients with hypoxemia due to COVID-19 to self-prone [2] Although generally considered low risk, pressure-related complications can occur during proning and differ from those that occur in supine patients. We present two cases of COVID-19-associated ARDS treated with prone positioning who developed meralgia paresthetica that was diagnosed in our ICU recovery clinic. Meralgia paresthetica (MP) results from compression injury of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve between the anterior superior iliac spine and the inguinal ligament (Fig. 1); this mononeuropathy results in sensory abnormalities in the anterolateral thigh [3]. To our knowledge, there is only one other reported case of MP in prone positioning for ARDS, although it has been reported after surgical prone positioning in up to 24% of cases [4, 5]. The first patient was a 53-year-old man with diabetes (well-controlled, glycosylated hemoglobin 6.5 to 7.0%), obesity (BMI 30.9), and hypertension, who was mechanically ventilated for 11 days. He had a single session of proning for 16 h. He was extubated and discharged home on day 19 of admission. During his ICU recovery clinic visit (2 months after discharge), he reported isolated left-sided, welldemarcated anterior thigh numbness, new since his hospital stay. He had no associated weakness or pain, though did also endorse some non-painful numbness and tingling in
A new noninvasive method was used to measure the impairment of pulmonary gas exchange in 34 patients with lung disease, and the results were compared with the traditional ideal alveolar-arterial Po2 difference (AaDO2) calculated from arterial blood gases. The end-tidal Po2 was measured from the expired gas during steady-state breathing, the arterial Po2 was derived from a pulse oximeter if the [Formula: see text] was 95% or less, which was the case for 23 patients. The difference between the end-tidal and the calculated Po2 was defined as the oxygen deficit. Oxygen deficit was 42.7 mmHg (SE 4.0) in this group of patients, much higher than the means previously found in 20 young normal subjects measured under hypoxic conditions (2.0 mmHg, SE 0.8) and 11 older normal subjects (7.5 mmHg, SE 1.6) and emphasizes the sensitivity of the new method for detecting the presence of abnormal gas exchange. The oxygen deficit was correlated with AaDO2 ( R2 0.72). The arterial Po2 that was calculated from the noninvasive technique was correlated with the results from the arterial blood gases ( R2 0.76) and with a mean bias of +2.7 mmHg. The Pco2 was correlated with the results from the arterial blood gases (R2 0.67) with a mean bias of −3.6 mmHg. We conclude that the oxygen deficit as obtained from the noninvasive method is a very sensitive indicator of impaired pulmonary gas exchange. It has the advantage that it can be obtained within a few minutes by having the patient simply breathe through a tube.
OBJECTIVES: The multifaceted long-term impairments resulting from critical illness and COVID-19 require interdisciplinary management approaches in the recovery phase of illness. Operational insights into the structure and process of recovery clinics (RCs) from heterogeneous health systems are needed. This study describes the structure and process characteristics of existing and newly implemented ICU-RCs and COVID-RCs in a subset of large health systems in the United States. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Thirty-nine RCs, representing a combined 156 hospitals within 29 health systems participated. PATIENTS: None. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: RC demographics, referral criteria, and operating characteristics were collected, including measures used to assess physical, psychologic, and cognitive recoveries. Thirty-nine RC surveys were completed (94% response rate). ICU-RC teams included physicians, pharmacists, social workers, physical therapists, and advanced practice providers. Funding sources for ICU-RCs included clinical billing (n = 20, 77%), volunteer staff support (n = 15, 58%), institutional staff/space support (n = 13, 46%), and grant or foundation funding (n = 3, 12%). Forty-six percent of RCs report patient visit durations of 1 hour or longer. ICU-RC teams reported use of validated scales to assess psychologic recovery (93%), physical recovery (89%), and cognitive recovery (86%) more often in standard visits compared with COVID-RC teams (psychologic, 54%; physical, 69%; and cognitive, 46%). CONCLUSIONS: Operating structures of RCs vary, though almost all describe modest capacity and reliance on volunteerism and discretionary institutional support. ICU- and COVID-RCs in the United States employ varied funding sources and endorse different assessment measures during visits to guide care coordination. Common features include integration of ICU clinicians, interdisciplinary approach, and focus on severe critical illness. The heterogeneity in RC structures and processes contributes to future research on the optimal structure and process to achieve the best postintensive care syndrome and postacute sequelae of COVID outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.