Background: Intensive care patients commonly develop muscle wasting and functional impairment. However, the role of severe COVID-19 in the magnitude of muscle wasting and functionality in the acute critical disease is unknown.Objective: To perform a prospective characterization to evaluate the skeletal muscle mass and functional performance in intensive care patients with severe COVID-19.Methods: Thirty-two critically ill patients (93.8% male; age: 64.1 ± 12.6 years) with the diagnosis of the severe COVID-19 were prospectively recruited within 24 to 72 h following intensive care unit (ICU) admission, from April 2020 to October 2020, at Hospital Sírio-Libanês in Brazil. Patients were recruited if older than 18 years old, diagnosis of severe COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR, ICU stay and absence of limb amputation. Muscle wasting was determined through an ultrasound measurement of the rectus femoris cross-sectional area, the thickness of the anterior compartment of the quadriceps muscle (rectus femoris and vastus intermedius), and echogenicity. The peripheral muscle strength was assessed with a handgrip test. The functionality parameter was determined through the ICU mobility scale (IMS) and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). All evaluations were performed on days 1 and 10.Results: There were significant reductions in the rectus femoris cross-section area (−30.1% [95% IC, −26.0% to −34.1%]; P < 0.05), thickness of the anterior compartment of the quadriceps muscle (−18.6% [95% IC, −14.6% to 22.5%]; P < 0.05) and handgrip strength (−22.3% [95% IC, 4.7% to 39.9%]; P < 0.05) from days 1 to 10. Patients showed increased mobility (0 [0–5] vs 4.5 [0–8]; P < 0.05), improvement in respiratory function (3 [3–3] vs 2 [1–3]; P < 0.05) and structure respiratory system (3 [3–3] vs 2 [1–3]; P < 0.05), but none of the patients returned to normal levels.Conclusion: In intensive care patients with severe COVID-19, muscle wasting and decreased muscle strength occurred early and rapidly during 10 days of ICU stay with improved mobility and respiratory functions, although they remained below normal levels. These findings may provide insights into skeletal muscle wasting and function in patients with severe COVID-19.

The results of this study suggest that the reduction in diaphragm mobility in COPD patients is mainly due to air trapping and is not influenced by respiratory muscle strength or pulmonary hyperinflation.

Some patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) present with severe acute respiratory syndrome, which causes multiple organ dysfunction, besides dysfunction of the respiratory system, that requires invasive procedures. On the basis of the opinions of front-line experts and a review of the relevant literature on several topics, we proposed clinical practice recommendations on the following aspects for physiotherapists facing challenges in treating patients and containing virus spread: 1. personal protective equipment, 2. conventional chest physiotherapy, 3. exercise and early mobilization, 4. oxygen therapy, 5. nebulizer treatment, 6. noninvasive ventilation and high-flow nasal oxygen, 7. endotracheal intubation, 8. protective mechanical ventilation, 9. management of mechanical ventilation in severe and refractory cases of hypoxemia, 10. prone positioning, 11. cuff pressure, 12. tube and nasotracheal suction, 13. humidifier use for ventilated patients, 14. methods of weaning ventilated patients and extubation, and 15. equipment and hand hygiene. These recommendations can serve as clinical practice guidelines for physiotherapists. This article details the development of guidelines on these aspects for physiotherapy of patients with COVID-19.

No abstract

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has been recognized as an effective strategy in preventing endotracheal intubation in subjects with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Some interface-related complications have also been recognized, such as skin breakdown (SB). The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of SB and identify potential treatment-related risk factors for its development in adults with ARF undergoing NIV or CPAP. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in a general hospital. Subjects were retrospectively enrolled in this study if they were > 18 y old and developed ARF caused by any condition in which NIV or CPAP was indicated for at least one application for a period longer than 2 h. The outcomes were the prevalence of SB and the evaluation of related risk factors. Data were extracted from the electronic medical records. A stepwise forward logistic regression model was used to identify independent risk factors for SB development. RESULTS: A total of 375 subjects (160 males) met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. Fifty-four subjects (14.4%) developed SB. The mean number of applications of NIV or CPAP carried out for > 2 h was higher in subjects with SB (7.1 ؎ 13.3 h) than in those without SB (4.4 ؎ 13.3 h) (P ‫؍‬ .03). Subjects with SB also presented a higher total duration of NIV use (44.6 ؎ 118.5 h) compared with subjects without SB (21.8 ؎ 45.5 h) (P ‫؍‬ .01). Subjects who developed SB presented a higher use of oronasal mask (92.6%) compared with the group that did not (21.5%) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ARF undergoing NIV or CPAP, oronasal mask use for > 26 h was independently associated with development of SB.

Background Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) and High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) are the main forms of treatment for acute respiratory failure. This study aimed to evaluate the effect, safety, and applicability of the NIV and HFNC in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) caused by COVID-19. Methods In this retrospective study, we monitored the effect of NIV and HFNC on the SpO 2 and respiratory rate before, during, and after treatment, length of stay, rates of endotracheal intubation, and mortality in patients with AHRF caused by COVID-19. Additionally, data regarding RT-PCR from physiotherapists who were directly involved in assisting COVID-19 patients and non-COVID-19. Results 62.2% of patients were treated with HFNC. ROX index increased during and after NIV and HFNC treatment (P < 0.05). SpO 2 increased during NIV treatment (P < 0.05), but was not maintained after treatment (P = 0.17). In addition, there was no difference in the respiratory rate during or after the NIV (P = 0.95) or HFNC (P = 0.60) treatment. The mortality rate was 35.7% for NIV vs 21.4% for HFNC (P = 0.45), while the total endotracheal intubation rate was 57.1% for NIV vs 69.6% for HFNC (P = 0.49). Two adverse events occurred during treatment with NIV and eight occurred during treatment with HFNC. There was no difference in the physiotherapists who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 directly involved in assisting COVID-19 patients and non-COVID-19 ones (P = 0.81). Conclusion The application of NIV and HFNC in the critical care unit is feasible and associated with favorable outcomes. In addition, there was no increase in the infection of physiotherapists with SARS-CoV-2.

The implementation of a physical therapy guideline for patients undergoing UAS resulted in reduced incidence of atelectasis and reduction in length of hospital stay in the postoperative period.