BackgroundCOVID-19-related Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (CARDS) is the severe evolution of the Sars-Cov-2 infection leading to an intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Its onset is associated with “long-covid” including persisting respiratory disorders up to one year. Rehabilitation is suggested by most guidelines in the treatment of “long-covid”. As no randomised controlled trial did support its use in “long-covid” we aimed to evaluate the effects of endurance training rehabilitation (ETR) on dyspnoea in “long-covid” following CARDS.MethodsIn this multicentre, two-arm, parallel, open, assessor-blinded, randomised, controlled trial performed in three French ICU, we enrolled adults previously admitted for CARDS, discharged for at least three months and presenting an mMRC dyspnea scale score > 1. Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either ETR or standard physiotherapy (SP), both for three months. Outcomes assessors were masked to treatment assignment. Primary outcome was dyspnoea’s evolution, measured by Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile (MDP) at inclusion and after 90 days.ResultsBetween August 7, 2020 and January 26, 2022, 871 COVID-19 patients were screened, of whom 60 were randomly assigned to ETR (n=27) or SP (n=33). Mean MDP score after treatment was significantly lower in the ETR group than in the SP group (26.15 [SD 15.48] vs. 44.76 [SD 19.25]; mean difference -18.61 [95% CI -27.78 to -9.44]; p<0.0001).ConclusionCARDS patients suffering from breathlessness three months after discharge improved their dyspnoea significantly more when treated with ETR for three months rather than with SP.

BackgroundThe potential influence of thoracic ultrasound on clinical decision-making by physiotherapists has never been studied. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of thoracic ultrasound on clinical decision-making by physiotherapists for critical care patients.MethodsThis prospective, observational multicentre study was conducted between May 2017 and November 2020 in four intensive care units in France and Australia. All hypoxemic patients consecutively admitted were enrolled. The primary outcome was the net reclassification improvement (NRI), quantifying how well the new model (physiotherapist’s clinical decision-making including thoracic ultrasound) reclassifies subjects as compared with an old model (clinical assessment). Secondary outcomes were the factors associated with diagnostic concordance and physiotherapy treatment modification.ResultsA total of 151 patients were included in the analysis. The NRI for the modification of physiotherapist’s clinical decisions was—40% (95% CI (−56 to −22%), p=0.02). Among the cases in which treatment was changed after ultrasound, 41% of changes were major (n=38). Using a multivariate analysis, the physiotherapist’s confidence in their clinical diagnosis was associated with diagnostic concordance (adjusted OR=3.28 95% CI (1.30 to 8.71); p=0.014). Clinical diagnosis involving non-parenchymal conditions and clinical signs reflecting abolished lung ventilation were associated with diagnostic discordance (adjusted OR=0.06 95% CI (0.01 to 0.26), p<0.001; adjusted OR=0.26 95% CI (0.09 to 0.69), p=0.008; respectively).ConclusionThoracic ultrasound has a high impact on the clinical decision-making process by physiotherapists for critical care patients.Trial registration numberNCT02881814; https://clinicaltrials.gov.

The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) caused a large number of non-ventilated hypoxemic patients to require the use of prone position. The aim of this study is to measure the efficiency and tolerance of prone positioning in ward hypoxemic patients treated for Covid-19. This retrospective study included confirmed Covid-19 hypoxemic patients treated by at least one prone position session. Primary outcome was pulse oximetry over inspired oxygen fraction ratio (SpO 2 /FiO 2) before, during, and after prone position. Secondary outcomes were failure, adverse events, and poor tolerance rate. Twenty-seven patients were included. During first, second and third sessions, SpO 2 /FiO 2 ratio was significantly higher during posture than before (p < 0.0001, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001 respectively). Eighteen patients were responders (defined as an improvement of SpO 2 /FiO 2 of more than 50) during the first posture and have a shorter length of hospital stay than non-responder patients. Failure rate was 5%, and poor tolerance and adverse events rates were 8% and 7% respectively. Our study found that prone position in wards improved alveolar exchange during posture and is well tolerated. This technique could be used in any medical ward.

No abstract

Background: Patients admitted in intensive care units often receive mechanical ventilation. Prior to extubation, weaning process could be a major cause of dyspnea and anxiety in awake intubated patients. Hypnosis is commonly used to manage anxiety and pain. Our hypothesis is that hypnosis would decrease stress during the weaning and extubation process.Methods: This systematic review follows PRISMA Guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020171445). Web of Science, MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched until 11 March 2020. We included all interventional trials assessing hypnotherapy for intubated patients whom were undergoing weaning or extubation. Two of the authors independently screened studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias from identified trials.Results: One study fulfilled our selection. This case series included 2 patients. Eleven sessions were completed. Dyspnea was not assessed/reported. Hypnotherapy decreased anxiety during the weaning process from a median of 1 point (Interquartile Range: 1.0-2.5). Increase in oxygen saturation is also reported. There was no evidence of neither an anxiety reduction or an oxygen saturation improvement. This is due to the scarcity of publication and the methodological design of the one selected study.Conclusions: We cannot conclude whether or not hypnosis could be recommended in the weaning process of intubated patients. Further studies are needed to assess hypnosis effects.Registration: The present systematic review was registered in the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) under registration number CRD42020171445.