IntroductionCritically ill patients who require intensive care unit (ICU) treatment may experience psychological distress with increasing development of psychological disorders and related morbidity. Our aim was to determine whether intra-ICU clinical psychologist interventions decrease the prevalence of anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after 12 months from ICU discharge.MethodsOur observational study included critical patients admitted before clinical psychologist intervention (control group) and patients who were involved in a clinical psychologist program (intervention group). The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Impact of Event Scale-Revised questionnaires were used to assess the level of posttraumatic stress, anxiety and depression symptoms.ResultsThe control and intervention groups showed similar demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients in the intervention group showed lower rates of anxiety (8.9% vs. 17.4%) and depression (6.5% vs. 12.8%) than the control group on the basis of HADS scores, even if the differences were not statistically significant. High risk for PTSD was significantly lower in patients receiving early clinical psychologist support than in the control group (21.1% vs. 57%; P < 0.0001). The percentage of patients who needed psychiatric medications at 12 months was significantly higher in the control group than in the patient group (41.7% vs. 8.1%; P < 0.0001).ConclusionsOur results suggest that that early intra-ICU clinical psychologist intervention may help critically ill trauma patients recover from this stressful experience.

Routine use of LUS in the ICU setting can be associated with a reduction of the number of chest radiographs and CT scans performed.

In our post-critically ill population, PICCs were associated with a higher rate of DVT complications than CVCs. Routine ultrasound surveillance for the first 2 weeks after patient discharge from the ICU with a PICC and preferential use of CVC for these patients may be warranted.

In patients with the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infection, the echocardiographic assessment of the right ventricle (RV) represents a pivotal element in the understanding of current disease status and in monitoring disease progression. The present manuscript is aimed at specifically describing the echocardiographic assessment of the right ventricle, mainly focusing on the most useful parameters and the time of examination. The RV direct involvement happens quite often due to preferential lung tropism of COVID-19 infection, which is responsible for an interstitial pneumonia characterized also by pulmonary hypoxic vasoconstriction (and thus an RV afterload increase), often evolving in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The indirect RV involvement may be due to the systemic inflammatory activation, caused by COVID-19, which may affect the overall cardiovascular system mainly by inducing an increase in troponin values and in the sympathetic tone and altering the volemic status (mainly by affecting renal function). Echocardiographic parameters, specifically focused on RV (dimensions and function) and pulmonary circulation (systolic pulmonary arterial pressures, RV wall thickness), are to be measured in a COVID-19 patient with respiratory failure and ARDS. They have been selected on the basis of their feasibility (that is easy to be measured, even in short time) and usefulness for clinical monitoring. It is advisable to measure the same parameters in the single patient (based also on the availability of valid acoustic windows) which are identified in the first examination and repeated in the following ones, to guarantee a reliable monitoring. Information gained from a clinically-guided echocardiographic assessment holds a clinical utility in the single patients when integrated with biohumoral data (indicating systemic activation), blood gas analysis (reflecting COVID-19-induced lung damage) and data on ongoing therapies (in primis ventilatory settings).

Background Tocilizumab blocks pro-inflammatory activity of interleukin-6 (IL-6), involved in pathogenesis of pneumonia the most frequent cause of death in COVID-19 patients. Methods A multicenter, single-arm, hypothesis-driven trial was planned, according to a phase 2 design, to study the effect of tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints, a priori expected rates being 20 and 35%, respectively). A further prospective cohort of patients, consecutively enrolled after the first cohort was accomplished, was used as a secondary validation dataset. The two cohorts were evaluated jointly in an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model to assess prognostic variables on survival. Results In the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) phase 2 population, 180/301 (59.8%) subjects received tocilizumab, and 67 deaths were observed overall. Lethality rates were equal to 18.4% (97.5% CI: 13.6–24.0, P = 0.52) and 22.4% (97.5% CI: 17.2–28.3, P < 0.001) at 14 and 30 days, respectively. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, that included 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. In the exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio negatively affected survival, while the concurrent use of steroids was associated with greater survival. A statistically significant interaction was found between tocilizumab and respiratory support, suggesting that tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Conclusions Tocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Possibly, this effect could be limited to patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline. Registration EudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092).