Background: Tracheotomy, through its ability to wean patients off ventilation, can shorten ICU length of stay and in doing so increase ICU bed capacity, crucial for saving lives during the COVID-19 pandemic. To date, there is a paucity of patient selection criteria and prognosticators to facilitate decision making and enhance precious ICU capacity.Methods: Prospective study of COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheotomy (n = 12) over a 4-week period (March-April 2020). Association between preoperative and postoperative ventilation requirements and outcomes (ICU stay, time to decannulation, and death) were examined. Results: Patients who sustained FiO 2 ≤ 50% and PEEP ≤ 8 cm H 2 O in the 24 hours pretracheotomy exhibited a favorable outcome. Those whose requirements remained below these thresholds post-tracheotomy could be safely stepped down after 48 hours. Conclusion:Sustained FiO 2 ≤ 50% and PEEP ≤ 8 cm H 2 O in the 48 hours post-tracheotomy are strong predictive factors for a good outcome, raising the potential for these patients to be stepped down early, thus increasing ICU capacity.

Lemierre's syndrome is a potentially life-threatening consequence of oropharyngeal and ear infections and often results in critical care admission and even intubation. Due to the multisystem manifestation, multiple teams may initially be involved in the care, some of which may be unfamiliar with the features and usual clinical course. This report describes a case in a 36-year-old woman with the classic features of internal jugular vein thrombosis and septic emboli to the lungs secondary to an oropharyngeal infection. Treatment comprised antibiotic therapy, anticoagulation and fluid resuscitation, and was carried out in a high dependency unit setting. At follow-up 3 months after discharge, the patient was well with no residual symptoms off all treatment. During the events of this case, it became apparent that while ear, nose and throat and infectious diseases team members were relatively familiar with the condition, other departments including the critical care team were less so.

Introduction:On 14th August 2015 an office manager informed Public Health England of five employees known to have been diagnosed with pneumonia over the previous three weeks. We investigated to establish whether an outbreak occurred and to identify and control the source of infection.Methods:We undertook case finding for self-reported pneumonia cases at local businesses (July-August 2015). Clinical samples from a hospitalised case were tested for common respiratory pathogens, but returned negative results. Further testing confirmed Chlamydia psittaci infection in this case (serology and PCR).  We subsequently undertook C. psittaci testing for all cases, redefining them as confirmed (C. psittaci PCR or high antibody titre via serology) or probable (inconclusive C. psittaci serology). Twenty-eight day exposure histories informed descriptive epidemiological analysis. We conducted an environmental investigation at the office to identify potential sources of exposure.Results:We identified six office workers with pneumonia; four met case definitions (three confirmed, one probable) with symptom onset between 29th July and 4th August 2015. Workplace was the only epidemiological link and only one case reported limited, indirect bird contact. Environmental investigations identified pigeons roosting near the office which were being fed by workers (none cases).Discussion:This was a probable outbreak of psittacosis with no direct bird-to-human contact reported. Cases recovered after receiving appropriate antibiotics. Feeding of pigeons was stopped. A deep clean of office ventilation systems was conducted and workers were advised to avoid bird contact.  We hypothesised that indirect environmental exposure to infected pigeons was to the source of this outbreak. This work provides evidence that health professionals should consider psittacosis in the differential diagnosis of cases of severe or atypical respiratory illness even without overt bird contact.

COVIDTrach is a UK multidisciplinary collaborative project that aims to evaluate the outcomes of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients. It also examines the implementation of national guidance in COVID-19 tracheostomies and the incidence of COVID-19 infections amongst those health care workers involved in the procedure. An invitation to participate in an online survey tool (REDCap) was disseminated to all UK NHS departments involved in tracheostomy in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients via the Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, it's subsidiary organisations and the Intensive Care Society. To date 78 hospitals have submitted 564 COVID-19 tracheostomy cases. Fifty-two percent (n=219/465) of patients who had undergone tracheostomy and were still alive, had been successfully weaned from mechanical ventilation at the point of completing the survey. The all cause in-hospital mortality following tracheostomy was 12% (n=62/530), with 3% of these (n=2/62) due to tracheostomy related complications and the remaining deaths due to COVID-19 related complications. Amongst 400 cases submitting data two weeks after the tracheostomy, no instance of COVID-19 infection amongst operators was recorded. FFP3 masks or Powered Air Purifying Respirators were used by operators in 100% of tracheostomies and a face visor or hood with face shield was available in 99% of cases. This interim report highlights early outcomes following tracheostomy in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients. Future reporting from COVIDTrach will include more detailed analysis at later timepoints using comparator groups in order to provide a more comprehensive assessment of tracheostomy in COVID-19.

Background Coronavirus disease 2019 is an international pandemic. One of the cardinal features is acute respiratory distress syndrome, and proning has been identified as beneficial for a subset of patients. However, proning is associated with pressure-related side effects, including injury to the nose and face. Method This paper describes a pressure-relieving technique using surgical scrub sponges. This technique was derived based on previous methods used in patients following rhinectomy. Conclusion The increased use of prone ventilation has resulted in a number of referrals to the ENT team with concerns regarding nasal pressure damage. The described technique, which is straightforward and uses readily available materials, has proven effective in relieving pressure in a small number of patients.