0000000001276198
AUTHOR
Emanuela Biagioni
Nasal pressure swings as the measure of inspiratory effort in spontaneously breathing patients with de novo acute respiratory failure.
Abstract Background Excessive inspiratory effort could translate into self-inflicted lung injury, thus worsening clinical outcomes of spontaneously breathing patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Although esophageal manometry is a reliable method to estimate the magnitude of inspiratory effort, procedural issues significantly limit its use in daily clinical practice. The aim of this study is to describe the correlation between esophageal pressure swings (ΔPes) and nasal (ΔPnos) as a potential measure of inspiratory effort in spontaneously breathing patients with de novo ARF. Methods From January 1, 2021, to September 1, 2021, 61 consecutive patients with ARF (83.6% related to COVID…
Quality of Life in COVID-Related ARDS Patients One Year after Intensive Care Discharge (Odissea Study): A Multicenter Observational Study
Background: Investigating the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after intensive care unit (ICU) discharge is necessary to identify possible modifiable risk factors. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the HRQoL in COVID-19 critically ill patients one year after ICU discharge. Methods: In this multicenter prospective observational study, COVID-19 patients admitted to nine ICUs from 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 in Italy were enrolled. One year after ICU discharge, patients were required to fill in short-form health survey 36 (SF-36) and impact of event-revised (IES-R) questionnaire. A multivariate linear or logistic regression analysis to search for factors associated wi…
Additional file 1 of Nasal pressure swings as the measure of inspiratory effort in spontaneously breathing patients with de novo acute respiratory failure
Additional file 1: eTable 1. Esophageal and nasal pressure swings according to acute respiratory failure etiology. Data are presented as median and interquartile ranges (IQR). eFigure 1. Pearson���s R showing correlations between ��Pes and ��Pnos at 24 hours after splitting the study population according to the NRS received. eFigure 2. Bland-Altman analysis assessing the agreement between ��Pes measured with esophageal manometry and estimated based on ��Pnos (��Pes, estimated) and computed as k����Pnos, where k is the average ratio of ��Pes to ��Pnos measured at baseline. At T2 Bland-Altman methods showed a bias of 0.1 cmH2O and 95% limits of agreement, LoA, from ���2.0 to 2.1 cmH2O (95.1% …