Evaluation of Patients with COVID-19 Followed Up in Intensive Care Units in the Second Year of the Pandemic: A Multicenter Point Prevalence Study
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Original Article
VOLUME: 25 ISSUE: 1
P: 11 - 16
January 2024

Evaluation of Patients with COVID-19 Followed Up in Intensive Care Units in the Second Year of the Pandemic: A Multicenter Point Prevalence Study

Turk Thorac J 2024;25(1):11-16
1. Department of Respiratory Intensive Care, University of Health Sciences Süreyyapaşa Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
2. Department of Intensive Care Unit, University of Health Sciences İzmir Dr. Suat Şeren Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Training and Research Hospital, İzmir, Turkey
3. Sancaktepe Şehit Prof. Dr. İlhan Varank Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
4. Medical Intensive Care Unit, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
5. Department of Critical Care, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
6. Department of Critical Care, University of Health Sciences Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
7. Department of Intensive Care, Ankara Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
8. Department of Intensive Care, University of Health Sciences Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
9. Department of Intensive Care, Prof. Dr. Feriha Öz Emergency and Pandemic Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
10. İstanbul Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
11. Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
12. University of Health Sciences Gülhane Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
13. Department of Intensive Care, Clinic of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
14. University of Health Sciences Dışkapı Yıldırım Beyazıt Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
15. Elazığ Fethi Sekin City Hospital, Elazığ, Turkey
16. Department of General Intensive Care Unit, Amasya University Sabuncuoğlu Şerafettin Training and Research Hospital, Amasya, Turkey
17. Department of Intensive Care, Marmara University Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
18. Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Malatya Training and Research Hospital, Malatya, Turkey
19. Karabük Training and Research Hospital, Karabük, Turkey
20. Gazi Yaşargil Training and Research Hospital, Diyarbakır, Turkey
21. Giresun Faculty of Medicine, Giresun, Turkey
22. Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, İlhan Özdemir Public Hospital, Giresun, Turkey
23. Giresun Prof. Dr. A. İlhan Özdemir Public Hospital, Giresun, Turkey
24. Balıkesir Atatürk City Hospital, Balıkesir, Turkey
25. Department of Intensive Care, İzzet Baysal State Hospital, Bolu, Turkey
26. Bolu İzzet Baysal Public Hospital, Bolu, Turkey
27. Department of General Intensive Care, Kastamonu University, Kastamonu, Turkey
28. Department of Intensive Care, University of Health Sciences Bakırköy Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
29. University of Health Sciences, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
30. University of Health Sciences Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
No information available.
No information available
Accepted Date: 22.11.2023
Online Date: 22.11.2023
Publish Date: 22.11.2023
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

A 1-day point prevalence study was planned to obtain country data by determining the clinical characteristics, follow-up and treatment methods of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases that required intensive care unit (ICU) treatment in the second year of the pandemic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients who were hospitalized in the ICUs due to COVID-19 between March 11, 2022, 08.00 am, and March 12, 2022, 08.00 am, were included in the study. Demographic characteristics, intensive care and laboratory data, radiological characteristics, and follow-up results of the patients were recorded.

RESULTS: A total of 811 patients from 59 centers were included in the study, 59% of the cases were male, and the mean age was 74 ± 14 years. At least one comorbid disease was present in 94% of the cases, and hypertension was the most common. When ICU weight scores were examined, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II: 19 (15-27) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment: 7 (4-10) were seen. Sepsis was present in 37% (n = 298) of cases. PaO2/FiO2 ratios of the patients were 190 the highest and 150 the lowest and 51% of the cases were followed via invasive mechanical ventilation. On the study day, 73% bilateral involvement was seen on chest x-ray, and ground-glass opacities (52%) were the most common on chest tomography. There was growth in culture in 40% (n = 318) of the cases, and the most common growth was in the tracheal aspirate (42%).

CONCLUSION: The clinical course of COVID-19 is variable, and ICU follow-up was required due to advanced age, comorbidity, presence of respiratory symptoms, and widespread radiological involvement. The need for respiratory support and the presence of secondary infection are important issues to be considered in the follow-up. Despite the end of the second year of the pandemic and vaccination, the high severity of the disease as well as the need for follow-up in ICUs has shown that COVID-19 is an important health problem.

Cite this article as:

Güngör S, Ediboğlu Ö, Yazıcıoğlu Moçin Ö, et al. Evaluation of patients with COVID-19 followed-up in intensive care units in the second year of the pandemic: A multicenter point prevalence study. Thorac Res Pract. 2024;25(1):11-16.

Keywords:
COVID-19, intensive care, intensive care unit, pandemic, follow-up