Search - Critical Care Science (CCS)

You searched for:"Marcia Souza Volpe"

We found (2) results for your search.
  • Original Article

    A comprehensive physical functional assessment of survivors of critical care unit stay due to COVID-19

    Crit Care Sci. 2024;36:e20240284en

    Abstract

    Original Article

    A comprehensive physical functional assessment of survivors of critical care unit stay due to COVID-19

    Crit Care Sci. 2024;36:e20240284en

    DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240284-en

    Views12

    ABSTRACT

    Objective:

    To examine the physical function and respiratory muscle strength of patients – who recovered from critical COVID-19 – after intensive care unit discharge to the ward on Days one (D1) and seven (D7), and to investigate variables associated with functional impairment.

    Methods:

    This was a prospective cohort study of adult patients with COVID-19 who needed invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula and were discharged from the intensive care unit to the ward. Participants were submitted to Medical Research Council sum-score, handgrip strength, maximal inspiratory pressure, maximal expiratory pressure, and short physical performance battery tests. Participants were grouped into two groups according to their need for invasive ventilation: the Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group (IMV Group) and the Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group (Non-IMV Group).

    Results:

    Patients in the IMV Group (n = 31) were younger and had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores than those in the Non-IMV Group (n = 33). The short physical performance battery scores (range 0 – 12) on D1 and D7 were 6.1 ± 4.3 and 7.3 ± 3.8, respectively for the Non-Invasive Mechanical Ventilation Group, and 1.3 ± 2.5 and 2.6 ± 3.7, respectively for the IMV Group. The prevalence of intensive care unit-acquired weakness on D7 was 13% for the Non-IMV Group and 72% for the IMV Group. The maximal inspiratory pressure, maximal expiratory pressure, and handgrip strength increased on D7 in both groups, but the maximal expiratory pressure and handgrip strength were still weak. Only maximal inspiratory pressure was recovered (i.e., > 80% of the predicted value) in the Non-IMV Group. Female sex, and the need and duration of invasive mechanical were independently and negatively associated with the short physical performance battery score and handgrip strength.

    Conclusion:

    Patients who recovered from critical COVID-19 and who received invasive mechanical ventilation presented greater disability than those who were not invasively ventilated. However, they both showed marginal functional improvement during early recovery, regardless of the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. This might highlight the severity of disability caused by SARS-CoV-2.

    See more
    A comprehensive physical functional assessment of survivors of critical care unit stay due to COVID-19
  • Bronchial hygiene technique with manual hyperinflation and thoracic compression: effectiveness and safety

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2011;23(2):190-198

    Abstract

    Bronchial hygiene technique with manual hyperinflation and thoracic compression: effectiveness and safety

    Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2011;23(2):190-198

    DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2011000200012

    Views0

    OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of the manual hyperinflation with thoracic compression (MHTC) maneuver on the clearance of secretions, pulmonary mechanics, hemodynamics and oxygenation in mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: This was a controlled, crossover study that included twenty patients who were under invasive ventilation for more than 48 hours. Four hours after the last airway suctioning procedure, the patients underwent the study interventions, Suction alone or MHTC plus Suction, in sequence at four hour intervals. The sequence order for the procedures was established by randomization. Data were collected before, during and 5, 15, 30 and 60 minutes after each intervention. The suctioned secretions were collected and weighed. RESULTS: No significant differences between the procedures were found regarding tidal volume, plateau pressure and pulmonary compliance (p>0.05). The hemodynamic variables showed increased pressures and heart rate during the procedures and returned to baseline values five minutes after the end of the procedure (p≤0.001). No significant hemodynamic differences were seen between the interventions (p>0.05). For the duration of the study, oxygen saturation was 99% with only two exceptions during the MHTC + Suction procedure, where saturation was 98% (p<0.05). No significant differences were observed between the techniques regarding the weight of the suctioned secretion. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that MHTC, as performed in this study, adds no benefit with respect to oxygenation optimization, pulmonary mechanics and clearance of secretions. However, the MHTC maneuver did not result in hemodynamic changes when compared to the suctioning procedure alone.

    See more
    Bronchial hygiene technique with manual hyperinflation and thoracic compression: effectiveness and safety

Search

Search in:

Article type
article-commentary
brief-report
case-report
correction
editorial
editorial
letter
letter
other
rapid-communication
reply
research-article
research-article
review-article
Session
Articles
Artigo de Revisão de Pediatria
Artigo Original
Artigo Original de Pediatria
Artigo Original Destaque
Artigos de Revisão
Artigos originais
Author's Response
Brief Communication
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Report
Comentários
Commentaries
Commentary
Consenso Brasileiro de Monitorização e Suporte Hemodinâmico
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorials
Erratum
Letter to the Editor
Letters to the Editor
Original Article
Original Article – Basic Research
Original Article – Neonatologia
Original Articles
Original Articles – Basic Research
Original Articles – Clinical Research
Relato de Caso
Relatos de Caso
Research Letter
Review
Review Article
Special Article
Special Articles
Viewpoint
Year / Volume
2024; v.36
2023; v.35
2022; v.34
2021; v.33
2020; v.32
2019; v.31
2018; v.30
2017; v.29
2016; v.28
2015; v.27
2014; v.26
2013; v.25
2012; v.24
2011; v.23
2010; v.22
2009; v.21
2008; v.20
2007; v.19
2006; v.18
ISSUE