Evidence Hub

Timing of Intubation and Mortality Among Critically Ill Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients: A Single-Center Cohort Study

Alfonso C. Hernández-Romieu, M. Adelman, Maxwell A. Hockstein, Chad J. Robichaux, Johnathan A. Edwards, J. Fazio, J. Blum, Craig S. Jabaley et al.

Critical Care Medicine, 2020

231 participants · 118 citations

Abstract

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Objectives: Increasing time to mechanical ventilation and high-flow nasal cannula use may be associated with mortality in coronavirus disease 2019. We examined the impact of time to intubation and use of high-flow nasal cannula on clinical outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Six coronavirus disease 2019-specific ICUs across four university-affiliated hospitals in Atlanta, Georgia. Patients: Adults with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection who received high-flow nasal cannula or mechanical ventilation. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Among 231 patients admitted to the ICU, 109 (47.2%) were treated with high-flow nasal cannula and 97 (42.0%) were intubated without preceding high-flow nasal cannula use. Of those managed with high-flow nasal cannula, 78 (71.6%) ultimately received mechanical ventilation. In total, 175 patients received mechanical ventilation; 44.6% were female, 66.3% were Black, and the median age was 66 years (interquartile range, 56–75 yr). Seventy-six patients (43.4%) were intubated within 8 hours of ICU admission, 57 (32.6%) between 8 and 24 hours of admission, and 42 (24.0%) greater than or equal to 24 hours after admission. Patients intubated within 8 hours were more likely to have diabetes, chronic comorbidities, and higher admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 231 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free