ORCID Profile
0000-0002-7533-166X
Current Organisations
Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland
,
Beaumont Hospital
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 10-02-2022
DOI: 10.1111/IWJ.13768
Abstract: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of a specially designed care bundle on the development of facial pressure injuries among frontline health care workers wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID‐19 pandemic. This was a mixed methods study. First, a pre‐posttest observational design was employed to evaluate the impact of the pre‐piloted intervention, a care bundle including skin cleansing and hydration, protective material use, facemask selection and skin inspection, developed in line with international best practice guidelines. Data were collected using survey methodology. Frontline COVID‐19 staff working in acute, community and ambulance services were invited to participate. Then, judgemental and volunteer s ling was used to select participants to undertake semi‐structured interviews to elicit feedback on their perceptions of the care bundle. The s le included 120 acute hospital staff, 60 Ambulance staff, 24 Community Hub staff and 20 COVID‐19 testing centre staff. A survey response rate of 61% was realised (n = 135/224). Of the participants, 32% (n = 43) had a facial pressure ulcer (FPI) pre‐intervention and 13% (n = 18) developed an FPI while using the care bundle. The odds ratio (OR) was 0.33 (95% CI: 0.18 to 0.61 P = .0004), indicating a 77% reduction in the odds of FPI development with use of the care bundle. Analysis of the qualitative data from 22 interviews identified three key themes, the context for the care bundle, the ease of use of the care bundle and the care bundle as a solution to FPI development. The care bundle reduced the incidence of FPI among the participants and was found to be easy to use. Implementation of skin protection for frontline staff continues to be important given the persistently high incidence of COVID‐19 and the ongoing need to wear PPE for protracted durations.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 07-2023
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 06-2023
DOI: 10.1111/NICC.12925
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 25-06-2021
DOI: 10.1007/S15010-021-01599-5
Abstract: The ISARIC prospective multinational observational study is the largest cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We present relationships of age, sex, and nationality to presenting symptoms. International, prospective observational study of 60 109 hospitalized symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 recruited from 43 countries between 30 January and 3 August 2020. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate relationships of age and sex to published COVID-19 case definitions and the most commonly reported symptoms. ‘Typical’ symptoms of fever (69%), cough (68%) and shortness of breath (66%) were the most commonly reported. 92% of patients experienced at least one of these. Prevalence of typical symptoms was greatest in 30- to 60-year-olds (respectively 80, 79, 69% at least one 95%). They were reported less frequently in children (≤ 18 years: 69, 48, 23 85%), older adults (≥ 70 years: 61, 62, 65 90%), and women (66, 66, 64 90% vs. men 71, 70, 67 93%, each P 0.001). The most common atypical presentations under 60 years of age were nausea and vomiting and abdominal pain, and over 60 years was confusion. Regression models showed significant differences in symptoms with sex, age and country. This international collaboration has allowed us to report reliable symptom data from the largest cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Adults over 60 and children admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are less likely to present with typical symptoms. Nausea and vomiting are common atypical presentations under 30 years. Confusion is a frequent atypical presentation of COVID-19 in adults over 60 years. Women are less likely to experience typical symptoms than men.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 12-07-2021
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2021
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 08-2023
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 04-05-2023
DOI: 10.1111/AOR.14542
Abstract: Veno‐venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V‐V ECMO) is a lifesaving support modality for severe respiratory failure, but its resource‐intensive nature led to significant controversy surrounding its use during the COVID‐19 pandemic. We report the performance of several ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores at discriminating survival in a large COVID‐19 V‐V ECMO cohort. We validated ECMOnet, PRESET (PREdiction of Survival on ECMO Therapy‐Score), Roch, SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), APACHE II (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation), 4C (Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium), and CURB‐65 (Confusion, Urea nitrogen, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, age years) scores on the ISARIC (International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium) database. We report discrimination via Area Under the Receiver Operative Curve (AUROC) and Area under the Precision Recall Curve (AURPC) and calibration via Brier score. We included 1147 patients and scores were calculated on patients with sufficient variables. ECMO mortality scores had AUROC (0.58–0.62), AUPRC (0.62–0.74), and Brier score (0.286–0.303). Roch score had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.62), precision (AUPRC 0.74) yet worst calibration (Brier score of 0.3) despite being calculated on the fewest patients (144). Severity of illness scores had AUROC (0.52–0.57), AURPC (0.59–0.64), and Brier Score (0.265–0.471). APACHE II had the highest accuracy (AUROC 0.58), precision (AUPRC 0.64), and best calibration (Brier score 0.26). Within a large international multicenter COVID‐19 cohort, the evaluated ECMO mortality prediction and severity of illness scores demonstrated inconsistent discrimination and calibration highlighting the need for better clinically applicable decision support tools.
Publisher: Oxford University Press (OUP)
Date: 28-02-2023
DOI: 10.1093/IJE/DYAD012
Abstract: We describe demographic features, treatments and clinical outcomes in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 cohort, one of the world's largest international, standardized data sets concerning hospitalized patients. The data set analysed includes COVID-19 patients hospitalized between January 2020 and January 2022 in 52 countries. We investigated how symptoms on admission, co-morbidities, risk factors and treatments varied by age, sex and other characteristics. We used Cox regression models to investigate associations between demographics, symptoms, co-morbidities and other factors with risk of death, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Data were available for 689 572 patients with laboratory-confirmed (91.1%) or clinically diagnosed (8.9%) SARS-CoV-2 infection from 52 countries. Age [adjusted hazard ratio per 10 years 1.49 (95% CI 1.48, 1.49)] and male sex [1.23 (1.21, 1.24)] were associated with a higher risk of death. Rates of admission to an ICU and use of IMV increased with age up to age 60 years then dropped. Symptoms, co-morbidities and treatments varied by age and had varied associations with clinical outcomes. The case-fatality ratio varied by country partly due to differences in the clinical characteristics of recruited patients and was on average 21.5%. Age was the strongest determinant of risk of death, with a ∼30-fold difference between the oldest and youngest groups each of the co-morbidities included was associated with up to an almost 2-fold increase in risk. Smoking and obesity were also associated with a higher risk of death. The size of our international database and the standardized data collection method make this study a comprehensive international description of COVID-19 clinical features. Our findings may inform strategies that involve prioritization of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who have a higher risk of death.
No related grants have been discovered for Natalie McEvoy.