Guidance on nebulization during the current COVID-19 pandemic

Assessing sterility techniques in bronchodilator responsiveness testing by practicing allergists in North America

Background

The American Thoracic Society has published general guidelines for sterility when testing for bronchodilator responsiveness. However, the extent to which practicing allergists implement sterility measures is currently unknown.

Objective

This study aims to understand the adherence to the American Thoracic Society guidelines for sterility among practicing allergists.

Methods

In 2015, a questionnaire was approved and distributed by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology to all its members. The anonymous responses were recorded and tabulated after a 3-week period.

Results

Of the 6800 allergists who received surveys from the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology members, 496 participated in the survey (response rate 7.3%). Using metered dose inhalers with a spacer and nebulizers were the most common bronchodilator administration techniques, as indicated by 59.35% and 58.52% of responses, respectively. Whereas 69.25% of the allergists considered their bronchodilator administration techniques to be sterile, 14.05% did not consider their administration technique to be sterile and 16.70% were unsure. For maintaining sterility, 38.75% of the respondents indicated using a new disposable attachment for reused inhalers, 18.71% indicated using a new inhaler for each patient, and 9.13% reported wiping inhalers with a cleaning agent.

Conclusions

When asked about the sterility of the techniques used by them, nearly one-third of the allergists either stated that the measures used by them were unsterile or stated that they were were unsure. To increase adherence to sterility measures among North American allergists, promoting guideline awareness and proposing updated guidelines focused on the most common bronchodilator administration techniques is essential.

All shook up: how the COVID-19 pandemic rocked pediatric asthma care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Asthma management is a crucial aspect of public health. The landscape of asthma management underwent significant change in the wake of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. These changes greatly affected existing patients, individuals suffering with undiagnosed illness, providers, and the healthcare system as a whole.

RECENT FINDINGS

Providers had to navigate through the potential risk of exposure while weighing the benefit of office visits for patients. This promoted the rapid uptake of telemedicine and virtual outreach, as well as modifications to acute management and controller therapies. Telehealth allowed for the remote monitoring of these patient populations, increased compliance with home-based self-management, and an emphasis on patient education. Furthermore, the pandemic underscored the importance of proactive asthma management as many individuals were left untreated or undiagnosed for various reasons. It is evident that the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic reshaped the landscape of various components of the healthcare system, including asthma management, necessitating innovative approaches to monitoring and patient education.

SUMMARY

Understanding the lessons learned from this time period is crucial for enhancing the resilience of our health system in the wake of future challenges that may be posed against our system.

Long- and Short-Term Trends in Outpatient Attendance by Speciality in Japan: A Joinpoint Regression Analysis in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a decline in outpatient attendance. Therefore, this study aimed to clarify long- and short-term clinic attendance trends by speciality in Japan between 2009 and 2021. A retrospective observational study of Japan's claims between 2009 and 2021 was conducted using the Estimated Medical Expenses Database. The number of monthly outpatient claims in clinics was used as a proxy indicator for monthly outpatient attendance, and specialities were categorised into internal medicine, paediatrics, surgery, orthopaedics, dermatology, obstetrics and gynaecology, ophthalmology, otolaryngology, and dentistry. The annually summarised age-standardised proportions and the percentage of change were calculated. Joinpoint regression analysis was used to evaluate long-term secular trends. The data set included 4,975,464,894 outpatient claims. A long-term statistically significant decrease was observed in outpatient attendance in internal medicine, paediatrics, surgery, ophthalmology, and otolaryngology during the pandemic. From March 2020 to December 2021, which includes the COVID-19 pandemic period, outpatient attendance in paediatrics, surgery, and otolaryngology decreased in all months compared with that of the corresponding months in 2019. For some specialities, the impact of the pandemic was substantial, even in the context of long-term trends. Speciality-specific preparedness is required to ensure essential outpatient services in future public health emergencies.

The Laboratory Characterization of Fugitive Aerosol Emissions From a Standard Jet Nebulizer With and Without a Filtered Mouthpiece

Background and objective The risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission from patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during nebulization is unclear. In this study, we aimed to address this issue. Methods Fugitive emissions of aerosolized saline during nebulization were observed using a standard jet nebulizer fitted with unfiltered and filtered mouthpieces connected via a mannequin to a breathing simulator. Fugitive emissions were observed by using a laser sheet and captured on high-definition video, and they were measured by using optical particle counters positioned where a potential caregiver may be administering nebulization and three other locations in the sagittal plane at various distances downstream of the mannequin. Results The use of a standard unfiltered mouthpiece resulted in significant emission of fugitive aerosols ahead of and above the mannequin (spread over 2 m in front). A mouthpiece with a filter-adaptor effectively suppressed the emissions, with only minor leakage from the nebulizer cup. Particle count measurements supported the visual observations, providing total particle count levels and aerosol concentration levels at the measurement locations. The levels decayed slowly with downstream distance. Conclusions The visualization described above captured the dispersion of emitted aerosols in the plane of the laser sheet, aligned with the sagittal plane. The particle count measurements provided temporal and spatial distributions of the aerosol concentration levels over the time and locations considered. However, the exhaled air and aerosolized droplets spread three-dimensionally in front of and above the mannequin. The results visually highlight the effectiveness of using a filtered mouthpiece in suppressing the fugitive aerosols and identify an approach for limiting the occupational exposure of healthcare workers to these emissions while administering nebulized therapies.

Influence of Aerosol Mask Design on Fugitive Aerosol Concentrations During Nebulization

BACKGROUND

Secondhand exposure to fugitive aerosols may cause airway diseases in health providers. We hypothesized that redesigning aerosol masks to be closed-featured would reduce the fugitive aerosol concentrations during nebulization. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of a mask designed for a jet nebulizer on the concentration of fugitive aerosols and delivered doses.

METHODS

An adult intubation manikin was attached to a lung simulator to mimic normal and distressed adult breathing patterns. The jet nebulizer delivered salbutamol as an aerosol tracer. The nebulizer was attached to 3 aerosol face masks: an aerosol mask, a modified non-rebreathing mask (NRM, with no vent holes), and an AerosoLess mask. An aerosol particle sizer measured aerosol concentrations at parallel distances of 0.8 m and 2.2 m and a frontal distance of 1.8 m from the manikin. The drug dose delivered distal to the manikin's airway was collected, eluted, and analyzed using a spectrophotometer at a 276 nm wavelength.

RESULTS

With a normal breathing pattern, the trends of aerosol concentrations were higher with an NRM followed by an aerosol mask and AerosoLess mask (P < .001) at 0.8 m; however, the concentrations were higher with an aerosol mask followed by NRM and AerosoLess mask at 1.8 m (P < .001) and 2.2 m (P < .001). With a distressed breathing pattern, the aerosol concentrations were higher with an aerosol mask followed by an NRM and AerosoLess mask at 0.8 m, 1.8 m (P < .001), and 2.2 m (P = .005). The delivered drug dose was significantly higher with AerosoLess mask with a normal breathing pattern and with an aerosol mask with a distressed breathing pattern.

CONCLUSIONS

Mask design influences fugitive aerosol concentrations in the environment, and a filtered mask reduces the concentration of aerosols at 3 different distances and with 2 breathing patterns.

There Is a Risk of Spread During a Nebulization Session in a Patient with COVID-19

Introduction: A hypothetical risk of SARS-CoV-2 airborne transmission through nebulization was suggested based on a potential environmental contamination by the fugitive aerosol emitted in the environment during the procedure. The aim of this study was to verify this risk from the fugitive aerosol emitted by COVID-19 patients during one nebulization session. Methods: In this cohort study, COVID-19 patients treated with nebulization were recruited at their admission to the hospital. Patients had to perform a nebulization session while a BioSampler® and a pump were used to vacuum the fugitive aerosol and collect it for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection. Results: Ten consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were recruited. The median viral load was 6.5 × 106 copies/mL. Two out of the 10 samples from the fugitive aerosol collected were positive to SARS-CoV-2. Conclusion: The risk of fugitive aerosol contamination with SARS-CoV-2 during nebulization has now been verified.

Saline nasal irrigation and gargling in COVID-19: a multidisciplinary review of effects on viral load, mucosal dynamics, and patient outcomes

With unrelenting SARS-CoV-2 variants, additional COVID-19 mitigation strategies are needed. Oral and nasal saline irrigation (SI) is a traditional approach for respiratory infections/diseases. As a multidisciplinary network with expertise/experience with saline, we conducted a narrative review to examine mechanisms of action and clinical outcomes associated with nasal SI, gargling, spray, or nebulization in COVID-19. SI was found to reduce SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal loads and hasten viral clearance. Other mechanisms may involve inhibition of viral replication, bioaerosol reduction, improved mucociliary clearance, modulation of ENaC, and neutrophil responses. Prophylaxis was documented adjunctive to personal protective equipment. COVID-19 patients experienced significant symptom relief, while overall data suggest lower hospitalization risk. We found no harm and hence recommend SI use, as safe, inexpensive, and easy-to-use hygiene measure, complementary to hand washing or mask-wearing. In view of mainly small studies, large well-controlled or surveillance studies can help to further validate the outcomes and to implement its use.

COVID-19 Therapeutic Potential of Natural Products

Despite the fact that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment and management are now considerably regulated, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is still one of the leading causes of death in 2022. The availability of COVID-19 vaccines, FDA-approved antivirals, and monoclonal antibodies in low-income countries still poses an issue to be addressed. Natural products, particularly traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs) and medicinal plant extracts (or their active component), have challenged the dominance of drug repurposing and synthetic compound libraries in COVID-19 therapeutics. Their abundant resources and excellent antiviral performance make natural products a relatively cheap and readily available alternative for COVID-19 therapeutics. Here, we deliberately review the anti-SARS-CoV-2 mechanisms of the natural products, their potency (pharmacological profiles), and application strategies for COVID-19 intervention. In light of their advantages, this review is intended to acknowledge the potential of natural products as COVID-19 therapeutic candidates.

Minimizing Aerosol Leakage from Facemasks in the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: Aerosol therapies with vented facemasks are considered a risk for nosocomial transmission of viruses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The transmission risk can be decreased by minimizing aerosol leakage and filtering the exhaled air. Objective: In this study, we determined which closed facemask designs show the least leakage. Methods: Smoke leakage was quantified during in- and exhalation in a closed system with expiration filter for three infant, six child, and six adult facemasks (three times each mask), using age-appropriate anatomical face models and breathing patterns. To assess leakage, smoke release was recorded and cumulative average pixel intensity (cAPI) was calculated. Results: In the adult group, aircushion edges resulted in less leakage than soft edges (cAPI: 407 ± 250 vs. 774 ± 152) (p = 0.004). The Intersurgical^® Economy 5 mask (cAPI: 146 ± 87) also released less smoke than the Intersurgical^® Clearlite 5 (cAPI: 748 ± 68) mask with the same size, but different geometry and edge type (p-value <0.05). Moreover, mask size had an effect, as there was a difference between Intersurgical^® Economy 4 (cAPI: 708 ± 346) and 5, which have the same geometry but a different size (p-value <0.05). Finally, repositioning masks increased the standard deviations. Mask leakage was not dependent on breathing patterns within the child group. Conclusions: Mask leakage can be minimized by using a closed system with a well-fitting mask that is appropriately positioned. To decrease leakage, and therewith minimize potential viral transmission, selecting a well-fitting mask with an aircushion edge is to be recommended.

One stone two birds: anti-inflammatory bronchodilators as a potential pharmacological strategy for COVID-19

The ongoing Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has imposed a huge threat to public health across the world. While vaccinations are essential for reducing virus transmission and attenuating disease severity, the nature of high mutation rate of SARS-CoV-2 renders vaccines less effective, urging quick development of effective therapies for COVID-19 disease. However, developing novel drugs remains extremely challenging due to the lengthy process and high cost. Alternatively, repurposing of existing drugs on the market represents a rapid and safe strategy for combating COVID-19 pandemic. Bronchodilators are first line drugs for inflammatory lung diseases, such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Compared to other anti-inflammatory drugs repurposed for COVID-19, bronchodilators are unique in that they have both anti-inflammatory and bronchodilating properties. Whether the dual properties of bronchodilators empower them greater potential to be repurposed for COVID-19 is worth exploring. In fact, clinical and preclinical studies have recently emerged to investigate the benefits of bronchodilators such assalbutamol, formoterol and theophylline in treating COVID-19, and many of them have shown encouraging efficacy on attenuating disease severity of pneumonia and other associated symptoms. To comprehensively understand the latest progress on COVID-19 intervention with bronchodilators, this review will summarize recent findings in this area and highlight the promising clinical benefits and possible adverse effects of bronchodilators as therapeutic options for COVID-19 with a focus on β2 receptor agonists, anticholinergic drugs and theophylline.

Nebulizer versus metered dose inhaler with space chamber (MDI spacer) for acute asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation: attitudes of patients and healthcare providers in the COVID-19 era

OBJECTIVE

Short-acting bronchodilators for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are commonly delivered by nebulizers although administration using metered dose inhaler with space chamber (MDI spacer) has been shown to be equally efficacious. There are few studies examining patients' and healthcare providers' attitudes on the two administration methods in adults. This study explores patients' and healthcare providers' attitudes on the use of nebulizer versus MDI spacer for acute asthma and COPD exacerbations in adults.

METHODS

Patients admitted for asthma or COPD exacerbations, doctors, and nurses in a university-affiliated hospital were surveyed from 1 April 2021 to 30 September 2021 regarding their views on the effectiveness, ease of use, preparation and administration, side effects, and infection risk of the two administration methods.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients, 103 doctors, and 650 nurses completed the survey. 60.6% of patients perceived nebulizer to be more effective. Patients who found nebulizer more comfortable were more likely to prefer nebulizer (OR 43.97, p = 0.01), while those who associated it with a greater infection risk were less likely to prefer nebulizer (OR 0.15, p = 0.03). 49.5% of doctors and 49.1% of nurses perceived nebulizer to be more effective, compared to 10.7% and 34.5%, respectively, for MDI spacer. Effectiveness and patient comfort influenced doctors' and nurses' preference for nebulizer while ease of preparation and administration influenced nurses' preference only.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and healthcare providers perceived nebulizer to be more effective. Factors unique to each group influenced their preference for nebulizer.

Estimated cost-savings from optimizing use of inhaled medications for inpatients with obstructive lung disease

CONCLUSIONS

Models representing transitions from all-nebulized to nebulizer-plus-MDI respiratory medications resulted in cost savings, largely from the reduction of labor cost of nebulizer administration with nebs-only treatment. Therefore, transitioning from nebs to MDIs can lead to cost savings and could allow greater opportunities for inhaler education.

Delivery technology of inhaled therapy for asthma and COPD

Inhaled therapy is the cornerstone of the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Drugs such as bronchodilators and corticosteroids are administered directly to the airways for local effect and rapid onset of action while systemic exposure and side effects are minimized. There are four major types of inhaler devices used clinically to generate aerosols for inhalation, namely, pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), nebulizers, Soft Mist™ inhalers (SMIs) and dry powder inhalers (DPIs). Each of them has its own unique characteristics that can target different patient groups. For instance, patients' inhaler technique is critical for pMDIs and SMIs to achieve proper drug deposition in the lung, which could be challenging for some patients. Nebulizers are designed to deliver aerosols to patients during tidal breathing, but they require electricity to operate and are less portable than other devices. DPIs are the only device that delivers aerosols in dry powder form with better stability, but they rely on patients' inspiration effort for powder dispersion, rendering them unsuitable for patients with compromised lung function. Choosing a device that can cater for the need of individual patient is paramount for effective inhaled therapy. This chapter provides an overview of inhaled therapy for the management of asthma and COPD. The operation principles, merits and limitations of different delivery technologies are examined. Looking ahead, the challenges of delivering novel therapeutics such as biologics through the pulmonary route are also discussed.

Diagnosis and treatment of adult asthma patients in Serbia: a 2022 experts group position statement

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is the most common non-communicable chronic lung condition across all ages. Epidemiological data indicate that many asthma patients in Serbia remain undiagnosed and untreated. The implementation of recent global advances in asthma management is limited due to the lack of a systematic approach, drug availability and regulatory affairs. In addition, the global coronavirus disease pandemic has posed a significant challenge, particularly in resource-limited settings.

AREAS COVERED

In this paper, we propose an algorithm for treating adult asthma patients in Serbia. We performed PubMed database search on published asthma clinical trials and guidelines from 1 January 2015 to 10 March 2020. The consensus process incorporated a modified Delphi method that included two rounds of e-mail questionnaires and three rounds of national asthma expert meetings. We focus on 1) objective diagnosis of asthma, 2) the implementation of up-to-date therapeutic options, and 3) the identification and referral of severe asthma patients to newly established severe asthma centers.

EXPERT OPINION

Regional specificities and variations in healthcare systems require the adaptation of evidence-based knowledge. Practical, clinically oriented algorithms designed to overcome local barriers in healthcare delivery may facilitate timely and adequate asthma diagnosis and the local implementation of current advances in asthma management.

Managing adult asthma during the COVID-19 pandemic: A 2022 review and current recommendations

Introduction: This review aims to examine asthma management during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: Relevant recommendations and articles were identified by respiratory professional societies and PubMed search using the terms “asthma” and “COVID-19”, and examined for relevance and inclusion in this study. Results: Recommendations for the management of asthma have remained similar but are now supported by new evidence between the years 2020 and 2022. Patients with well-controlled, mild-to-moderate asthma are unlikely to be at increased risk of acquiring COVID-19 or having worse outcomes from COVID-19. All asthma patients should receive COVID-19 vaccination. Spirometry can be performed with the usual strict infection control procedures unless there is a suspicion of COVID-19. Mask-wearing and other health measures remain important for asthma patients. Conclusion: While previous recommendations were largely based on expert opinion, the tremendous amount of literature published since the pandemic first emerged 2 years ago has helped guide respiratory professional bodies to update their recommendations. This study provides a timely review of the various recommendations and can be used to guide healthcare professionals in managing asthma patients, as the world prepares for a future with COVID-19 becoming endemic. The long-term consequences of COVID-19 infection in asthma patients and the ripple effects of COVID-19 remain uncertain and deserve ongoing study. Keywords: Asthma, coronavirus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2

Particle Size Analysis in Aerosol-Generating Dental Procedures Using Laser Diffraction Technique

The global outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has raised concerns about the risk of airborne infection during dental treatment. Aerosol-generating dental procedures (AGDP) produce droplets and aerosols, but the details of the risks of COVID-19 transmission in AGDP are not well-understood. By discriminating between droplets and aerosols, we devised a method to measure particle size using laser diffraction analysis and evaluated aerosols generated from dental devices for providing a basis for proper infection control procedures. The droplets and aerosols generated from dental devices were characterized by multimodal properties and a wide range of droplet sizes, with the majority of droplets larger than 50 μm. AGDP emitted few aerosols smaller than 5 μm, which are of concern for pulmonary infections due to airborne transmission. In addition, the use of extraoral suction was found to prevent the spread of aerosols from high-speed dental engines. This study suggests that the risk of aerosol infections is considerably limited in regular dental practice and that current standard precautions, such as mainly focusing on protection against droplet and contact infections, are sufficient. While several cases of airborne transmission of COVID-19 in general clinics and emergency hospitals have been reported, cluster outbreaks in dental clinics have not yet been reported, which may indicate that AGDP does not pose a significant threat in contributing to the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

[Nebulization of emergency medications in the south German rescue service]

BACKGROUND

In German emergency rescue services, inhalation treatment is routinely carried out by qualified health personnel. Standard operating procedures (SOP) for nebulization are neither uniform throughout Germany nor available in all federal states. Standardized recommendations with respect to which nebulizer type should be used are missing. The aerosol output as well as the drug deposition rates of jet and mesh nebulizers, however, differ considerably. Mesh devices can achieve a threefold higher lung deposition. Their use in emergency departments has also been shown to be associated with a better patient outcome when compared to jet nebulizers.

OBJECTIVE

This survey was designed to evaluate the type of nebulizer used in the south German rescue services. Special attention was paid to the influence of existing SOP on the decision to perform nebulization during emergency treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 4800 emergency paramedics working in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria and Rhineland-Palatinate received a questionnaire with a total of 17 questions on the implementation of drug nebulization in the daily practice.

RESULTS

Despite the existence of more efficient nebulizer types, the jet nebulizer was by far the most frequently used nebulizer in the south German rescue services. The deposition rates of both the jet and mesh nebulizers were considerably overestimated by most respondents; however, 77.5% of all respondents could not give any information about the deposition rates of the mesh nebulizer. Only two thirds of all respondents carried out nebulization treatment on the basis of SOP. The implementation of SOP, however, was pivotal to the application of nebulization during emergencies. If SOP were in place,76.9% of the responders used aerosol treatment compared to 23.1% when there were none. The perceived safety when using nebulization during emergencies was also significantly higher (p = 0.013) when SOP were implemented.

CONCLUSION

The exclusive use of mesh nebulizers could standardize the treatment of emergency patients in the south German rescue services. The use of mesh devices might possibly improve patient outcomes, even if clinical studies are still lacking. Nebulizer treatment differs between the federal states. A comprehensive implementation of SOP for nebulization treatment might support this process and could increase the application frequency and the perceived safety of nebulization during emergencies. A better training of paramedic personnel could improve the knowledge of aerosols as a treatment option for emergency patients and help to classify the advantages and disadvantages of the different aerosol generators available.

Aerosol delivery systems for treating obstructive airway diseases during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes CoronaVirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), has resulted in a worldwide pandemic and currently represents a major public health crisis. It has caused outbreaks of illness through person-to-person transmission of the virus mainly via close contacts, and droplets produced by an infected person's cough or sneeze. Aerosolised inhaled therapy is the mainstay for treating obstructive airway diseases at home and in healthcare settings, but there is heightened particular concern about the potential risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the form of aerosolised respiratory droplets during the nebulised treatment of patients with COVID-19. As a consequence of this concern, the use of hand-held inhalers, especially pressurised metered dose inhalers, has risen considerably as an alternative to nebulisers, and this switch has led to inadequate supplies of inhalers in some countries. However, there is no evidence supporting an increased risk of viral transmission during nebulisation in COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, some patients may be unable to adequately use their new device and may not benefit fully from the switch to treatment via hand-held inhalers. Thus, there is no compelling reason to alter aerosol delivery devices for patients with established nebuliser-based regimens. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the current evidence and understanding of the use of aerosolised inhaled therapies during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and to provide some guidance on the measures to be taken to minimise the risk of transmitting infection, if any, during aerosol therapies.

The Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 on Pediatric Asthma in the United States

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused severe economic and health impacts in the United States, and the impact is disproportionately more in socially disadvantages areas. The available data, albeit limited in children, suggest that the initial concerns of the potential of serious impact of COVID-19 illness in children with asthma are unproven so far. The reduction in asthma morbidities is due to improved adherence, COVID-19 control measures, school closures, and decreased exposure to allergens and viral infections in children. During the pandemic, asthma guidelines were updated to guide physicians in asthma care. In the face of unprecedented time, it is important to be vigilant, adhere to treatment guidelines, and implement preventive measures to eradicate the virus and improve outcomes in children with asthma.

An in vitro visual study of fugitive aerosols released during aerosol therapy to an invasively ventilated simulated patient

COVID-19 can cause serious respiratory complications resulting in the need for invasive ventilatory support and concurrent aerosol therapy. Aerosol therapy is considered a high risk procedure for the transmission of patient derived infectious aerosol droplets. Critical-care workers are considered to be at a high risk of inhaling such infectious droplets. The objective of this work was to use noninvasive optical methods to visualize the potential release of aerosol droplets during aerosol therapy in a model of an invasively ventilated adult patient. The noninvasive Schlieren imaging technique was used to visualize the movement of air and aerosol. Three different aerosol delivery devices: (i) a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI), (ii) a compressed air driven jet nebulizer (JN), and (iii) a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN), were used to deliver an aerosolized therapeutic at two different positions: (i) on the inspiratory limb at the wye and (ii) on the patient side of the wye, between the wye and endotracheal tube, to a simulated intubated adult patient. Irrespective of position, there was a significant release of air and aerosol from the ventilator circuit during aerosol delivery with the pMDI and the compressed air driven JN. There was no such release when aerosol therapy was delivered with a closed-circuit VMN. Selection of aerosol delivery device is a major determining factor in the release of infectious patient derived bioaerosol from an invasively mechanically ventilated patient receiving aerosol therapy.

What we learned in the past year in managing our COVID-19 patients in intensive care units?

Coronavirus disease 2019 is a pandemic, was first recognized at Wuhan province, China in December 2019. The disease spread quickly across the globe, spreading stealthily from human to human through both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. A multisystem disease which appears to primarily spread via bio aerosols, it has exhibited a wide clinical spectrum involving multiple organ systems with the respiratory system pathology being the prime cause of morbidity and mortality. Initially unleashing a huge destructive trail at Wuhan China, Lombardy Italy and New York City, it has now spread to all parts of the globe and has actively thrived and mutated into new forms. Health care systems and Governments responded initially with panic, with containment measures giving way to mitigation strategies. The global medical and scientific community has come together and responded to this huge challenge. Professional medical societies quickly laid out "expert" guidelines which were conservative in their approach. Many drugs were re formulated and tested quickly with the help of national and international collaborative groups, helping carve out effective treatment strategies and help build a good scientific foundation for evidence-based medicine. Out of the darkness of chaos, we now have an orderly approach to manage this disease both from a public health preventive and therapeutic standpoint. With preventive measures such as masking and social distancing to the development of highly effective and potent vaccines, the public health success of such measures has been tempered by behavioral responses and resource mobilization. From a therapy standpoint, we now have drugs that were promising but now proven ineffective, and those that are effective when given early during viral pathogenesis or later when immune dysregulation has established, and the goal is to help reign in the destructive cascade. It has been a fascinating journey for mankind and our work here recapitulates the evolution of various aspects of critical care and other inpatient practices which continue to evolve.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Hospitalised COPD Exacerbations in Malta

METHOD

Data was collected retrospectively from electronic hospital records during the periods 1st March until 10th May in 2019 and 2020.

RESULTS

There was a marked decrease in AECOPD admissions in 2020, with a 54.2% drop in admissions (n = 119 in 2020 vs. n = 259 in 2019). There was no significant difference in patient demographics or medical comorbidities. In 2020, there was a significantly lower number of patients with AECOPD who received nebulised medications during admission (60.4% in 2020 vs. 84.9% in 2019; p ≤ 0.001). There were also significantly lower numbers of AECOPD patients admitted in 2020 who received controlled oxygen via venturi masks (69.0% in 2020 vs. 84.5% in 2019; p = 0.006). There was a significant increase in inpatient mortality in 2020 (19.3% [n = 23] and 8.4% [n = 22] for 2020 and 2019, respectively, p = 0.003). Year was found to be the best predictor of mortality outcome (p = 0.001). The lack of use of SABA pre-admission treatment (p = 0.002), active malignancy (p = 0.003), and increased length of hospital stay (p = 0.046) were also found to be predictors of mortality for AECOPD patients; however, these parameters were unchanged between 2019 and 2020 and therefore could not account for the increase in mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a decrease in the number of admissions with AECOPD in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, when compared to 2019. The year 2020 proved to be a significant predictor for inpatient mortality, with a significant increase in mortality in 2020. The decrease in nebuliser and controlled oxygen treatment noted in the study period did not prove to be a significant predictor of mortality when corrected for other variables. Therefore, the difference in mortality cannot be explained with certainty in this retrospective cohort study.

Management of COPD patients during COVID: difficulties and experiences

Introduction: The role of COPD in COVID-19 is not yet well understood. However, there is increasing evidence showing that COPD patients with COVID-19 have a higher risk of presenting a serious infection, a greater likelihood of requiring ICU support, and a higher mortality than other groups.Areas covered: In this article, we address some critical questions on COVID-19 as they pertain to COPD. In particular, we discuss whether the usual algorithms of pharmacological and non-pharmacological management in COPD still apply.Expert opinion: Patients with COPD must continue their regular therapy, regardless of whether they are affected by COVID-19. Corticosteroids reduce mortality in COVID-19 patients in need of supportive oxygen therapy or invasive mechanical ventilation. It is essential that a COPD patient who has tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 is closely followed over time because any delay in diagnosis and initiation of appropriate therapy could negatively affect his/her prognosis. However, we still do not know if COVID-19 infection occurs and evolves differently in each of the recognized COPD phenotypes and, therefore, whether it needs a different management. There are other open questions concerning COVID-19 and COPD that need to be considered. Future studies are absolutely necessary to answer these questions.