@article{HerrmannLotzKaragiannidisetal.2022,
  author    = {Herrmann, Johannes and Lotz, Christopher and Karagiannidis, Christian and Weber-Carstens, Steffen and Kluge, Stefan and Putensen, Christian and Wehrfritz, Andreas and Schmidt, Karsten and Ellerkmann, Richard K. and Oswald, Daniel and Lotz, G{\"o}sta and Zotzmann, Viviane and Moerer, Onnen and K{\"u}hn, Christian and Kochanek, Matthias and Muellenbach, Ralf and Gaertner, Matthias and Fichtner, Falk and Brettner, Florian and Findeisen, Michael and Heim, Markus and Lahmer, Tobias and Rosenow, Felix and Haake, Nils and Lepper, Philipp M. and Rosenberger, Peter and Braune, Stephan and Kohls, Mirjam and Heuschmann, Peter and Meybohm, Patrick},
  title     = {Key characteristics impacting survival of COVID-19 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation},
  series = {Critical Care},
  volume    = {26},
  journal   = {Critical Care},
  number    = {1},
  doi       = {10.1186/s13054-022-04053-6},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-299686},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Background Severe COVID-19 induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) often requires extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Recent German health insurance data revealed low ICU survival rates. Patient characteristics and experience of the ECMO center may determine intensive care unit (ICU) survival. The current study aimed to identify factors affecting ICU survival of COVID-19 ECMO patients. Methods 673 COVID-19 ARDS ECMO patients treated in 26 centers between January 1st 2020 and March 22nd 2021 were included. Data on clinical characteristics, adjunct therapies, complications, and outcome were documented. Block wise logistic regression analysis was applied to identify variables associated with ICU-survival. Results Most patients were between 50 and 70 years of age. PaO\(_{2}\)/FiO\(_{2}\) ratio prior to ECMO was 72 mmHg (IQR: 58-99). ICU survival was 31.4\%. Survival was significantly lower during the 2nd wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A subgroup of 284 (42\%) patients fulfilling modified EOLIA criteria had a higher survival (38\%) (p = 0.0014, OR 0.64 (CI 0.41-0.99)). Survival differed between low, intermediate, and high-volume centers with 20\%, 30\%, and 38\%, respectively (p = 0.0024). Treatment in high volume centers resulted in an odds ratio of 0.55 (CI 0.28-1.02) compared to low volume centers. Additional factors associated with survival were younger age, shorter time between intubation and ECMO initiation, BMI > 35 (compared to < 25), absence of renal replacement therapy or major bleeding/thromboembolic events. Conclusions Structural and patient-related factors, including age, comorbidities and ECMO case volume, determined the survival of COVID-19 ECMO. These factors combined with a more liberal ECMO indication during the 2nd wave may explain the reasonably overall low survival rate. Careful selection of patients and treatment in high volume ECMO centers was associated with higher odds of ICU survival.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WernerPoppFichtneretal.2022,
  author    = {Werner, Anne and Popp, Maria and Fichtner, Falk and Holzmann-Littig, Christopher and Kranke, Peter and Steckelberg, Anke and L{\"u}hnen, Julia and Redlich, Lisa Marie and Dickel, Steffen and Grimm, Clemens and Moerer, Onnen and Nothacker, Monika and Seeber, Christian},
  title     = {COVID-19 intensive care — Evaluation of public information sources and current standards of care in German intensive care units: a cross sectional online survey on intensive care staff in Germany},
  series = {Healthcare},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {Healthcare},
  number    = {7},
  issn      = {2227-9032},
  doi       = {10.3390/healthcare10071315},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-281865},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies for ICU staff (first evaluation in December 2020 when previous versions of consensus-based guidelines (S2k) were published) and question selected aspects of guideline adherence of standard care for patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey among German intensive care staff from 11 October 2021 to 11 November 2021. We distributed the survey via e-mail in intensive care facilities and requested redirection to additional intensive care staff (snowball sampling). Results: There was a difference between the professional groups in the number, selection and qualitative assessment of information sources about COVID-19. Standard operating procedures were most frequently used by all occupational groups and received a high quality rating. Physicians preferred sources for active information search (e.g., medical journals), while nurses predominantly used passive consumable sources (e.g., every-day media). Despite differences in usage behaviour, the sources were rated similarly in terms of the quality of the information on COVID-19. The trusted organizations have not changed over time. The use of guidelines was frequently stated and highly recommended. The majority of the participants reported guideline-compliant treatment. Nevertheless, there were certain variations in the use of medication as well as the criteria chosen for discontinuing non-invasive ventilation (NIV) compared to guideline recommendations. Conclusions: An adequate external source of information for nursing staff is lacking, the usual sources of physicians are only appropriate for the minority of nursing staff. The self-reported use of guidelines is high.},
  language  = {en}
}