Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Document Type
- Journal article (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Covid-19 (1)
- anxiety (1)
- depression (1)
- extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (1)
- human behaviour (1)
- intensive care unit (1)
- quality of life (1)
Institute
- Institut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie (2)
- Deutsches Zentrum für Herzinsuffizienz (DZHI) (1)
- Institut für Hygiene und Mikrobiologie (1)
- Institut für Virologie und Immunbiologie (1)
- Institut für medizinische Datenwissenschaften (1)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie (ab 2004) (1)
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie (1)
- Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I (1)
Psychosocial factors affect mental health and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in a complex manner, yet gender differences in these interactions remain poorly understood. We investigated whether psychosocial factors such as social support and personal and work-related concerns impact mental health and HRQL differentially in women and men during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Between June and October 2020, the first part of a COVID-19-specific program was conducted within the “Characteristics and Course of Heart Failure Stages A-B and Determinants of Progression (STAAB)” cohort study, a representative age- and gender-stratified sample of the general population of Würzburg, Germany. Using psychometric networks, we first established the complex relations between personal social support, personal and work-related concerns, and their interactions with anxiety, depression, and HRQL. Second, we tested for gender differences by comparing expected influence, edge weight differences, and stability of the networks. The network comparison revealed a significant difference in the overall network structure. The male (N = 1370) but not the female network (N = 1520) showed a positive link between work-related concern and anxiety. In both networks, anxiety was the most central variable. These findings provide further evidence that the complex interplay of psychosocial factors with mental health and HRQL decisively depends on gender. Our results are relevant for the development of gender-specific interventions to increase resilience in times of pandemic crisis.
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.