TY - JOUR
T1 - Surviving Sepsis Campaign
T2 - Guidelines on the Management of Critically Ill Adults with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
AU - Alhazzani, Waleed
AU - Møller, Morten Hylander
AU - Arabi, Yaseen M.
AU - Loeb, Mark
AU - Gong, Michelle Ng
AU - Fan, Eddy
AU - Oczkowski, Simon
AU - Levy, Mitchell M.
AU - Derde, Lennie
AU - Dzierba, Amy
AU - Du, Bin
AU - Aboodi, Michael
AU - Wunsch, Hannah
AU - Cecconi, Maurizio
AU - Koh, Younsuck
AU - Chertow, Daniel S.
AU - Maitland, Kathryn
AU - Alshamsi, Fayez
AU - Belley-Cote, Emilie
AU - Greco, Massimiliano
AU - Laundy, Matthew
AU - Morgan, Jill S.
AU - Kesecioglu, Jozef
AU - McGeer, Allison
AU - Mermel, Leonard
AU - Mammen, Manoj J.
AU - Alexander, Paul E.
AU - Arrington, Amy
AU - Centofanti, John E.
AU - Citerio, Giuseppe
AU - Baw, Bandar
AU - Memish, Ziad A.
AU - Hammond, Naomi
AU - Hayden, Frederick G.
AU - Evans, Laura
AU - Rhodes, Andrew
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2020/6/1
Y1 - 2020/6/1
N2 - Background: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed. Methods: We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations. Results: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which four are best practice statements, nine are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for six questions. The topics were: 1) infection control, 2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, 3) hemodynamic support, 4) ventilatory support, and 5) COVID-19 therapy. Conclusion: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new evidence in further releases of these guidelines.
AB - Background: The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of a rapidly spreading illness, Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), affecting thousands of people around the world. Urgent guidance for clinicians caring for the sickest of these patients is needed. Methods: We formed a panel of 36 experts from 12 countries. All panel members completed the World Health Organization conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel proposed 53 questions that are relevant to the management of COVID-19 in the ICU. We searched the literature for direct and indirect evidence on the management of COVID-19 in critically ill patients in the ICU. We identified relevant and recent systematic reviews on most questions relating to supportive care. We assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then generated recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice recommendations. Results: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued 54 statements, of which four are best practice statements, nine are strong recommendations, and 35 are weak recommendations. No recommendation was provided for six questions. The topics were: 1) infection control, 2) laboratory diagnosis and specimens, 3) hemodynamic support, 4) ventilatory support, and 5) COVID-19 therapy. Conclusion: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign COVID-19 panel issued several recommendations to help support healthcare workers caring for critically ill ICU patients with COVID-19. When available, we will provide new evidence in further releases of these guidelines.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85085215137&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85085215137&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004363
DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004363
M3 - Article
C2 - 32224769
AN - SCOPUS:85085215137
SN - 0090-3493
VL - 48
SP - E440-E469
JO - Critical Care Medicine
JF - Critical Care Medicine
IS - 6
ER -