No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
PPEs and First-Pass Success in COVID-19
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 February 2023
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
- Type
- Article Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine
References
Avery, P, McAleer, S, Rawlinson, D, Gill, S, Lockey, D. Maintaining prehospital intubation success with COVID-19 personal protective precautions. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2022;37(6):783–787.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kienbacher, CL, Grafeneder, J, Tscherny, K, et al. The use of personal protection equipment does not impair the quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a prospective triple-cross over randomized controlled non-inferiority trial. Resuscitation. 2021;160:79–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
You have
Access
To the Editor;
We’ve read the article by Avery, et al entitled “Maintaining Prehospital Intubation Success with COVID-19 Personal Protective Precautions” Reference Avery, McAleer, Rawlinson, Gill and Lockey1 with great interest. In our opinion, understanding the “new standard” and finding out the possible disruptions in patient care is as essential as researching the most effective ways to deliver best possible care for patients who are infected with novel coronavirus or microorganisms that could cause another epidemic or pandemic. This article sheds light into this topic.
We would like to draw attention to some of the issues mentioned in the article. In a previous study, it was stated that resuscitation with personal protective equipment (PPE) was not inferior to that performed without equipment. Reference Kienbacher, Grafeneder and Tscherny2 I think that the study evaluating the initial success of intubation is very valuable. However, there is no clear information about the outcome in critically ill patients, as it will take some time to wear PPE. Since the data for this study were collected retrospectively, time to intervention data may not be available. We think that it would be more accurate to provide information on survival after intubation success in the pre-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) period and in the COVID-19 period.
At first glance, the “There was no statistically significant difference in first-pass success rate between the two groups: 90.3% in the pre-COVID-19 group (n = 546) and 89.3% in the COVID-19 group (n = 720)” sentence in the Abstract seems as if the number of initial success rates is given as 546 and 720. However, these numbers constitute the total numbers in both groups.
This study proves that PPEs make no difference in the success of intubation from those who provide life support to use PPE without questioning their own selves for providing the best care possible. We would like to thank the authors for their contribution to literature.
Conflicts of interest/funding
The authors declare none.