Skip header and navigation

2 records – page 1 of 1.

Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC052102 RR
Question Submitted
May 21, 2020
Date Completed
May 22, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC052102 RR
Question Submitted
May 21, 2020
Date Completed
May 22, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
· There was no source of Canadian data (published or grey, federal or provincial) to address this question and differentiate between types of ventilation. · There are several studies available assessing the proportions seen in other countries and a lot of theoretical literature about using non-invasive ventilation (NIV) as a first-line intervention to hopefully avoid intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), for which there is weak evidence. · Key studies include an analysis of 36 ICU patients in Wuhan in which 41.7% received NIV and 47.2% received MIV. Another large-scale study of 1,099 hospitalized patients reported IMV in 6.1% with no report of NIV.
Category
Administration
Clinical Management
Subject
Ventilation
Health Planning
Population
All
Clinical Setting
ICU
Priority Level
Level 3 completed within 2-3 days
Cite As
Badea, A; Groot, G; Dalidowicz, M; Miller, L. In similar jurisdictions experiencing the COVID-19 pandemic, what is the proportion of patients receiving non-invasive ventilation versus those receiving intermittent mandatory ventilation? 2020 May 22; Document no.: EOC052102 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 8 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC100801 RR
Question Submitted
October 8, 2020
Date Completed
October 19, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC100801 RR
Question Submitted
October 8, 2020
Date Completed
October 19, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
· Well established that older individuals, particularly those with pre-existing conditions are at increased risk of severe disease and/or complications with SARS-CoV-2 infection, and volunteers should take this into consideration · No other evidence specific to healthcare workers or volunteers to guide age restriction policies
Category
Administration
Subject
Risk
Elderly
Facilities
Health Personnel
Population
Aged (80+)
Clinical Setting
Community
Primary care
Public Health
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
Badea, A; Groot, G; Miller, L; Mueller, M. What are the age restrictions for healthcare workers/volunteer? 2020 Oct 19; Document no.: EOC100801 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 8 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail