Skip header and navigation

10 records – page 1 of 1.

Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
EOC220201 ESR
Question Submitted
February 7, 2022
Date Completed
February 10, 2022
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
EOC220201 ESR
Question Submitted
February 7, 2022
Date Completed
February 10, 2022
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Category
Healthcare Services
Subject
Clinical Presentation
Critical Care
Mental Health
Outcome Assessment
Long Covid
Population
All
Clinical Setting
ICU
NICU
Priority Level
Level 4 Three weeks (21 days)
Cite As
Miller, L; Mueller, M. What are the one year outcomes for ICU COVID patients? 2022 Feb 10. Document no.: EOC220201 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2022. 46 p. (CEST evidence search report).
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Table
Review Code
EOC220201 RR Table
Question Submitted
February 7, 2022
Date Completed
February 18, 2022
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Table
Review Code
EOC220201 RR Table
Question Submitted
February 7, 2022
Date Completed
February 18, 2022
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Category
Healthcare Services
Subject
Clinical Presentation
Critical Care
Mental Health
Outcome Assessment
Long Covid
Population
All
Clinical Setting
ICU
NICU
Priority Level
Level 4 Three weeks (21 days)
Cite As
Badea, A; Reeder, B; Groot, G; Miller, L; Mueller, M. What are the one year outcomes for ICU COVID patients? 2022 Feb 18, Document no.: EOC220201 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2022. (CEST table).
Related Documents
Documents

EOC220201 RR Table

Download File
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC220201 RR
Question Submitted
February 7, 2022
Date Completed
February 18, 2022
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
*).ab. /freq=2 53068 12 9 or 10 or 11 446618 13 exp *treatment outcome/ or exp *outcome assessment
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC220201 RR
Question Submitted
February 7, 2022
Date Completed
February 18, 2022
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
6-month to 1 year survival rates of critical COVID-19 patients are similar to those of non-COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU
COVID-19 patients who have survived intensive care (ICU) admission are at risk of developing both post intensive care syndrome (PICS) and Long COVID. PICS includes impairments in physical, cognitive and psychological dimensions
Long-term survival follow up of COVID patients indicates that they experience similar levels of impairments in physical, cognitive and psychological dimensions as historical non-COVID reference populations.
The most common long-term impairments reported by COVID patients are persistent dyspnea/breathlessness, general weakness/fatigue and ongoing psychological symptoms such as anxiety, depression and PTSD
Category
Healthcare Services
Subject
Clinical Presentation
Critical Care
Mental Health
Outcome Assessment
Long Covid
Population
All
Clinical Setting
ICU
NICU
Priority Level
Level 4 Three weeks (21 days)
Cite As
Badea, A; Reeder, B; Groot, G; Miller, L; Mueller, M. What are the one year outcomes for ICU COVID patients? 2022 Feb 18, Document no.: EOC220201 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2022. 11 p. (CEST rapid review report).
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC042202 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 27, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
EOC042202 RR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 27, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Key Findings
There are no published or grey literature that directly address the review questions · A number of principle based guidelines/recommendations/criteria are available and reviewed. It appears that the WHO interim guidance "Considerations in adjusting public health and social measures in the context of COVID-19" is the best piece of evidence available right now. It is included in the reference list below.
Notes
INTERIM Rapid Review
Category
Administration
Subject
Closures
Reopening
Health Planning
Outcome Assessment
Risk
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 4 completed within 1 week
Cite As
Badea, A; Reeder, B; Groot, G; Miller, L; Young, C. What is the best evidence to guide the sequence or priority of re-opening each type of healthcare service and how have the closures impacted patients? 2020 Apr 24; Document no.: EOC042202 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 11 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
EOC042202-01 ESR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 23, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
EOC042202-01 ESR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
April 23, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Category
Administration
Subject
Closures
Reopening
Health Planning
Outcome Assessment
Risk
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 4 completed within 1 week
Cite As
Miller, L; Young, C. What is the best evidence to guide the sequence or priority of re-opening each type of healthcare service and how have the closures impacted patients? 2020 Apr 23; Document no.: EOC042202-01 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 5 p. (CEST evidence search report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
EOC042202-02 ESR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
May 6, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
EOC042202-02 ESR
Question Submitted
April 22, 2020
Date Completed
May 6, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
EOC
Category
Administration
Subject
Closures
Reopening
Health Planning
Outcome Assessment
Risk
Population
All
Priority Level
Level 4 completed within 1 week
Cite As
Miller, L; Young, C. What is the best evidence to guide the sequence or priority of re-opening each type of healthcare service and how have the closures impacted patients? 2020 May 6; Document no.: EOC042202-02 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 31 p. (CEST evidence search report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
CC011101-01 ESR
Question Submitted
January 8, 2021
Date Completed
January 19, 2021
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
; Outcome Assessment Cite As: Fox, L; Mueller, M. What is the final disposition of post-COVID patients who
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
CC011101-01 ESR
Question Submitted
January 8, 2021
Date Completed
January 19, 2021
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Category
Clinical Management
Clinical Presentation
Subject
Ventilation
Critical Care
Outcome Assessment
Population
All
Clinical Setting
ICU
Priority Level
Level 4 Three weeks (21 days)
Cite As
Fox, L; Mueller, M. What is the final disposition of post-COVID patients who require chronic ventilation in the ICU? 2021 Jan 19; Document no.: CC011101-01 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 51 p. (CEST evidence search report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
CC011101 RR
Question Submitted
January 8, 2021
Date Completed
February 27, 2021
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
CC011101 RR
Question Submitted
January 8, 2021
Date Completed
February 27, 2021
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Critical Care
Key Findings
There is limited research examining COVID-19 ICU patients undergoing prolonged (>14 days) mechanical ventilation
Rates of prolonged mechanical ventilation, defined as > 14 days, among COVID-19 ICU patients ranged from 16.7% to 33.3%.
Overall, studies suggest that length of ICU stay range from 11 to 31 days and length of hospital stay range from 25 to 51 days among COVID-19 patients who have undergone prolonged mechanical ventilation.
Following ICU discharge, patients are admitted to general wards, subacute nursing facilities, pneumological sub-intensive units, rehabilitation wards or long-term acute care.
Category
Clinical Management
Clinical Presentation
Subject
Ventilation
Critical Care
Outcome Assessment
Population
All
Clinical Setting
ICU
Priority Level
Level 4 Three weeks (21 days)
Cite As
Groot, G; McLean, M; Fox, L; Mueller, M. What is the final disposition of post-COVID patients who require chronic ventilation in the ICU? 2021 Feb 27; Document no.: CC011101 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 37 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
PH111001-01 ESR
Question Submitted
November 10, 2020
Date Completed
November 13, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Public Health
Document Type
Evidence Search Report
Review Code
PH111001-01 ESR
Question Submitted
November 10, 2020
Date Completed
November 13, 2020
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Public Health
Category
Healthcare Services
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Saskatchewan
Outcome Assessment
Decision Making
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Public Health
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
Miller, L; Howell-Spooner, B. What public health interventions are effective in reducing the burden of COVID-19 disease in comparable jurisdictions to Saskatchewan? 2020 Nov 13; Document no.: PH111001-01 ESR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 25 p. (CEST evidence search report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
PH111001 RR
Question Submitted
November 10, 2020
Date Completed
January 11, 2021
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Public Health
Document Type
Rapid Review
Review Code
PH111001 RR
Question Submitted
November 10, 2020
Date Completed
January 11, 2021
Status
3. Completed
Research Team
Public Health
Key Findings
A recent comprehensive examination of international experience [17] provides a hierarchy of effectiveness of public health interventions. The most effective interventions, as measured by the change in the effective reproduction number (Rt), include the cancellation of small and mass gatherings, closure of educational institutions, border restrictions, lockdowns, restrictions on individual movement, and increased availability and use of PPE such as face masks. Less effective are testing restrictions, public transportation restrictions, airport health checks, and environmental cleaning and disinfection (Figure 1).
Shelter-in-place, lockdown, and curfew orders have a substantial impact on the burden of COVID-19, having reduced Rt from 6.9 to 0.8 over the course of a month in Spain, for example. In an international comparison, stay-at-home orders reduced the percent daily increase in new cases from baseline from 26.9% at baseline to 20.3%, 12.8%, 7.3% at 7, 14, 21 days, respectively.
Closure of schools and workplaces are associated with a modest reduction in the incidence of COVID-19, in the order of 13%.
Travel restrictions lead to a moderate reduction COVID-19 disease burden. A study of 13 European countries found that voluntary reduced mobility occurring prior to government policies decreased the percent change in deaths per day by 9.2%, whereas subsequent government closure policies decreased deaths per day by 14.0%.
An extensive systematic review of SARS, MERS, and SARS-CoV-2 demonstrates that physical distancing of 1 m is associated with a relative risk (RR) of disease transmission = 0.18. The RR decreases two-fold for each additional m increase in distance.
A ban on public gatherings reduces COVID-19 transmission; however, evidence supporting specific gathering size limits is weak. In Germany, gathering restrictions and voluntary behaviour changes had the single greatest effect on the epidemic, reducing Rt by 9.7% per day and the growth rate from 30 to 12% within 2 weeks. Findings from the UK lockdown indicate that the average daily number of contacts decreased from 10.8 before to 2.8 after the lockdown. This was associated with a decrease in Rt from 2.6 to 0.62.
In a systematic review and in modelling studies, mask use by the public is estimated to reduce COVID-19 incidence and deaths by 38% and 47%, respectively.
Category
Healthcare Services
Infection Prevention and Control
Subject
Saskatchewan
Outcome Assessment
Decision Making
Population
All
Clinical Setting
Public Health
Priority Level
Level 3 Two weeks (14 days)
Cite As
McCarron, M; Karreman, E; Okpalauwaekwe, U; Henderson, R; Reeder, B; Muhajarine, N; Neudorf, C; Groot, G; Miller, L; Howell-Spooner, B. Which public health interventions are (most) effective in reducing the burden of COVID-19 disease in predominately OECD countries? 2021 Jan 11; Document no.: PH111001 RR. In: COVID-19 Rapid Evidence Reviews [Internet]. SK: SK COVID Evidence Support Team, c2020. 54 p. (CEST rapid review report)
Related Documents
Documents
Less detail

10 records – page 1 of 1.