3 ms·
it's not good. in on study, 24/26 of pts with non-invasive mech ventilation and 31/32 of pts with invasive ventilation died. https://www.thelancet.com/journal
by lucretian 7y ago
it's not good.
in on study, 24/26 of pts with non-invasive mech ventilation and 31/32 of pts with invasive ventilation died.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30566-3/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
note that the study demographics were skewed to the more vulnerable cohorts (avg age = 56, range = 46-67, 62% male, 48% with a comorbidity).
- alexandercrohde 7y agoWow... I had no idea it was so low. Since you seem to be knowledgeable, if ventilating isn't a big-impact intervention, what's the point of flattening the curve? Is there some other intervention that hospital is doing that actually makes a more meaningful difference that can't be done at home? Or is it maybe just psychological?
- lucretian 7y agoi'm not sure. i'm not a doctor. at minimum, flattening the curve is buying time for therapies and vaccines. that study may be overly pessimistic. elsewhere, i think i saw 50/50 survival rates for ventilated patients but i don't have a source at hand.