Abstract
Background Even when resting pulse oximetry is normal in the patient with acute Covid-19, hypoxia can manifest on exertion. We sought to summarise the literature on the performance of different rapid tests for exertional desaturation.
Research question What tests have been formally evaluated for the rapid assessment of exertional hypoxia? What is the evidence for their accuracy, practicability and safety in the context of suspected acute Covid-19? To what extent will these tests help identify patients with evidence of either silent or hidden hypoxia leading to earlier recognition of those at risk of severe outcomes?
Method We aim to review three independent searches of AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE MEDLINE, Cochrane and PubMed using LitCovid, Scholar and Google databases until 24th September 2020. Screening, data abstraction, and quality appraisal of full-text papers will be completed independently by two reviewers including a topic expert and a review expert. Studies will be tabulated and assessed for risk of bias using QUADAS 2 tool.
Discussion This rapid review aims to produce key findings relevant to the assessment of exertional desaturation in patients with suspected Covid-19. Establishing a validated tool to assess exertional desaturation will help to ensure that future research on this topic can be undertaken in a consistent way. An exertional desaturation test should be used in combination with a comprehensive clinical evaluation and only on patients whose resting oximetry reading is 96% or above unless in a supervised care setting. It should be terminated if the patient experiences adverse effects.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
AK is funded by an NIHR Academic Clinical Fellowship. TG's research is funded from the following sources: National Institute for Health Research (BRC-1215-20008), ESRC (ES/V010069/1), and Wellcome Trust (WT104830MA).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
N/A
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data referred to in this manuscript is available.
