Search

The article presents the results of a study which compared the effectiveness and safety of anti-infective coating materials 5-fluorouracil and chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine in preventing colonization in central venous catheters. According to the authors, 5-fluorouracil was more efficient in controlling incidence of catheter colonization than chlorhexidine and silver sulfadiazine. They add that catheter-related bloodstream infection did not occur when 5-fluorouracil was used while two episodes occurred using chlorhexidine/silver sulfadizine group.

The majority of nosocomial bloodstream infections in critically ill patients originate from an infected central venous catheter (CVC). Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) cause significant morbidity and mortality and increase the cost of care. The most frequent causative organisms for CRBSI are coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNSs), Staphylococcus aureus, enterococci, and Candida species. The path to infection frequently includes migration of skin organisms at the insertion site into the cutaneous catheter tract, resulting in microbial colonization of the catheter tip and formation of biofilm. Evidence-based strategies for the prevention of CRBSI include behavioral and educational interventions, effective skin antisepsis coupled with maximum barrier precautions, the use of antiseptic dressings, and the use of antiseptic or antibiotic impregnated catheters. Achieving and maintaining very low rates of CRBSI requires a multidisciplinary approach involving the entire health care team, the use of novel technologies in patients with the highest risk of CRBSI, and frequent reeducation of staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the complications associated with airway management in the intensive care unit in a significant number of patients. Among the problems encountered were difficult intubations, esophageal intubations and pulmonary aspiration. Researchers found that there was a significant correlation between the presence of hypotension at the time of intubation and cardiac arrest.

The author stresses the importance of anesthesiologists in managing airway emergencies in the intensive care unit (ICU). The assessment of risk factors for difficult intubation (DI) and difficult ventilation and the high rate of complications of emergency endotracheal intubation (EEI) in critically ill patients are discussed. According to the author, studies have shown improved patient outcomes when clinicians trained in anesthesiology are the ones who perform emergent airway management.

The article focuses on an analysis of endotracheal intubation (EEI) significance in an intensive care unit (ICU) services along with risks over its usage. Topics discussed include assessment of different issues related to an intubation usage such as hypoxemia; consideration of ramped position for patient while usage of EEI services in an operating room (OR); and analysis of arterial oxygen saturation conditions with performance of EEI through direct laryngoscopy (DL).

The author offers his counterargument against the article "Counterpoint: Should an Anesthesiologist Be the Specialist of Choice in Managing the Difficult Airway in the ICU? Not Necessarily," by Kevin Doerschug published in the present issue of the journal "Chest." He explains the difference in complication rates of emergency endotracheal intubations (EEIs) between nonanesthesia and anesthesia providers. He asserts that anesthesiologists are best equipped to handle difficult airway management.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Anti-infective external coating of central venous catheters: A randomized, noninferiority trial comparing 5-fluorouracil with chlorhexidine/silver sulfadiazine in preventing catheter colonization," by J. M. Walz, R. L. Avelar, K. J. Longtine and colleagues.

Background: The rates of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in U.S. ICUs have decreased significantly, and a parallel reduction in the rates of total hospital-onset bacteremias in these units should also be expected. We report 10-year trends for total hospital-onset ICU-associated bacteremias at a tertiary-care academic medical center.Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of all positive-result blood cultures among patients admitted to seven adult ICUs for fiscal year 2005 (FY2005) through FY2014 according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Healthcare Safety Network definitions. The rate of change for primary and secondary hospital-onset BSIs was determined, as was the distribution of organisms responsible for these BSIs. Data from three medical, two general surgical, one combined neurosurgical/trauma, and one cardiac/cardiac surgery adult ICU were analyzed.Results: Across all ICUs, the rates of primary BSIs progressively fell from 2.11/1,000 patient days in FY2005 to 0.32/1,000 patient days in FY2014; an 85.0% decrease (P < .0001). Secondary BSIs also progressively decreased from 3.56/1,000 to 0.66/1,000 patient days; an 81.4% decrease (P < .0001). The decrease in BSI rates remained significant after controlling for the number of blood cultures obtained and patient acuity.Conclusions: An increased focus on reducing hospital-onset infections at the academic medical center since 2005, including multimodal multidisciplinary efforts to prevent central line-associated BSIs, pneumonia, Clostridium difficile disease, surgical site infections, and urinary tract infections, was associated with progressive and sustained decreases for both primary and secondary hospital-onset BSIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Admission rates of orthopedic patients to intensive care units are increasing. Thus, an intensivist's familiarity with specific problems associated with major joint replacement surgery is of utmost importance in order to meet the needs of this particular patient population. In this article, the authors review the most commonly encountered complications after major hip and knee arthroplasty. Perioperative risk factors for morbidity and mortality and the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of cardiopulmonary complications in this patient population are discussed. Procedure-specific complications such as fat embolism and acrylic bone cement-related issues are reviewed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nonvocal alert patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting often struggle to communicate due to inaccessible or unavailable tools for augmentative and alternative communication. Innovation of a hand-operated non-touchscreen communication system for nonvocal ICU patients was guided by design concepts including speech output, simplicity, and flexibility. A novel communication tool, the Manually Operated Communication System (MOCS), was developed for use in intensive care settings with patients unable to speak. MOCS is a speech-output technology designed for patients with manual dexterity impairments preventing legible writing. MOCS may have the potential to improve communication for nonvocal patients with limited manual dexterity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Expertise in airway management is a vital skill for any provider caring for critically ill patients. A growing body of literature has identified the stark difference in periprocedural outcomes of elective intubation in the operating room when compared with emergency intubation in the ICU. A number of strategies to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with airway management in the critically ill have been described. In this review, we provide an updated framework for airway assessment before direct laryngoscopy and video laryngoscopy, and use of newer pharmacologic agents; comment on current concepts in tracheal intubation in the ICU; and address human factors around critical decision-making during ICU airway management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immobilisation predicts adverse outcomes in patients in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU). Attempts to mobilise critically ill patients early after surgery are frequently restricted, but we tested whether early mobilisation leads to improved mobility, decreased SICU length of stay, and increased functional independence of patients at hospital discharge.Methods: We did a multicentre, international, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial in SICUs of five university hospitals in Austria (n=1), Germany (n=1), and the USA (n=3). Eligible patients (aged 18 years or older, who had been mechanically ventilated for <48 h, and were expected to require mechanical ventilation for ≥24 h) were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of a stratified block randomisation via restricted web platform to standard of care (control) or early, goal-directed mobilisation using an inter-professional approach of closed-loop communication and the SICU optimal mobilisation score (SOMS) algorithm (intervention), which describes patients' mobilisation capacity on a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 (no mobilisation) to 4 (ambulation). We had three main outcomes hierarchically tested in a prespecified order: the mean SOMS level patients achieved during their SICU stay (primary outcome), and patient's length of stay on SICU and the mini-modified functional independence measure score (mmFIM) at hospital discharge (both secondary outcomes). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01363102).Findings: Between July 1, 2011, and Nov 4, 2015, we randomly assigned 200 patients to receive standard treatment (control; n=96) or intervention (n=104). Intention-to-treat analysis showed that the intervention improved the mobilisation level (mean achieved SOMS 2·2 [SD 1·0] in intervention group vs 1·5 [0·8] in control group, p<0·0001), decreased SICU length of stay (mean 7 days [SD 5-12] in intervention group vs 10 days [6-15] in control group, p=0·0054), and improved functional mobility at hospital discharge (mmFIM score 8 [4-8] in intervention group vs 5 [2-8] in control group, p=0·0002). More adverse events were reported in the intervention group (25 cases [2·8%]) than in the control group (ten cases [0·8%]); no serious adverse events were observed. Before hospital discharge 25 patients died (17 [16%] in the intervention group, eight [8%] in the control group). 3 months after hospital discharge 36 patients died (21 [22%] in the intervention group, 15 [17%] in the control group).Interpretation: Early, goal-directed mobilisation improved patient mobilisation throughout SICU admission, shortened patient length of stay in the SICU, and improved patients' functional mobility at hospital discharge.Funding: Jeffrey and Judy Buzen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Data on the utilization of critical care services (CCSs) among patients who underwent spine fusion are rare. Given the increasing popularity of this procedure, information regarding demographics and risk factors for the use of these advanced services is needed in order to appropriately allocate resources, educate clinical staff, and identify targets for future research. Methods: We analyzed hospital discharge data of patients who underwent lumbar spine fusion in approximately 400 US hospitals between 2006 and 2010. Patient, procedure, and health care system-related demographics for those requiring CCS were compared to those who did not. Outcomes such as mortality, complications, disposition status, and hospital charges were compared among groups and risk factors for the utilization of CCS identified. Results: A total of 95 434 entries of patients who underwent posterior lumbar spine fusion surgery between 2006 and 2010 were identified. Approximately 10% of the patients required CCS. On average, patients requiring CCS were older and had a higher comorbidity burden, developed more complications, had longer hospital stays and higher costs, and were less likely to be discharged home compared to non-CCS patients. Risk factors with increased odds for requiring CCS included advanced age, increasing comorbidity burden, increasing surgical invasiveness, and presence of postoperative complications, especially pulmonary. Conclusions: Approximately, 10% of the patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery require CCS. Utilizing the present data, critical care physicians and administrators can identify patients at risk, educate clinical staff, identify targets for intervention, and allocate resources to meet the needs of this particular patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]