Search

Introduction Many patients who pass a spontaneous awakening trial (SAT) and spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) do not undergo extubation that day. We aimed to identify predictors of extubation on the day of passing an SBT and to develop prediction models for extubation among mechanically ventilated patients. Methods In a cohort of mechanically ventilated patients who had passed an SBT in a single, academic medical intensive care unit (ICU) from 2018 to 2019, we developed a logistic regression model for identifying predictors of extubation. Results Of 745 patients in our study, 77% were extubated the day they passed a SBT. Independent predictors of extubation included higher Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) (−2 compared to −4: odds ratio (OR) 1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.56 to 2.14), receipt of sedation on the day prior (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.74), absence of diagnosis of sepsis or septic shock (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.59 to 1), absence of neurological illness (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.96), indication for intubation of altered mental status, seizure, or agitation (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.65), and absence of hemodynamic instability or cardiac arrest (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95). Conclusion and Relevance Patients on mechanical ventilation were more likely to be extubated on the day they passed an SBT if they had higher RASS scores, received sedation the day prior, or did not have diagnosis of sepsis, neurological illness, or hemodynamic instability. Future research should attempt to identify and address modifiable risk factors for failure to extubate after passing an SBT.

Balanced crystalloids may improve outcomes compared with saline for some critically ill adults. Lower tonicity of balanced crystalloids could worsen cerebral edema in patients with intracranial pathology. The effect of balanced crystalloids versus saline on clinical outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) requires further study. We planned an

Sepsis is the dysregulated immune response to severe infection that is common and lethal among critically ill patients. Fluid administration is a common treatment for hypotension and shock in early sepsis. Fluid therapy can also cause edema and organ dysfunction. Research on the best treatment strategies for sepsis has provided insights on the optimal timing, dose, and type of fluid to treat patients with sepsis. Initial research on early goal-directed therapy for sepsis included an initial bolus of 30 ml/kg of fluid, but more recent research has supported use of smaller volumes. After initial fluid resuscitation, minimizing additional fluid administration may be beneficial, but no single measure has been established as the best method to guide ongoing fluid management in sepsis. Dynamic measures of "fluid responsiveness" can predict which patients will experience an increase in cardiac output from a fluid bolus. Use of such a measure in clinical care remains limited by applicability to patient populations and uncertainty regarding the effect on clinical outcomes. Recent research informs the effect of fluid composition on outcomes for patients with sepsis. Current data support the use of balanced crystalloids, rather than saline, and the use of crystalloids, rather than semisynthetic colloids. The role for albumin administration in sepsis remains uncertain. Future research should focus on determining the optimal volume of fluid during sepsis resuscitation, the effectiveness of measures of "fluid responsiveness" in improving outcomes, the optimal composition of crystalloid solutions, the role of albumin, and the effects of "deresuscitation" after septic shock.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mechanical ventilation in critically ill adults involves adjusting the fraction of inspired oxygen to maintain arterial oxygen saturation. The oxygen-saturation target that will optimize clinical outcomes in this patient population remains unknown. METHODS: In a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, cluster-crossover trial conducted in the emergency department and medical intensive care unit at an academic center, we assigned adults who were receiving mechanical ventilation to a lower target for oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (Spo(2)) (90%; goal range, 88 to 92%), an intermediate target (94%; goal range, 92 to 96%), or a higher target (98%; goal range, 96 to 100%). The primary outcome was the number of days alive and free of mechanical ventilation (ventilator-free days) through day 28. The secondary outcome was death by day 28, with data censored at hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 2541 patients were included in the primary analysis. The median number of ventilator-free days was 20 (interquartile range, 0 to 25) in the lower-target group, 21 (interquartile range, 0 to 25) in the intermediate-target group, and 21 (interquartile range, 0 to 26) in the higher-target group (P = 0.81). In-hospital death by day 28 occurred in 281 of the 808 patients (34.8%) in the lower-target group, 292 of the 859 patients (34.0%) in the intermediate-target group, and 290 of the 874 patients (33.2%) in the higher-target group. The incidences of cardiac arrest, arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, stroke, and pneumothorax were similar in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among critically ill adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, the number of ventilator-free days did not differ among groups in which a lower, intermediate, or higher Spo(2) target was used. (Supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; PILOT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03537937.)

Background: Hypoxemia is common during tracheal intubation in intensive care units. To prevent hypoxemia during intubation, 2 methods of delivering oxygen between induction and laryngoscopy have been proposed: bag-mask ventilation and supplemental oxygen delivered by nasal cannula without ventilation (apneic oxygenation). Whether one of these approaches is more effective for preventing hypoxemia during intubation of critically ill patients is unknown. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of data from 138 patients enrolled in 2, consecutive randomized trials of airway management in an academic intensive care unit. A total of 61 patients were randomized to receive bag-mask ventilation in a trial comparing bag-mask ventilation to none, and 77 patients were randomized to receive 100% oxygen at 15 L/min by nasal cannula in a trial comparing apneic oxygenation to none. Using multivariable linear regression accounting for age, body mass index, severity of illness, and oxygen saturation at induction, we compared patients assigned to bag-mask ventilation with those assigned to apneic oxygenation regarding lowest oxygen saturations from induction to 2 min after intubation. Results: Patients assigned to bag-mask ventilation and apneic oxygenation were similar at baseline. The median lowest oxygen saturation was 96% (interquartile range [IQR] 89%-100%) in the bag-mask ventilation group and 92% (IQR 84%-99%) in the apneic oxygenation group. After adjustment for prespecified confounders, bag-mask ventilation was associated with a higher lowest oxygen saturation compared to apneic oxygenation (mean difference, 4.2%; 95% confidence interval, 0.7%-7.8%; P = .02). The incidence of severe hypoxemia (oxygen saturation

Background Decannulation from venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) at the earliest and safest possible time may improve outcomes and reduce cost. Yet, no prospective studies have compared weaning strategies for liberation from ECMO. Research Question Is a protocolized daily assessment of readiness to liberate from venovenous ECMO safe and feasible? Study Design and Methods We conducted a prospective, single-arm safety and feasibility study of a protocol for daily assessment of readiness to liberate from venovenous ECMO among consecutive adult patients receiving venovenous ECMO across four ICUs at a single center between June 20, 2020, and November 24, 2020. The ECMO-free protocol included three phases: (1) the safety screening, (2) non-ECMO F io 2 titration, and (3) the ECMO-free trial. Enrollment, interventions, and data collection were performed prospectively by trained study staff. Results Twenty-six patients received the ECMO-free protocol on 385 patient-days. The safety screening was passed during a total of 59 ECMO-free daily assessments (15.3%) among 20 patients. Every passed safety screening proceeded to an ECMO-free trial. Twenty-eight passed ECMO-free trials (47.5%) occurred among 16 patients (61.5%). No missed safety screenings, protocol deviations, or adverse events occurred. Of the 16 patients who passed an ECMO-free trial, 14 patients (87.5%) were decannulated. Among decannulated patients, 12 patients (85.7%) were decannulated on the same day as a passed ECMO-free trial, 6 patients (42.9%) were decannulated on the first day that they passed an ECMO-free trial, and 6 patients (42.9%) passed an ECMO-free trial at least twice consecutively before decannulation. The median time from first passed ECMO-free trial to decannulation was 2 days (interquartile range, 0-3 days). Interpretation The ECMO-free protocol is feasible and may identify patients for decannulation earlier than gradual approaches to weaning.

Oxygen supplementation is one of the most common interventions in critically ill patients. Despite over a century of data suggesting both beneficial and detrimental effects of supplemental oxygen, optimal arterial oxygenation targets in adult patients remain unclear. Laboratory animal studies have consistently showed that exposure to a high Fi(O(2)) causes respiratory failure and early death. Human autopsy studies from the 1960s purported to provide histologic evidence of pulmonary oxygen toxicity in the form of diffuse alveolar damage. However, concomitant ventilator-induced lung injury and/or other causes of acute lung injury may explain these findings. Although some observational studies in general populations of critically adults showed higher mortality in association with higher oxygen exposures, this finding has not been consistent. For some specific populations, such as those with cardiac arrest, studies have suggested harm from targeting supraphysiologic Pa(O(2)) levels. More recently, randomized clinical trials of arterial oxygenation targets in narrower physiologic ranges were conducted in critically ill adult patients. Although two smaller trials came to opposite conclusions, the two largest of these trials showed no differences in clinical outcomes in study groups that received conservative versus liberal oxygen targets, suggesting that either strategy is reasonable. It is possible that some strategies are of benefit in some subpopulations, and this remains an important ongoing area of research. Because of the ubiquity of oxygen supplementation in critically ill adults, even small treatment effects could have a large impact on a global scale.

This review article summarizes current scientific evidence regarding the treatment of sepsis. We highlight recent advances in sepsis management with a focus on antibiotics, fluids, vasopressors, and adjunctive therapies such as corticosteroids and renal replacement therapy.

PurposeThe Balanced versus Saline Trialists (BEST) -Living Study is an ongoing living systematic review with aggregated and individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) from eligible trials that assessed the effects of using balanced solutions compared with saline in critically ill adults. We herein present the search strategies for the BEST-Living Study and provide details for future analysis and presentation.MethodsThe report will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Individual Participant Data (PRISMA-IPD) recommendations. Search was performed in Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). The primary endpoint will be hospital mortality, which will be analyzed using a Bayesian hierarchical model. Secondary endpoints include nurvival until longest follow-up available, use of kidney replacement therapy, and intensive care unit and hospital length-of-stay. Details on the analysis plan are provided in this statistical analysis plan.ConclusionThe study will provide the most up-to-date and comprehensive assessment using the best evidence available for the use of balanced solutions in critically ill patients.ApprovalsThe undersigned and all authors have reviewed this plan and approve it as final. They find it to be consistent with the requirements of the protocol as it applies to their respective areas. They also find it to be compliant with ICH-E9 principles and, in particular, confirm that this analysis plan was final prior to any analysis of the aggregated data.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review describes the learning healthcare system paradigm, recent examples, and future directions. Patients, clinicians, and health systems frequently encounter decisions between available treatments, technologies, and healthcare delivery methods with little or no evidence about the comparative effectiveness and safety of the available options. Learning healthcare systems endeavor to recognize such knowledge gaps, integrate comparative effectiveness research – including clinical trials – into clinical care to address the knowledge gaps, and seamlessly implement the results into practice to improve care and patient outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies comparing the effectiveness of diagnostic tests and treatments, using information technology to identify patients likely to experience an outcome or benefit from an intervention, and evaluating models of healthcare delivery have demonstrated how a learning healthcare system approach can reduce arbitrary variation in care, decrease cost, and improve patient outcomes. SUMMARY: Learning healthcare systems have the potential to answer questions of importance to patients, clinicians, and health system leaders, improve efficiency of healthcare delivery, and improve patient outcomes. Achieving this goal will require realignment of the culture around clinical care, institutional and federal investment, expanded stakeholder engagement, tailored ethical and regulatory guidance, and methodologic advances in information technology and biostatistics.

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine if balanced crystalloids compared with saline improve outcomes in critically ill adults admitted with low plasma bicarbonate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of the Isotonic Solutions and Major Adverse Renal Events Trial (SMART). We included patients who presented to the Emergency Department with a first measured plasma bicarbonate less than 20mmol/L. Among these patients, we compared the effect of balanced crystalloid versus saline on the primary outcome of major adverse kidney events within 30 days (MAKE30), defined as a composite of death, new renal-replacement therapy, or persistent renal dysfunction (final inpatient creatinine ≥ 200% baseline). Secondary outcomes included 30 day in-hospital mortality, receipt of new RRT, persistent renal dysfunction, incident AKI, and vasopressor-free days. RESULTS: Among the 2029 patients with an initial plasma bicarbonate concentration < 20 mmol/L, there was no difference in the incidence of MAKE30 between those assigned to balanced crystalloid versus saline (21.8% vs 21.3%; P = 0.93). Secondary outcomes were similar between the balanced crystalloid and saline groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among critically ill adults presenting to the Emergency Department, initial plasma bicarbonate concentration does not appear to be a useful marker to guide the selection of balanced crystalloid versus saline.

Background Whether the composition of intravenous crystalloid solutions affects outcomes in adults with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) remains unknown. Therefore, we determined whether the use of saline is associated with a lower risk of disability and death in patients with aSAH compared with balanced crystalloids. Methods We conducted a post hoc subgroup analysis of SMART (Isotonic S olutions and M ajor A dverse R enal Events T rial), a pragmatic, unblinded, cluster‐randomized, multiple‐crossover clinical trial that enrolled 15 802 adults between June 2015 and April 2017. We compared IV administration of saline to balanced crystalloids in consecutively enrolled patients with aSAH aged 18 years or older whose ruptured aneurysm was procedurally secured at a single academic center in the United States. The primary outcome was the score on the modified Rankin scale (range, 0 [no symptoms]–6 [death]) at 90 days obtained from a prospective institutional stroke registry. Secondary outcome included death by 90 days. Logistic or proportional odds regression models were used to test for between‐group differences adjusted for age, hypertension, aSAH grade, and procedure type. Results Of the 79 patients with aSAH procedurally treated during the Isotonic Solutions and Major Adverse Renal Events Trial study period, 78 were enrolled (median age, 58 years; interquartile range, 49–64.5; 64% female), with 41 (53%) assigned to saline and 37 (47%) to balanced crystalloids. Plasma‐Lyte was the primary balanced crystalloid used. Among 72 patients with 90‐day modified Rankin scale assessment, the adjusted common odds ratio, for the modified Rankin scale was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.28–1.63; P =0.39), with values P =0.02). Conclusions Among procedurally treated patients with aSAH, the risk of disability or death at 90 days did not significantly differ between saline and balanced crystalloids. Death occurred less frequently with saline than balanced crystalloids.

IntroductionAntibiotics are time-critical in the management of sepsis. When infectious organisms are unknown, patients are treated with empiric antibiotics to include coverage for gram-negative organisms, such as antipseudomonal cephalosporins and penicillins. However, in observational studies, some antipseudomonal cephalosporins (eg, cefepime) are associated with neurologic dysfunction while the most common antipseudomonal penicillin (piperacillin–tazobactam) is associated with acute kidney injury (AKI). No randomised control trials have compared these regimens. This manuscript describes the protocol and analysis plan for a trial designed to compare the effects of antipseudomonal cephalosporins and antipseudomonal penicillins among acutely ill patients receiving empiric antibiotics.Methods and analysisThe Antibiotic Choice On ReNal outcomes trial is a prospective, single-centre, non-blinded randomised trial being conducted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. The trial will enrol 2500 acutely ill adults receiving gram-negative coverage for treatment of infection. Eligible patients are randomised 1:1 to receive cefepime or piperacillin–tazobactam on first order entry of a broad-spectrum antibiotic covering gram-negative organisms. The primary outcome is the highest stage of AKI and death occurring between enrolment and 14 days after enrolment. This will be compared between patients randomised to cefepime and randomised to piperacillin–tazobactam using an unadjusted proportional odds regression model. The secondary outcomes are major adverse kidney events through day 14 and number of days alive and free of delirium and coma in 14 days after enrolment. Enrolment began on 10 November 2021 and is expected to be completed in December 2022.Ethics and disseminationThe trial was approved by the Vanderbilt University Medical Center institutional review board (IRB#210591) with a waiver of informed consent. Results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences.Trial registration numberNCT05094154.

Purpose Limited data are available on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in patients with severe hypoxemic respiratory failure from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods We examined the clinical features and outcomes of 190 patients treated with ECMO within 14 days of ICU admission, using data from a multicenter cohort study of 5122 critically ill adults with COVID-19 admitted to 68 hospitals across the United States. To estimate the effect of ECMO on mortality, we emulated a target trial of ECMO receipt versus no ECMO receipt within 7 days of ICU admission among mechanically ventilated patients with severe hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2

Background: Despite the rapid integration of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) into intensive care units over the past decade, established programs for training critical care clinicians to provide ECMO are lacking. Objective: To evaluate the development and implementation of a multidisciplinary ECMO training program for the rapid deployment of ECMO training for a high volume of critical care clinicians. Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study examining a program for rapid training of multiple disciplines of critical care clinicians to deliver ECMO during the implementation of ECMO services across the intensive care units of an academic tertiary care center between October 2018 and January 2019. The multidisciplinary ECMO training program included didactic and simulation-based teaching and emphasized new, universal clinical protocols to improve consistency of care across the institution. Pre- and post-program written examinations evaluated knowledge acquisition, and an electronically distributed program evaluation assessed perceptions of content and delivery. Results: Among the 97 clinicians who completed the program, 49 (51%) were physicians and 48 (49%) were advanced practice providers from the departments of surgery (n = 42), medicine (n = 29), and anesthesia (n = 26). There was a significant difference in knowledge about ECMO between the pre- and post-program examination score (median [interquartile range] 70% [60–80%] vs. 90% [80–90%], respectively, P

Refractory hypoxemia can occur in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome from COVID-19 despite support with venovenous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Parallel ECMO circuits can be used to increase physiologic support. We report our clinical experience using ECMO circuits in parallel for select patients with persistent severe hypoxemia despite the use of a single ECMO circuit.We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome who received VV-ECMO with an additional circuit in parallel at Vanderbilt University Medical Center between March 1, 2020, and March 1, 2022. We report demographic characteristics and clinical characteristics including ECMO settings, mechanical ventilator settings, use of adjunctive therapies, and arterial blood gas results after initial cannulation, before and after receipt of a second ECMO circuit in parallel, and before removal of the circuit in parallel, and outcomes.Of 84 patients with COVID-19 who received VV-ECMO during the study period, 22 patients (26.2%) received a circuit in parallel. The median duration of ECMO was 40.0 days (interquartile range, 31.6-53.1 days), of which 19.0 days (interquartile range, 13.0-33.0 days) were spent with a circuit in parallel. Of the 22 patients who received a circuit in parallel, 16 (72.7%) survived to hospital discharge and 6 (27.3%) died before discharge.In select patients, the additional use of an ECMO circuit in parallel can increase ECMO blood flow and improve oxygenation while allowing for lung-protective mechanical ventilation and excellent outcomes.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has increased the demand for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and introduced distinct challenges to patient selection for ECMO. Standardized processes for patient selection amidst resource limitations are lacking, and data on ECMO consults are underreported. We retrospectively reviewed consecutive adult ECMO consults for acute respiratory failure received at a single academic medical center from April 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, and evaluated the implementation of a multidisciplinary selection committee (ECMO Council) and standardized framework for patient selection for ECMO. During the 334-day period, there were 202 total ECMO consults; 174 (86.1%) included a diagnosis of COVID-19. Among all consults, 157 (77.7%) were declined and 41 (20.3%) resulted in the initiation of ECMO. Frequent reasons for decline included the presence of multiple relative contraindications (n = 33), age greater than 60 years (n = 32), and resource limitations (n = 27). The ECMO Council deliberated on every case in which an absolute contraindication was not present (n = 96) via an electronic teleconference platform. Utilizing multidisciplinary consensus together with a standardized process for patient selection in ECMO is feasible during a pandemic and may be reliably exercised over time. Whether such an approach is feasible at other centers remains unknown.

The ORCHID (Outcomes Related to COVID-19 treated with Hydroxychloroquine among In-patients with symptomatic Disease) trial is a multicenter, blinded, randomized trial of hydroxychloroquine versus placebo for the treatment of adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). This document provides the rationale and background for the trial and highlights key design features. We discuss five novel challenges to the design and conduct of a large, multicenter, randomized trial during a pandemic, including 1) widespread, off-label use of the study drug before the availability of safety and efficacy data; 2) the need to adapt traditional procedures for documentation of informed consent during an infectious pandemic; 3) developing a flexible and robust Bayesian analysis incorporating significant uncertainty about the disease, outcomes, and treatment; 4) obtaining indistinguishable drug and placebo without delaying enrollment; and 5) rapidly obtaining administrative and regulatory approvals. Our goals in describing how the ORCHID trial progressed from study conception to enrollment of the first patient in 15 days are to inform the development of other high-quality, multicenter trials targeting COVID-19. We describe lessons learned to improve the efficiency of future clinical trials, particularly in the setting of pandemics. The ORCHID trial will provide high-quality, clinically relevant data on the safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 among hospitalized adults.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04332991).

Preventing, treating, and promoting recovery from critical illness due to pulmonary disease are foundational goals of the critical care community and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Decades of clinical research in acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute respiratory failure, pneumonia, and sepsis have yielded improvements in supportive care, which have translated into improved patient outcomes. Novel therapeutics have largely failed to translate from promising pre-clinical findings into improved patient outcomes in late-phase clinical trials. Recent advances in personalized medicine, "big data", causal inference using observational data, novel clinical trial designs, pre-clinical disease modeling, and understanding recovery from acute illness promise to transform the methods of pulmonary and critical care clinical research. To assess the current state, research priorities, and future directions for adult pulmonary and critical care research, the NHLBI assembled a multidisciplinary working group of investigators. This working group identified recommendations for future research, including: (1) focusing on understanding the clinical, physiological, and biological underpinnings of heterogeneity in syndromes, diseases, and treatment-response with the goal of developing targeted, personalized interventions; (2) optimizing pre-clinical models by incorporating comorbidities, co-interventions, and organ support; (3) developing and applying novel clinical trial designs; and (4) advancing mechanistic understanding of injury and recovery in order to develop and test interventions targeted at achieving long-term improvements in the lives of patients and families. Specific areas of research are highlighted as especially promising for making advances in pneumonia, acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, and acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Mortality historically has been the primary outcome of choice for acute and critical care clinical trials. However, undue reliance on mortality can limit the scope of trials that can be performed. Large sample sizes are usually needed for trials powered for a mortality outcome, and focusing solely on mortality fails to recognize the importance that reducing morbidity can have on patients' lives. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for rapid, efficient trials to rigorously evaluate new therapies for hospitalized patients with acute lung injury. Oxygen-free days (OFDs) is a novel outcome for clinical trials that is a composite of mortality and duration of new supplemental oxygen use. It is designed to characterize recovery from acute lung injury in populations with a high prevalence of new hypoxemia and supplemental oxygen use. In these populations, OFDs captures two patient-centered consequences of acute lung injury: mortality and hypoxemic lung dysfunction. Power to detect differences in OFDs typically is greater than that for other clinical trial outcomes, such as mortality and ventilator-free days. OFDs is the primary outcome for the Fourth Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV-4) Host Tissue platform, which evaluates novel therapies targeting the host response to COVID-19 among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 and new hypoxemia. This article outlines the rationale for use of OFDs as an outcome for clinical trials, proposes a standardized method for defining and analyzing OFDs, and provides a framework for sample size calculations using the OFD outcome.

Purpose/Background: Pharmacists have been shown to play an important role in the medication management of critically ill patients. Pharmacist interventions in the care of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have not been quantitatively described. Methodology: A single center, retrospective, observational study was conducted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. All adult patients admitted to the COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) or Medical ICU with a COVID-19 diagnosis between March 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, were included. All interventions made by pharmacists were documented electronically, collected, categorized, and analyzed. The primary outcome of this study was the median number of interventions by pharmacists per patient. The secondary outcome was the number of different types of interventions performed. Results: A total of 768 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 63 years old; 63% of patients were male and 71% were Caucasian. Median hospital length of stay (LOS) was 12 days (interquartile range (IQR) 7-21) and ICU LOS was 5 days (IQR 1-11). The median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 4 (IQR 2-7) and Charlson Comorbidity Index was 3 (IQR 2-5). Mortality at 60 days occurred in 352 patients (46%). Pharmacists performed a total of 7027 interventions for 655 patients with a median number of pharmacist interventions per patient of 6 (IQR 3-14). The most common pharmacist interventions were medication discontinuation (24%), completion of components of the ICU liberation bundle (19%), medication dose adjustment (18%), therapeutic drug monitoring (15%), and medication initiation (10%). Conclusions: Pharmacists made multiple interventions related to medication use and management in critically ill patients with COVID-19. This study adds important information of the evolving role clinical pharmacists play in the care of critical illness, specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic.

IntroductionAmong critically ill patients undergoing orotracheal intubation in the emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU), failure to visualise the vocal cords and intubate the trachea on the first attempt is associated with an increased risk of complications. Two types of laryngoscopes are commonly available: direct laryngoscopes and video laryngoscopes. For critically ill adults undergoing emergency tracheal intubation, it remains uncertain whether the use of a video laryngoscope increases the incidence of successful intubation on the first attempt compared with the use of a direct laryngoscope.Methods and analysisTheDirEct versusVIdeo LaryngosCopE(DEVICE) trial is a prospective, multicentre, non-blinded, randomised trial being conducted in 7 EDs and 10 ICUs in the USA. The trial plans to enrol up to 2000 critically ill adults undergoing orotracheal intubation with a laryngoscope. Eligible patients are randomised 1:1 to the use of a video laryngoscope or a direct laryngoscope for the first intubation attempt. The primary outcome is successful intubation on the first attempt. The secondary outcome is the incidence of severe complications between induction and 2 min after intubation, defined as the occurrence of one or more of the following: severe hypoxaemia (lowest oxygen saturation Ethics and disseminationThe trial protocol was approved with waiver of informed consent by the single institutional review board at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Human Research Protection Office of the Department of Defense. The results will be presented at scientific conferences and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05239195).

Objective To determine whether surge conditions were associated with increased mortality. Design Multicenter cohort study. Setting U.S. ICUs participating in STOP-COVID. Patients Consecutive adults with COVID-19 admitted to participating ICUs between March 4 and July 1, 2020. Interventions None Measurements and Main Results The main outcome was 28-day in-hospital mortality. To assess the association between admission to an ICU during a surge period and mortality, we used two different strategies: (1) an inverse probability weighted difference-in-differences model limited to appropriately matched surge and non-surge patients and (2) a meta-regression of 50 multivariable difference-in-differences models (each based on sets of randomly matched surge- and non-surge hospitals). In the first analysis, we considered a single surge period for the cohort (March 23 – May 6). In the second, each surge hospital had its own surge period (which was compared to the same time periods in matched non-surge hospitals). Our cohort consisted of 4342 ICU patients (average age 60.8 [sd 14.8], 63.5% men) in 53 U.S. hospitals. Of these, 13 hospitals encountered surge conditions. In analysis 1, the increase in mortality seen during surge was not statistically significant (odds ratio [95% CI]: 1.30 [0.47-3.58], p = .6). In analysis 2, surge was associated with an increased odds of death (odds ratio 1.39 [95% CI, 1.34-1.43], p Conclusions Admission to an ICU with COVID-19 in a hospital that is experiencing surge conditions may be associated with an increased odds of death. Given the high incidence of COVID-19, such increases would translate into substantial excess mortality.

IMPORTANCE: For critically ill adults undergoing emergency tracheal intubation, failure to intubate the trachea on the first attempt occurs in up to 20% of cases and is associated with severe hypoxemia and cardiac arrest. Whether using a tracheal tube introducer (“bougie”) increases the likelihood of successful intubation compared with using an endotracheal tube with stylet remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of use of a bougie vs an endotracheal tube with stylet on successful intubation on the first attempt. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Bougie or Stylet in Patients Undergoing Intubation Emergently (BOUGIE) trial was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial among 1102 critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation in 7 emergency departments and 8 intensive care units in the US between April 29, 2019, and February 14, 2021; the date of final follow-up was March 14, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to use of a bougie (n = 556) or use of an endotracheal tube with stylet (n = 546). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was successful intubation on the first attempt. The secondary outcome was the incidence of severe hypoxemia, defined as a peripheral oxygen saturation less than 80%. RESULTS: Among 1106 patients randomized, 1102 (99.6%) completed the trial and were included in the primary analysis (median age, 58 years; 41.0% women). Successful intubation on the first attempt occurred in 447 patients (80.4%) in the bougie group and 453 patients (83.0%) in the stylet group (absolute risk difference, −2.6 percentage points [95% CI, −7.3 to 2.2]; P = .27). A total of 58 patients (11.0%) in the bougie group experienced severe hypoxemia, compared with 46 patients (8.8%) in the stylet group (absolute risk difference, 2.2 percentage points [95% CI, −1.6 to 6.0]). Esophageal intubation occurred in 4 patients (0.7%) in the bougie group and 5 patients (0.9%) in the stylet group, pneumothorax was present after intubation in 14 patients (2.5%) in the bougie group and 15 patients (2.7%) in the stylet group, and injury to oral, glottic, or thoracic structures occurred in 0 patients in the bougie group and 3 patients (0.5%) in the stylet group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation, use of a bougie did not significantly increase the incidence of successful intubation on the first attempt compared with use of an endotracheal tube with stylet. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03928925

Objectives Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has become integral to critical care. Data informing optimal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation education modalities are lacking. We aimed to compare the effect of high-fidelity simulation versus interactive mobile learning on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation knowledge acquisition and retention among clinicians. Design Observer-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Setting A single academic medical center. Subjects Forty-four critical care clinicians with limited extracorporeal membrane oxygenation experience. Interventions Participants were randomized to receive: 1) simulation: three high-fidelity training scenarios, 2) QuizTime: 15 total multiple-choice questions delivered over 3 weeks via mobile device, or 3) experiential: no formal training. Participants completed a survey, written knowledge examination, and simulation assessment prior to randomization, immediately following the intervention, and 4 month postintervention. Measurements and main results The primary outcome was knowledge about extracorporeal membrane oxygenation assessed by score on the immediate postintervention written examination. Secondary outcomes included performance in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation simulation postintervention and 4 months later assessed by a rater blinded to group assignment. Clinicians randomized to simulation (n = 15), QuizTime (n = 14), and experiential (n = 15) had similar baseline characteristics. Adjusting for baseline knowledge, postintervention examination scores were higher in the simulation group (90.0%; interquartile range, 85.0-90.0%) than the QuizTime group (70.0%; interquartile range, 65.0-80.0%; p = 0.0003) and the experiential group (75.0%; interquartile range, 65.0-80.0%; p = 0.001). Scores did not differ between the groups at 4 months (p > 0.05 in all analyses). In postintervention extracorporeal membrane oxygenation simulations, the simulation group demonstrated shorter time to critical action compared with QuizTime (80.0 s [interquartile range, 54.0-111.0 s] vs 300.0 s [interquartile range 85.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.02) and compared with both QuizTime (45.0 s [interquartile range, 34.0-92.5 s] vs 255.5 s [interquartile range, 102.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.008) and experiential (300.0 s [interquartile range, 58.0-300.0 s]; p = 0.009) at 4 months. Conclusions Simulation was superior to QuizTime and experiential learning with regard to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation knowledge acquisition. Further studies are needed to ascertain the effect of these interventions on knowledge retention, clinical performance, and patient outcomes.

For critically ill adults, oxygen saturation is continuously monitored using pulse oximetry (SpoSingle-center, observational study.Medical ICU at an academic medical center.Critically ill adults receiving mechanical ventilation from July 2018 to February 2021, excluding patients with COVID-19, with race documented as Black or White in the electronic medical record, who had a pair of SpoNone.We included 1,024 patients with 5,557 paired measurements within 10 minutes, of which 3,885 (70%) were within 1 minute. Of all pairs, 769 (14%) were from Black patients and 4,788 (86%) were from White patients. In analyses using a mixed-effects model, we found that across the range of SpoAmong patients with a measured Spo

Many patients who survive critical illness are left with laryngeal functional impairment from endotracheal intubation that permanently limits their recovery and quality of life. Although the risk for laryngeal injury increases with larger endotracheal tube sizes, there are no data delineating the association of smaller endotracheal tube sizes with survival or acute recovery from critical illness.To determine if smaller endotracheal tubes are noninferior to larger endotracheal tubes with respect to critical illness outcomes.This propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study included all adult patients who underwent endotracheal intubation in the emergency department or intensive care unit and received mechanical ventilation for at least 12 hours from June 2020 to November 2020 at a single tertiary referral academic medical center.Endotracheal intubation.Propensity score-matched analyses were performed with respect to the primary end point of 30-day all-cause in-hospital survival as well as the secondary end points of duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, mean peak inspiratory pressure, 30-day readmission, need for reintubation, and need for tracheostomy or gastrostomy tube placement.Overall, 523 participants (64%) were men and 291 (36%) were women. Of these, 814 patients were categorized into 3 endotracheal tube groups: small for height (n = 182), appropriate for height (n = 408), and large for height (n = 224). There was not a significant difference in 30-day all-cause in-hospital survival between groups ([HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.7] for small vs appropriate; [HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.6] for large vs appropriate). Patients with small-for-height endotracheal tubes had longer intubation durations (mean difference, 32.5 hrs [95% CI, 6.4-58.6 hrs]) compared with patients with appropriate-for-height tubes.Despite differences in intubation duration, the results of this cohort study suggest that smaller endotracheal tube sizes are not associated with impaired survival or recovery from critical illness. They support future prospective exploration of the association of smaller endotracheal tube sizes with recovery from critical illness.

IntroductionThe choice of intravenous fluid for fluid therapy in critically ill adult patients remains a matter of debate. Currently, crystalloids are used more often than colloids, with ongoing controversy over the relative efficacy and safety of buffered salt solutions (BSS) versus normal saline (0.9% sodium chloride). In 2021 two large pragmatic trials enrolling critically ill patients will add substantial new data to address this controversy. We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that will include the data from these two trials to provide clinicians with the most up to date evidence and robust evidence to guide their choice of crystalloid fluids.Methods and analysisWe will include RCTs that compare the effect of buffered salt solutions to normal saline for fluid resuscitation and/or fluid therapy in critically ill adults, on all-cause mortality and other patient centred outcomes. We will perform a search that includes the electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, and clinical trial registries. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, perform full article reviews and extract study data, with discrepancies resolved by a third reviewer. We will report study characteristics and assess risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool. We will perform Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random-effects aggregate data meta-analysis whenever it is feasible to do so. We will evaluate overall certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review and meta-analysis does not require ethical approval as it does not involve primary data collection. We will publish our results in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and present them at national and international scientific conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021243399Strengths and limitations of this review [box]This systematic review will provide up-to-date evidence to answer the focused clinical question: In adult patients who are critically ill, does administering balanced crystalloid solutions for fluid therapy reduce mortality and other patient-centered outcomes, compared with administering 0.9% sodium chloride?We will conduct a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines, searching three electronic databases, clinical trial registries and published conference abstracts, with two independent reviewers evaluating studies and extracting data.A meta-analysis will assess the primary outcome of all-cause mortality at 90 days and secondary outcomes of ventilator and vasopressor free days, renal replacement therapy use, incidence of acute kidney injury, and patient quality of life outcomes.The limitations of this review include the clinical heterogeneity of the included trials, diversity of the targeted population receiving fluid therapy, variability in the composition of balanced crystalloid solutions, and timing of initiation of study crystalloids. We will address all limitations with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework.

Rationale & Objective Acute kidney injury treated with kidney replacement therapy (AKI-KRT) occurs frequently in critically ill patients with COVID-19. We examined the clinical factors that determine kidney recovery in this population. Study Design Multicenter cohort study. Setting & Participants 4221 adults with COVID-19 not receiving kidney replacement therapy who were admitted to intensive care units at 68 US hospitals with COVID-19 from March 1 to June 22, 2020 (the “ICU cohort”). Among these, 876 developed AKI-KRT after admission to the ICU (the “AKI-KRT subcohort”). Exposure(s) The ICU cohort was analyzed using AKI severity as the exposure. For the AKI-KRT subcohort, exposures included demographics, comorbidities, initial mode of KRT, and markers of illness severity at the time of dialysis initiation. Outcome(s) The outcome for the ICU cohort was estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at hospital discharge. A three-level outcome including death, kidney nonrecovery, and kidney recovery at discharge, was analyzed for the AKI-KRT subcohort. Analytical approach The ICU cohort was characterized using descriptive analyses. The AKI-KRT subcohort was characterized with both descriptive analyses and multinomial logistic regression to assess factors associated with kidney nonrecovery while accounting for death. Results Among a total of 4221 patients in the ICU cohort, 2361 (56%) developed AKI, including 876 (21%) who received KRT. More severe AKI was associated with higher mortality. Among survivors, more severe AKI was associated with an increased rate of kidney nonrecovery and lower kidney function at discharge. Among the 876 patients with AKI-KRT, 588 (67%) died, 95 (11%) had kidney nonrecovery, and 193 (22%) had kidney recovery by the time of discharge. The odds of kidney nonrecovery was greater for lower estimated GFR with odds ratios (ORs) of 2.09 (95% CI, 1.09-4.04), 4.27 (95% CI, 1.99-9.17), and 8.69 (95% CI, 3.07-24.55) for CKD GFR categories 3, 4, and 5, respectively, compared to estimated GFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Oliguria at the time of KRT initiation was also associated with nonrecovery (OR 2.10 [95% CI, 1.14-3.88] and 4.02 [95% CI, 1.72-9.39] for patients with 50-499 and, Critically ill patients with COVID-19 often develop acute kidney injury (AKI). This study of 4221 patients demonstrated that more severe AKI was associated with greater in-hospital mortality and poorer kidney function at hospital discharge. Among the 876 patients who required dialysis for AKI, almost two-thirds died. Among those who survived to discharge, about two-thirds recovered kidney function and were discharged without the need for dialysis. Lower baseline kidney function and reduced urine output were associated with non-recovery of kidney function. Identification of such predictors is important in assessing prognosis among these critically ill patients and has implications for clinical care of individuals critically ill with COVID-19.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text., OBJECTIVES: Acute respiratory distress syndrome is underrecognized in the ICU, but it remains uncertain if acute respiratory distress syndrome recognition affects evidence-based acute respiratory distress syndrome care in the modern era. We sought to determine the rate of clinician-recognized acute respiratory distress syndrome in an academic medical ICU and understand how clinician-recognized-acute respiratory distress syndrome affects clinical care and patient-centered outcomes. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Single medical ICU at an academic tertiary-care hospital. PATIENTS: Nine hundred seventy-seven critically ill adults (381 with expert-adjudicated acute respiratory distress syndrome) enrolled from 2006 to 2015. INTERVENTIONS: Clinician-recognized-acute respiratory distress syndrome was identified using an electronic keyword search of clinical notes in the electronic health record. We assessed the classification performance of clinician-recognized acute respiratory distress syndrome for identifying expert-adjudicated acute respiratory distress syndrome. We also compared differences in ventilator settings, diuretic prescriptions, and cumulative fluid balance between clinician-recognized acute respiratory distress syndrome and unrecognized acute respiratory distress syndrome. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Overall, clinician-recognized-acute respiratory distress syndrome had a sensitivity of 47.5%, specificity 91.1%, positive predictive value 77.4%, and negative predictive value 73.1% for expert-adjudicated acute respiratory distress syndrome. Among the 381 expert-adjudicated acute respiratory distress syndrome cases, we did not observe any differences in ventilator tidal volumes between clinician-recognized-acute respiratory distress syndrome and unrecognized acute respiratory distress syndrome, but clinician-recognized-acute respiratory distress syndrome patients had a more negative cumulative fluid balance (mean difference, –781 mL; 95% CI, [–1,846 to +283]) and were more likely to receive diuretics (49.3% vs 35.7%, p = 0.02). There were no differences in mortality, ICU length of stay, or ventilator-free days. CONCLUSIONS: Acute respiratory distress syndrome recognition was low in this single-center study. Although acute respiratory distress syndrome recognition was not associated with lower ventilator volumes, it was associated with differences in behaviors related to fluid management. These findings have implications for the design of future studies promoting evidence-based acute respiratory distress syndrome interventions in the ICU.

Rationale: “Target trial emulation” has been proposed as an observational method to answer comparative effectiveness questions, but it has rarely been attempted concurrently with a randomized clinical trial (RCT). Objectives: We tested the hypothesis that blinded analysts applying target trial emulation to existing observational data could predict the results of an RCT. Methods: PreVent (Preventing Hypoxemia with Manual Ventilation during Endotracheal Intubation) was a multicenter RCT examining the effects of positive-pressure ventilation during tracheal intubation on oxygen saturation and severe hypoxemia. Analysts unaware of PreVent’s results used patient-level data from three previous trials evaluating airway management interventions to emulate PreVent’s eligibility criteria, randomization procedure, and statistical analysis. After PreVent’s release, results of this blinded observational analysis were compared with those of the RCT. Difference-in-differences estimates for comparison of treatment effects between the observational analysis and the PreVent trial are reported on the absolute scale. Results: Using observational data, we were able to emulate PreVent’s randomization procedure to produce balanced groups for comparison. The lowest oxygen saturation during intubation was higher in the positive-pressure ventilation group than the no positive-pressure ventilation group in the observational analysis (n = 360; mean difference = 1.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −1.0 to 4.6) and in the PreVent trial (n = 401; mean difference = 3.9%; 95% CI = 1.4 to 6.4), though the observational analysis could not exclude no difference. Difference-in-differences estimates comparing treatment effects showed reasonable agreement for lowest oxygen saturation between the observational analysis and the PreVent trial (mean difference = −2.1%; 95% CI = −5.9 to 1.7). Positive-pressure ventilation resulted in lower rates of severe hypoxemia in both the observational analysis (risk ratio = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.93) and in the PreVent trial (risk ratio = 0.48; 95% CI = 0.30 to 0.77). The absolute reduction in the incidence of severe hypoxemia with positive-pressure ventilation was similar in the observational analysis (9.4%) and the PreVent trial (12.0%), though the difference between these estimates had wide CIs (mean difference = 2.5%; 95% CI = −8.0 to 13.6%). Conclusions: Applying target trial emulation methods to existing observational data for the evaluation of a novel intervention produced results similar to those of a randomized trial. These findings support the use of target trial emulation for comparative effectiveness research.

Background Septic shock therapies that shorten the time to physiologic and clinical recovery may result in financial savings. However, the financial implications of improving these nonmortal outcomes are not well characterized. Therefore, we quantified hospital charges associated with four outcomes: ICU length of stay, duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, duration of vasopressor use, and new renal replacement therapy. Methods This was an observational study using administrative data from a large academic hospital in the United States. The analysis included adults treated with vasopressors for septic shock in a medical ICU. Linear regression modeling with ordinary least square was used to estimate the incremental hospital charges associated with 1 day of ICU length of stay, 1 day of mechanical ventilation, 1 day of vasopressor use, and new renal replacement therapy. Results The study population included 587 adults with septic shock, including 180 (30.7%) who died in the hospital. The median charge for a septic shock hospitalization was $98,583 (interquartile range [IQR], $61,177-$136,672). Decreases in ICU length of stay, mechanical ventilation duration, and vasopressor duration of 1 day were associated with charge reductions of $15,670 (IQR, $15,023-$16,317), $15,284 (IQR, $13,566-$17,002), and $17,947 (IQR, $16,344-$19,549), respectively. Avoidance of new renal replacement therapy was associated with a charge reduction of $36,051 (IQR, $22,353-$49,750). Conclusions Septic shock therapies that reduce the duration of organ support and ICU care have the potential to lead to substantial financial savings.

One of the defining features of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is noncardiogenic pulmonary edema, resulting from increased permeability of the alveolar–capillary barrier and passage of protein-rich fluid into the interstitium and alveolar spaces. The loss of protein from the intravascular space disrupts the normal oncotic pressure differential and causes patients with ARDS to be particularly sensitive to the hydrostatic forces that correlate with intravascular volume. Conservative fluid management, in which diuretics are administered and intravenous fluid administration is minimized, may decrease hydrostatic pressure and increase serum oncotic pressure, potentially limiting the development of pulmonary edema. However, the cause of death in most patients with ARDS is multiorgan system failure, not hypoxemia, and the impact of conservative fluid management on the incidence of extrapulmonary organ failure during ARDS is unclear. These physiologic observations have led to a series of studies examining the impact of fluid management on the development of, resolution of, survival from, and long-term outcomes from ARDS. While questions remain, the current literature makes it clear that fluid management is an integral part of the care of patients with ARDS.

IMPORTANCE: Hypotension is common during tracheal intubation of critically ill adults and increases the risk of cardiac arrest and death. Whether administering an intravenous fluid bolus to critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation prevents severe hypotension, cardiac arrest, or death remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of fluid bolus administration on the incidence of severe hypotension, cardiac arrest, and death. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized clinical trial enrolled 1067 critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation with sedation and positive pressure ventilation at 11 intensive care units in the US between February 1, 2019, and May 24, 2021. The date of final follow-up was June 21, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a 500-mL intravenous fluid bolus (n = 538) or no fluid bolus (n = 527). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was cardiovascular collapse (defined as new or increased receipt of vasopressors or a systolic blood pressure