Search

Introduction Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common healthcare-associated infection in the intensive care unit (ICU). Probiotics are defined as live microorganisms that may confer health benefits when ingested. Prior randomised trials suggest that probiotics may prevent infections such as VAP and Clostridioides difficile–associated diarrhoea (CDAD). PROSPECT (Probiotics to Prevent Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial) is a multicentre, double-blinded, randomised controlled trial comparing the efficacy of the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG with usual care versus usual care without probiotics in preventing VAP and other clinically important outcomes in critically ill patients admitted to the ICU.Methods and analysis The objective of E-PROSPECT is to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of L. rhamnosus GG plus usual care versus usual care without probiotics in critically ill patients. E-PROSPECT will be performed from the public healthcare payer’s perspective over a time horizon from ICU admission to hospital discharge.We will determine probabilities of in-ICU and in-hospital events from all patients alongside PROSPECT. We will retrieve unit costs for each resource use item using jurisdiction-specific public databases, supplemented by individual site unit costs if such databases are unavailable. Direct costs will include medications, personnel costs, radiology/laboratory testing, operative/non-operative procedures and per-day hospital ‘hoteling’ costs not otherwise encompassed. The primary outcome is the incremental cost per VAP prevented between the two treatment groups. Other clinical events such as CDAD, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and in-hospital mortality will be included as secondary outcomes. We will perform pre-specified subgroup analyses (medical/surgical/trauma; age; frailty status; antibiotic use; prevalent vs no prevalent pneumonia) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses for VAP, then generate confidence intervals using the non-parametric bootstrapping approach.Ethics and dissemination Study approval for E-PROSPECT was granted by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board of McMaster University on 29 July 2019. Informed consent was obtained from the patient or substitute decision-maker in PROSPECT. The findings of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number NCT01782755; Pre-results.

Abstract Background Opioids and benzodiazepines are frequently used in the intensive care unit (ICU). Regular use and prolonged exposure to opioids in ICU patients followed by abrupt tapering or cessation may lead to iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome (IWS). IWS is well described in pediatrics, but no prospective study has evaluated this syndrome in adult ICU patients. The objective of this study was to determine the incidence of IWS caused by opioids in a critically ill adult population. This multicenter prospective cohort study was conducted at two level-1 trauma ICUs between February 2015 and September 2015 and included 54 critically ill patients. Participants were eligible if they were 18 years and older, mechanically ventilated and had received more than 72 h of regular intermittent or continuous intravenous infusion of opioids. For each enrolled patient and per each opioid weaning episode, presence of IWS was assessed by a qualified ICU physician or senior resident according to the 5th edition of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria for opioid withdrawal. Results The population consisted mostly of males (74.1%) with a median age of 50 years (25th–75th percentile 38.2–64.5). The median ICU admission APACHE II score was 22 (25th–75th percentile 12.0–28.2). The overall incidence of IWS was 16.7% (95% CI 6–27). The median cumulative opioid dose prior to weaning was higher in patients with IWS (245.7 vs. 169.4 mcg/kg, fentanyl equivalent). Patients with IWS were also exposed to opioids for a longer period of time as compared to patients without IWS (median 151 vs. 125 h). However, these results were not statistically significant. Conclusions IWS was occasionally observed in this very specific population of mechanically ventilated, critically ill ICU patients. Further studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results and identify risk factors.

Abstract Background Management of congestive heart failure (CHF) is dependent on clinical assessments of volume status, which are subjective and imprecise. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is useful in the diagnosis of CHF, but how POCUS findings correlate with therapy remains unknown. This study aimed to determine whether the changes in clinical evaluation of CHF with treatment are mirrored with changes in the number of B lines on lung ultrasound (LUS) and inferior vena cava (IVC) size. In this prospective observational study, investigators performed serial clinical and ultrasound assessments within 24 h of admission (T1), day 1 in hospital (T2) and within 24 h of discharge (T3). Clinical assessments included an evaluation of the jugular venous distension (JVD), hepatojugular reflux (HJR), pulmonary rales and a clinical congestion score was calculated. Ultrasound assessment included the IVC size and collapsibility, and the number of B lines in an 8-point scan. Results Fifty consecutive patients were recruited with a mean age of 71.2 years (SD 12.7). Mean clinical congestion score on admission was 5.6 (SD 1.4) and declined significantly over time to 1.3 (0.91), as did the JVP, HJR and pulmonary rales. No significant changes were found in the IVC size between T1 [1.9 (0.65)] and T3 [2.0 (0.50)] or in the IVC collapsibility index [T1 0.3 (0.19) versus T3 0.25 (0.16)]. The mean number of B lines decreased from 11 (6.1) at T1 to 8.3 (5.5) at T3, although this decrease did not reach statistical significance. Spearman correlation between JVP and HJR versus IVC collapsibility and total B lines did not yield significant results. Conclusions Clinical exam findings correlate over time during the management of CHF, whereas LUS and IVC results did not. The number of B lines did decrease with therapy, but did not reach statistical significance likely because the sampled population was small and had only mild heart failure. Further studies are warranted to further explore the use of lung ultrasound in this patient population.

Introduction The most recent Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease consensus recommends a 5-day course of corticosteroid (CS) therapy for acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations (ACOPDE). As inappropriate use of CS therapy is associated with adverse events, we implemented a peer-to-peer education intervention to improve adherence to guidelines for patients with ACOPDE admitted to a medical clinical teaching unit at a tertiary care university centre.Methods Our study was a before–after design study with a concurrent control of a 15 min peer-to-peer educational intervention targeting medical residents at the beginning of a 4-week rotation for 12 consecutive months. Another medical teaching unit within the same university network, but at a different site, served as a concurrent control. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received appropriate duration of CS therapy (5 days) for ACOPDE during the intervention period as compared with the 12-month preintervention period at the intervention and control hospitals.Results Following the intervention, there was an increase in the proportion of patients receiving appropriate duration of CS therapy (34.2% to 51.3%, p=0.02) at the intervention hospital and no significant difference at the control hospital (22.8% to 34.1%, p=0.15). This effect was maintained at the intervention hospital 3 months postintervention period.Conclusion A short peer-to-peer educational intervention targeting medical residents on a clinical teaching unit improved adherence to appropriate duration of CS therapy for ACOPDE.

INTRODUCTION:There is high variability amongst physicians' assessments of appropriate ICU admissions, which may be based on potential assessments of benefit. We aimed to examine whether opinions over benefit of ICU admissions of critically ill medical inpatients differed based on physician specialty, namely intensivists and internists. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We carried out an anonymous, web-based questionnaire survey containing 5 typical ICU cases to all ICU physicians regardless of their base specialty as well as to all internists in 3 large teaching hospitals. For each case, we asked the participants to determine if the patient was an appropriate ICU admission and to assess different parameters (e.g. baseline function, likelihood of survival to ICU discharge, etc.). Agreement was measured using kappa values. RESULTS:21 intensivists and 22 internists filled out the survey (response rate = 87.5% and 35% respectively). Predictions of likelihood of survival to ICU admission, hospital discharge and return to baseline were not significantly different between the two groups. However, agreement between individuals within each group was only slight to fair (kappa range = 0.09-0.22). There was no statistically significant difference in predicting ICU survival and prediction of survival to hospital discharge between both groups. The accuracy with which physicians predicted actual outcomes ranged between 35% and 100% and did not significantly differ between the two groups. A greater proportion of internists favoured non resuscitative measures (24.6% of intensivists and 46.9% internists [p = 0.002]). CONCLUSION:In a case-based survey, physician specialty base did not affect assessments of ICU admission benefit or accuracy in outcome prediction, but resulted in a statistically significant difference in level of care assignments. Of note, significant disagreement amongst individuals in each group was found.

Objective. To determine the process and structure of Morbidity and Mortality Conference (MMC) and to provide guidelines for conducting MMC. Methods. Using a narrative systematic review methodology, literature search was performed from January 1, 1950, to October 2, 2012. Original articles in adult population were included. MMC process and structure, as well as baseline study demographics, main results, and conclusions, were collected. Results. 38 articles were included. 10/38 (26%) pertained to medical subspecialties and 25/38 (66%) to surgical subspecialties. 15/38 (40%) were prospective, 14/38 (37%) retrospective, 7/38 (18%) interventional, and 2/38 (5%) cross-sectional. The goals were quality improvement and education. Of the 10 medical articles, MMC were conducted monthly 60% of the time. Cases discussed included complications (60%), deaths (30%), educational values (30%), and system issues (40%). Recommendations for improvements were made frequently (90%). Of the 25 articles in surgery, MMCs were weekly (60% of the time). Cases covered mainly complications (72%) and death (52%), with fewer cases dedicated to education (12%). System issues and recommendations were less commonly reported. Conclusion. Fundamental differences existed in medical versus surgical departments in conducting MMC, although the goals remained similar. We provide a schematic guideline for MMC through a summary of existing literature.

Background. Medical emergency teams (METs) or rapid response teams (RRTs) facilitate early intervention for clinically deteriorating hospitalized patients. In healthcare systems where financial resources and intensivist availability are limited, the establishment of such teams can prove challenging. Objectives. A low-cost, ward-based response system was implemented on a medical clinical teaching unit in a Montreal tertiary care hospital. A prospective before/after study was undertaken to examine the system’s impact on time to intervention, code blue rates, and ICU transfer rates. Results. Ninety-five calls were placed for 82 patients. Median time from patient decompensation to intervention was 5 min (IQR 1–10), compared to 3.4 hours (IQR 0.6–12.4) before system implementation (p