Search

Background: High-cost users (HCU) represent important targets for health policy interventions. Sepsis is a life-threatening syndrome that is associated with high morbidity, mortality, and economic costs to the healthcare system. We sought to estimate the effect of sepsis on being a subsequent HCU., Methods: Using linked health-administrative databases, we conducted a population-based, propensity score-weighted cohort study of adults who survived a hospitalization in Ontario, Canada between January 2016 and December 2017. Sepsis was identified using a validated algorithm. The primary outcome was being a persistent HCU after hospital discharge (in the top 5% or 1% of total health care spending for 90 consecutive days), and the proportion of follow-up time since discharge as a HCU., Results: We identified 927,057 hospitalized individuals, of whom 79,065 had sepsis. Individuals who had sepsis were more likely to be a top 5% HCU for 90 consecutive days at any time after discharge compared to those without sepsis (OR 2.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.04-2.46) and spent on average 42.3% of their follow up time as a top 5% HCU compared to 28.9% of time among those without sepsis (RR 1.46; 95% CI 1.45-1.48). Individuals with sepsis were more likely to be a top 1% HCU for 90 consecutive days compared to those without sepsis (10% versus 5.1%, OR 2.05 [95% CI 1.99-2.11]), and spent more time as a top 1% HCU (18.5% of time versus 10.8% of time, RR 1.68 [95% CI 1.65-1.70])., Conclusions: The sequelae of sepsis result in higher healthcare costs with important economic implications. After discharge, individuals who experienced sepsis are more likely to be a HCU and spend more time as a HCU compared to individuals who did not experience sepsis during hospitalization., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Canadian intensive care unit (ICU) workers., Methods: Between June and August 2020, we distributed a cross-sectional online survey of ICU workers evaluating the impact of the pandemic, coping strategies, symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD; Impact of Events Scale-Revised), and psychological distress, anxiety, and depression (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale). We performed regression analyses to determine the predictors of psychological symptoms., Results: We analyzed responses from 455 ICU workers (80% women; 67% from Ontario; 279 nurses, 69 physicians, and 107 other healthcare professionals). Respondents felt that their job put them at great risk of exposure (60%), were concerned about transmitting COVID-19 to family members (76%), felt more stressed at work (67%), and considered leaving their job (37%). Overall, 25% had probable PTSD and 18% had minimal or greater psychological distress. Nurses were more likely to report PTSD symptoms (33%) and psychological distress (23%) than physicians (5% for both) and other health disciplines professionals (19% and 14%). Variables associated with PTSD and psychological distress included female sex (beta-coefficient [B], 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 2.10 and B, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.79 to 5.78, respectively; P < 0.001 for differences in scores across groups) and perceived increased risk due to PPE shortage or inadequate PPE training (B, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.51 to 2.31 and B, 4.88; 95% CI, 3.34 to 6.43, respectively). Coping strategies included talking to friends/family/colleagues (80%), learning about COVID-19 (78%), and physical exercise (68%). Over half endorsed the following workplace strategies as valuable: hospital-provided scrubs, clear communication and protocols by hospitals, knowing their voice is heard, subsidized parking, and gestures of appreciation from leadership., Conclusions: This survey study shows that ICU workers have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic with high levels of stress and psychological burden. Respondents endorsed communication, protocols, and appreciation from leadership as helpful mitigating strategies., (© 2021. Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.)

Background: Physicians play a key role in the provision of quality end-of-life (EOL) care but often lack requisite knowledge and skills. Residency programs must ensure training in palliative/EOL care to address this gap., Objective: To guide the development of curricula, we assessed internal medicine residents' attitudes, knowledge, perceived competence, and learning priorities in EOL care., Design: Cross-sectional, self-administered, descriptive survey using a convenience sample., Subjects: Internal medicine residents at five universities across Canada., Results: Of a total of 318 internal medicine residents, 185 (58%) participated in the survey. The majority (81.7%) agreed learning from dying patients was meaningful although 48.1% felt guilty, and 40.6% a failure at least sometimes after a patient's death. Two thirds had provided care to more than 10 dying patients. Most (73%) had conducted at least 3 family meetings; 26.7% were never observed. Mean self-assessed preparedness to provide EOL care was 6.1 +/- 2 (scale 0-10) and mean comfort level 3.2 +/- 0.8 (scale 0-5). Residents reported more than average competence in 50% of EOL competencies listed with record keeping highest (3.6 +/- 0.7) and use of nonpharmacologic interventions for pain lowest (2.2 +/- 0.8). Priority for learning was rated above average for all EOL competencies listed with use of opioids for management of pain highest (4.1 +/- 0.9) and discussing euthanasia lowest (3.1 +/- 1.3)., Conclusions: Internal medicine residents value opportunities to learn from dying patients but often lack supervision and experience emotional distress. Comparing residents' attitudes, perceptions of competence, and learning priorities provide insights into why certain EOL competencies are more challenging to teach and can guide development of meaningful educational experiences.

Objective: To determine physicians' opinions and practices related to the management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome., Design: Cross-sectional mail survey., Setting: Province of Ontario, Canada., Participants: Physicians treating patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome at university-affiliated and unaffiliated hospitals., Interventions: We searched the literature and consulted experts to generate a list of potential interventions for acute respiratory distress syndrome. Eight intensive care unit physicians selected the most relevant, available, and controversial of these interventions for prevention (n = 5) and treatment (n = 30). Fourteen physicians reviewed the questionnaire before administration to ensure clarity, realism, and clinical sensibility. We asked participants to report their views on a) the efficacy of each intervention; b) published research evaluating efficacy; c) the frequency with which they use each intervention; and d) determinants of utilization., Measurements and Main Results: One hundred ten of 194 eligible physicians responded. Respondents varied considerably in their reported use of the 35 interventions. Although physicians cited published research findings as the most powerful determinant of prescribing these interventions, they were unaware of many relevant trials. Physicians also commonly cited "usual local practice" as a determinant of use, although formal practice guidelines were rarely in operation. Other variables directly associated with use of these interventions included increasing frequency of exposure to acute respiratory distress syndrome (p <.0001), increasing size of the intensive care unit in which physicians work (p =.004), and the presence of residents in the intensive care unit (p =.02)., Conclusions: Wide variation in the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome appears related to limited awareness of relevant research, conflicting interpretations of research findings, and adherence to varying local practice patterns. Given physicians' desire to tailor their practice to research findings and to practice in a manner that is consistent with their local intensive care unit colleagues, future research and educational efforts related to evidence-based protocols for the management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome might be worthwhile.