Search

Context: The association of an adult tele-intensive care unit (ICU) intervention with hospital mortality, length of stay, best practice adherence, and preventable complications for an academic medical center has not been reported.Objective: To quantify the association of a tele-ICU intervention with hospital mortality, length of stay, and complications that are preventable by adherence to best practices.Design, Setting, and Patients: Prospective stepped-wedge clinical practice study of 6290 adults admitted to any of 7 ICUs (3 medical, 3 surgical, and 1 mixed cardiovascular) on 2 campuses of an 834-bed academic medical center that was performed from April 26, 2005, through September 30, 2007. Electronically supported and monitored processes for best practice adherence, care plan creation, and clinician response times to alarms were evaluated.Main Outcome Measures: Case-mix and severity-adjusted hospital mortality. Other outcomes included hospital and ICU length of stay, best practice adherence, and complication rates.Results: The hospital mortality rate was 13.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9%-15.4%) during the preintervention period compared with 11.8% (95% CI, 10.9%-12.8%) during the tele-ICU intervention period (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.40 [95% CI, 0.31-0.52]). The tele-ICU intervention period compared with the preintervention period was associated with higher rates of best clinical practice adherence for the prevention of deep vein thrombosis (99% vs 85%, respectively; OR, 15.4 [95% CI, 11.3-21.1]) and prevention of stress ulcers (96% vs 83%, respectively; OR, 4.57 [95% CI, 3.91-5.77], best practice adherence for cardiovascular protection (99% vs 80%, respectively; OR, 30.7 [95% CI, 19.3-49.2]), prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (52% vs 33%, respectively; OR, 2.20 [95% CI, 1.79-2.70]), lower rates of preventable complications (1.6% vs 13%, respectively, for ventilator-associated pneumonia [OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.09-0.23] and 0.6% vs 1.0%, respectively, for catheter-related bloodstream infection [OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.27-0.93]), and shorter hospital length of stay (9.8 vs 13.3 days, respectively; hazard ratio for discharge, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.33-1.56]). The results for medical, surgical, and cardiovascular ICUs were similar.Conclusion: In a single academic medical center study, implementation of a tele-ICU intervention was associated with reduced adjusted odds of mortality and reduced hospital length of stay, as well as with changes in best practice adherence and lower rates of preventable complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Buprenorphine has demonstrated benefit for acute and chronic pain and various psychiatric disorders. However, many studies evaluating buprenorphine's effect on psychiatric conditions are not specific to the chronic pain population. This retrospective study was conducted to assess the impact of buprenorphine on depressive symptoms in patients with chronic pain at a Veterans Affairs healthcare facility. Adults with chronic pain started on any formulation of buprenorphine or traditional opioid (non-buprenorphine opioid) with at least two depression screenings between May 1, 2016 and November 1, 2021 were included. The primary outcome was change in depressive symptoms, measured by Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), from baseline to 6-18 months after starting therapy. Secondary outcomes included changes in Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale and mental health services utilization. Twenty-one patients were included. Median baseline PHQ-9 in the buprenorphine and traditional opioid groups were 14 and 13, respectively. Median change in PHQ-9 was -5 in the buprenorphine group and -1.5 in the traditional opioid group. Compared to traditional opioids, buprenorphine was associated with a greater reduction in depressive symptoms among Veterans with chronic pain. Although this reduction met the threshold for clinically significant improvement, further investigation is needed to evaluate the clinical relevance of these findings.

The objective of this study was to understand the effect buprenorphine rotations have on respiratory risk and other safety outcomes. This was a retrospective observational study evaluating Veterans who underwent an opioid rotation from full-agonist opioids to buprenorphine products or to alternative opioids. The primary endpoint was change in the Risk Index for Overdose or Serious Opioid-induced Respiratory Depression (RIOSORD) score from baseline to six months post-rotation. Median baseline RIOSORD scores were 26.0 and 18.0 in the Buprenorphine Group and the Alternative Opioid Group, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between groups in baseline RIOSORD score. At six months post-rotation, median RIOSORD scores were 23.5 and 23.0 in the Buprenorphine Group and Alternative Opioid Group, respectively. The difference in change in RIOSORD scores between groups was not statistically significant ( p  = 0.23). However, based on changes in RIOSORD risk class, an 11% and 0% decrease in respiratory risk was observed in the Buprenorphine and Alternative Opioid groups, respectively. This finding may be considered clinically significant given a change in risk was observed as predicted by RIOSORD score. Further research is needed to clarify the effect that opioid rotations have on respiratory depression risk and other safety outcomes.

There is wide acceptance of the concept that interdisciplinary collaboration is an essential building block for successful health-care teams. This belief is grounded in our understanding of how teams function to address complex care needs that change with acute illness or injury. This general agreement has been validated in studies that have reported favorable outcomes associated with successfully implementing interdisciplinary models of health-care delivery in non-critical care settings. The very short time frames over which the care needs of critically ill or injured adults change and the team approach taken by nearly all ICUs strongly suggest that interdisciplinary collaboration is also beneficial in this setting. In this commentary, we define interdisciplinary collaboration and share the story of how we successfully redesigned and transformed our system-wide, interdisciplinary collaborative model for delivering critical care in order to share the lessons we learned as the process evolved with those who are about to embark on a similar challenge. We anticipate that those health-care systems that successfully implement interdisciplinary collaboration will be ahead of the curve in providing high-quality care at as low a cost as possible. Such institutions will also potentially be better positioned for improving teaching and providing a better foundation for critical care research in their institutions.