Search

Background: The Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) is a communication intervention that builds clinician capacity to have earlier, more values-based conversations about goals of care with patients experiencing life-limiting illness. We report the impact of its implementation on hospital wards.Methods: In this quality improvement initiative on the medical wards of two Canadian teaching hospitals, we trained physicians, nurse practitioners, and social workers in the use of the Serious Illness Conversation Guide. Between February 2017 and December 2019, we prompted trained clinicians to have serious illness conversations with hospitalized patients or their family member(s), for patients at high risk of dying. Outcomes were the number of clinicians trained, the number of conversations delivered, patient or family experience, including the extent to which they felt heard and understood, and clinician experience.Results: We trained 57 (92%) of 62 eligible clinicians. We delivered conversations to 334 (29%) of 1158 eligible patients (or family members) and documented 274 (82%) of these in the medical record. After a serious illness conversation, 80% of patients or families rated the conversations as mostly or extremely worthwhile and felt more heard and understood (+0.2 on 5-point scale, P = 0.04). The majority (95%) of clinicians agreed (some-what, mostly, or completely) that conversations could be done in an appropriate amount of time and 97% agreed (somewhat, mostly, or completely) that the Guide provided information that enhances clinical care. Interpretation: The SICP can be implemented on medical wards of hospitals and can have a positive impact on patient and clinician experience. RésuméContexte : Le Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) est une intervention de communication qui renforce la capacité du clinicien à avoir des conversations plus précoces et davantage axées sur les valeurs concernant les objectifs des soins avec les patients atteints d’une maladie limitant leur espérance de vie. Nous présentons les répercussions de sa mise en œuvre dans les services hospitaliers.Méthodologie : Dans cette initiative sur l’amélioration de la qualité dans les services médicaux de deux hôpitaux universitaires canadiens, nous avons formé des médecins, des infirmières praticiennes et des travailleurs sociaux à l’utilisation du guide de conversation sur les maladies graves. Entre février 2017 et decembre 2019, nous avons incité les cliniciens formés à avoir des conversations sur les maladies graves avec des patients hospitalisés présentant un risque élevé de décès ou des membres de leur famille. Les critères d’évaluation étaient le nombre de cliniciens formés, le nombre de conversations effectuées, l’expérience des patients ou de leur famille, y compris la mesure dans laquelle ils se sont sentis écoutés et compris, et l’expérience des cliniciens.Résultats : Nous avons formé 57 (92 %) des 62 cliniciens admissibles. Des conversations ont été réalisées auprès de 334 (29 %) des 1158 patients (ou membres de la famille) admissibles et 274 (82 %) de ces conversations ont été consignées dans le dossier médical. Après une conversation sur les maladies graves, 80 % des patients ou de leur famille ont évalué les conversations comme étant plutôt ou extrêmement utiles et ils se sont sentis plus écoutés et compris (+ 0,2 sur une échelle de 5 points, P = 0,04). La majorité (95 %) des cliniciens sont d’accord (quelque peu, plutôt ou complètement) sur le fait que les conversations ont pu avoir lieu dans un laps de temps approprié et 97 % sont d’accord (quelque peu, plutôt ou complètement) sur le fait que le guide fournit des renseignements qui améliorent les soins cliniques.Interprétation : Le SICP peut être mis en œuvre dans les services médicaux des hôpitaux et peut avoir des répercussions positives sur l’expérience des patients et des cliniciens.

BackgroundPoor communication with hospitalized patients facing serious, life-limiting illnesses can result in care that is not consistent with patients’ values and goals. The Serious Illness Care Program (SICP) is a communication intervention originally designed for the outpatient oncology setting that could address this practice gap. MethodsA multihospital quality improvement initiative adapted and implemented the SICP on the medical wards of four teaching hospitals in Calgary, Hamilton, Ottawa, and Montreal. The SICP consists of three main components: tools (including the Serious Illness Conversation Guide for clinicians), training for frontline clinicians to practice using the Guide, and system change to trigger and support serious illness conversations in practice. Implementation of the SICP at each site followed a phased approach: (1) Building a Foundation; (2) Planning; (3) Implementation; and (4) Sustainability. To assess the success of implementation and its impact, we developed an evaluation framework that includes process measures (e.g., number and proportion of eligible clinicians trained, number and proportion of eligible patients who received a serious illness conversation), patient-reported outcomes (including a validated, single-item “Feeling Heard and Understood” question), and clinician-reported outcomes. ConclusionBased on our adaptation and implementation efforts to date, we have found that the SICP is readily adaptable to an inpatient medical ward setting. Future manuscripts will report on the fidelity of implementation, impact on patient- and clinician-reported outcomes, and lessons learned about how to implement and sustain the program. RésuméContexteUne mauvaise communication avec les patients hospitalisés atteints d’une maladie grave qui limite leur espérance de vie peut se traduire par des soins qui ne correspondent pas à leurs valeurs et à leurs objectifs. Le Programme de soins dans le cas de maladies graves (PSMG) est une intervention de communication conçue à l’origine pour l’oncologie externe qui pourrait remédier à cette lacune dans la pratique. MéthodologieUne initiative multihospitalière visant l’amélioration de la qualité a adapté et mis en œuvre le PSMG dans les unités de soins de quatre hôpitaux universitaires situés à Calgary, à Hamilton, à Ottawa et à Montréal. Le PSMG comprend trois principaux éléments : des outils (dont le guide de conversation sur les maladies graves à l’intention des cliniciens), de la formation pour que les cliniciens de première ligne puissent s’exercer à l’aide du guide et un changement de système pour entamer et faciliter les conversations sur les maladies graves dans la pratique. À chaque endroit, la mise en œuvre du PSMG a suivi une approche progressive : 1) l’établissement d’une base; 2) la planification; 3) la mise en œuvre; 4) la durabilité. Pour évaluer le succès de la mise en œuvre et ses répercussions, nous avons créé un cadre d’évaluation qui comprend des mesures de processus (p. ex., le nombre et la proportion de cliniciens admissibles formés, le nombre et la proportion de patients admissibles qui ont eu une conversation sur les maladies graves), des résultats rapportés par les patients (dont une question validée à un seul élément « se sentir écouté et compris ») et des résultats rapportés par les cliniciens.ConclusionÀ la lumière de nos activités d’adaptation et de mise en œuvre réalisées jusqu’à maintenant, nous constatons que le PSMG est facilement adaptable à un contexte d’unité de soins pour les patients hospitalisés. Les prochains manuscrits porteront sur la fidélité de la mise en œuvre, les répercussions sur les résultats rapportés par les patients et les cliniciens et les leçons apprises sur la façon de mettre en œuvre et de maintenir le programme.

This paper reports findings from a modified World Café conducted at a palliative care professional conference in 2019, where input on tools to support advance care planning (ACP) was solicited from healthcare practitioners, managers and family members of patients. Barriers to ACP tool use included insufficient structures and resources in healthcare, death-avoidance culture and inadequate patient and family member engagement. Recommendations for tool use included clarification of roles and processes, training, mandates and monitoring, leadership support, greater reflection of diversity in tools and methods for public engagement. This paper illuminates factors to consider when implementing ACP tools in healthcare.

Awake prone positioning has been broadly utilised for non-intubated patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, but the results from published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the past year are contradictory. We aimed to systematically synthesise the outcomes associated with awake prone positioning, and evaluate these outcomes in relevant subpopulations.In this systematic review and meta-analysis, two independent groups of researchers searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs and observational studies (with a control group) of awake prone positioning in patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure published in English from Jan 1, 2020, to Nov 8, 2021. We excluded trials that included patients intubated before or at enrolment, paediatric patients (ie, younger than 18 years), or trials that did not include the supine position in the control group. The same two independent groups screened studies, extracted the summary data from published reports, and assessed the risk of bias. We used a random-effects meta-analysis to pool individual studies. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty and quality of the evidence. The primary outcome was the reported cumulative intubation risk across RCTs, and effect estimates were calculated as risk ratios (RR;95% CI). The analysis was primarily conducted on RCTs, and observational studies were used for sensitivity analyses. No serious adverse events associated with awake prone positioning were reported. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021271285.A total of 1243 studies were identified, we assessed 138 full-text articles and received the aggregated results of three unpublished RCTs; therefore, after exclusions, 29 studies were included in the study. Ten were RCTs (1985 patients) and 19 were observational studies (2669 patients). In ten RCTs, awake prone positioning compared with the supine position significantly reduced the need for intubation in the overall population (RR 0·84 [95% CI 0·72-0·97]). A reduced need for intubation was shown among patients who received advanced respiratory support (ie, high-flow nasal cannula or non-invasive ventilation) at enrolment (RR 0·83 [0·71-0·97]) and in intensive care unit (ICU) settings (RR 0·83 [0·71-0·97]) but not in patients receiving conventional oxygen therapy (RR 0·87 [0·45-1·69]) or in non-ICU settings (RR 0·88 [0·44-1·76]). No obvious risk of bias and publication bias was found among the included RCTs for the primary outcome.In patients with COVID-19-related acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure, awake prone positioning reduced the need for intubation, particularly among those requiring advanced respiratory support and those in ICU settings. Awake prone positioning should be used in patients who have acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and require advanced respiratory support or are treated in the ICU.OpenAI, Rice Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, and Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

BackgroundPoor quality communication about goals of care with seriously ill, hospitalized patients is associated with substantial discordance between prescribed medical orders for life-sustaining treatment and patients’ stated preferences. Designing tailored solutions to this discordance requires a better understanding of this communication process. ObjectiveTo acquire a detailed understanding of the process of communication about goals of care and decision making about life-sustaining treatments for hospitalized patients, and to seek opportunities for improvement. SettingMedical wards of three university-affiliated teaching hospitals in Canada. MethodAt each site, we used drop-in sessions and one-on-one interviews to consult with health care workers on eligible wards to create cross-functional (swim lane) maps of the process of communication about goals of care and decision making about life-sustaining treatments. Healthcare workers were also asked about barriers to this process to enable the identification of opportunities for improvement. ResultsA total of 112 healthcare workers provided input into the creation of process maps across the three sites. Common elements across sites were that: (1) physicians play a central role, (2) the full process for a given patient involves several interactions amongst members of the inter-professional team, and (3) the process is iterative. We also noted between-site variations in the location of GoC discussions and the extent to which trainees and multi-disciplinary team members were involved. Finally, we identified several key barriers that may serve as targets for future quality improvement efforts: suboptimal location of conversations, insufficient support of physician learners in goals-of-care conversations, and incomplete engagement of the inter-professional team. ConclusionEfforts to improve the quality of goals-of-care discussions and decision making about life-sustaining treatments in the hospital setting need to account for the central role played by physicians in the process but can be enhanced if they can more fully engage the inter-professional health care team.Resume Contexte Une communication de mauvaise qualité sur les objectifs des soins aux patients gravementmalades et hospitalisés est associée à une discordance importante entre les ordonnances médicales prescrites pour un traitement de survie et les préférences déclarées des patients. La conception de solutions adaptées à cette discordance nécessite une meilleure compréhension de ce processus de communication. ObjectifAcquérir une compréhension détaillée du processus de communication sur les objectifs des soins et la prise de décision sur les traitements de maintien de la vie pour les patients hospitalisés, et rechercher des possibilités d’amélioration. ParamètresLes services médicaux de trois hôpitaux universitaires canadiens affiliés à l’université. MéthodeSur chaque site, nous avons eu recours à des séances d’information et à des entretiens individuels pour consulter les travailleurs de la santé dans les services éligibles afin de créer des cartes interfonctionnelles (couloir de nage) du processus de communication sur les objectifs des soins et la prise de décision sur les traitements de maintien des fonctions vitales. Les travailleurs de la santé ont également été interrogés sur les obstacles à ce processus afin de permettre l’identification des possibilités d’amélioration. RésultatsAu total, 112 travailleurs de la santé ont participé à la création de cartes de processus sur les trois sites. Les éléments communs à tous les sites étaient les suivants : (1) les médecins jouent un rôle central, (2) le processus complet pour un patient donné implique plusieurs interactions entre les membres de l’équipe interprofessionnelle, et (3) le processus est itératif. Nous avons également noté des variations entre les sites en ce qui concerne le lieu des discussions du gouvernement et le degré d’implication des stagiaires et des membres de l’équipe pluridisciplinaire. Enfin, nous avons identifié plusieurs obstacles clés qui pourraient servir de cibles aux futurs efforts d’amélioration de la qualité : le lieu sous-optimal des conversations, le soutien insuffisant des apprenants médecins dans les conversations sur les objectifs de soins et l’engagement incomplet de l’équipe interprofessionnelle. ConclusionLes efforts visant à améliorer la qualité des discussions sur les objectifs des soins et la prise de décision concernant les traitements vitaux en milieu hospitalier doivent tenir compte du rôle central joué par les médecins dans le processus, mais peuvent être renforcés s’ils peuvent faire participer davantage l’équipe interprofessionnelle de soins de santé.

Advancements in the care of acutely ill patients has reduced intensive care unit (ICU) mortality but has also led to the emergence of a group of patients who have a prolonged dependency on life sup...

Background The Withdrawal Assessment Tool-1 (WAT-1) has been validated for assessing iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome in critically ill children receiving mechanical ventilation, but little is known about this syndrome in critically ill adults. Objective To evaluate the validity and reliability of the WAT-1 in critically ill adults. Methods A prospective, observational, open-cohort pilot study of critically ill adults receiving mechanical ventilation and regular administration of opioids for at least 72 hours. Patients were assessed for withdrawal twice daily on weekdays and once daily on weekends using the WAT-1 after an opioid weaning episode. The presence of iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome was evaluated once daily using modified Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth Edition) (DSM-5) criteria. All evaluations were blinded and performed independently. The criterion validity of the WAT-1 and the interrater reliability for WAT-1 and DSM-5 evaluations were determined. Results During 8 months, 52 adults (median age, 51.5 years) were enrolled. Eight patients (15%) had at least 1 positive assessment during their intensive care unit stay using the DSM-5, compared with 19 patients (37%) using the WAT-1. The overall sensitivity of the WAT-1 was 50%, and its specificity was 65.9%. Agreement between WAT-1 and DSM-5 assessments was poor (κ = 0.102). The interrater reliability for the WAT-1 was 89.1% and for the DSM-5 was 90.1%. Conclusion Despite showing reliability, the WAT-1 is not a valid tool for assessing the presence of iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome in adults.

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a technology that provides a rapid, non-invasive measurement of volume in body compartments and may aid the physician in the assessment of volume status. We sought to investigate the effect of BIA-measured volume status on duration of mechanical ventilation, 28-day mortality, and acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy in a population of medical/surgical patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Prospective observational study of adult patients who required mechanical ventilation within 24 hr of admission to ICU. Bioelectrical impedance analysis measured extracellular water (ECW) and total body water (TBW) and these measurements were recorded on days 1, 3, 5, and 7. A total of 36 patients were enrolled. Mean (standard deviation) age was 61.8 (21.3) years and 31% of patients were female. The majority were admitted from the emergency department or operating room. The most common diagnosis was sepsis. At 28 days, eight patients (22%) had died. There was no association between ECW/TBW ratio at day 1 and 28-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6 to 2.3) after adjusting for age, sex, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score. The median [interquartile range] number of ventilator days was 5 [2.5–7.5]. On day 1, for each 1% increase in the ECW/TBW ratio, there was a 1.2-fold increase in ventilator days (95% CI, 1.003 to 1.4; P = 0.05). It is notable that 20% of eligible patients could not be enrolled because medical equipment interfered with correct electrode placement. Bioimpedance-measured ECW/TBW on day 1 of admission to the ICU is associated with time on the ventilator. While this technology may be a useful adjunct to the clinical assessment of volume status, there are technical barriers to its routine use in a general ICU population.

Summary Background Awake prone positioning has been reported to improve oxygenation for patients with COVID-19 in retrospective and observational studies, but whether it improves patient-centred outcomes is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of awake prone positioning to prevent intubation or death in patients with severe COVID-19 in a large-scale randomised trial. Methods In this prospective, a priori set up and defined, collaborative meta-trial of six randomised controlled open-label superiority trials, adults who required respiratory support with high-flow nasal cannula for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 were randomly assigned to awake prone positioning or standard care. Hospitals from six countries were involved: Canada, France, Ireland, Mexico, USA, Spain. Patients or their care providers were not masked to allocated treatment. The primary composite outcome was treatment failure, defined as the proportion of patients intubated or dying within 28 days of enrolment. The six trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04325906 , NCT04347941 , NCT04358939 , NCT04395144 , NCT04391140 , and NCT04477655 . Findings Between April 2, 2020 and Jan 26, 2021, 1126 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to awake prone positioning (n=567) or standard care (n=559). 1121 patients (excluding five who withdrew from the study) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Treatment failure occurred in 223 (40%) of 564 patients assigned to awake prone positioning and in 257 (46%) of 557 patients assigned to standard care (relative risk 0·86 [95% CI 0·75−0·98]). The hazard ratio (HR) for intubation was 0·75 (0·62−0·91), and the HR for mortality was 0·87 (0·68−1·11) with awake prone positioning compared with standard care within 28 days of enrolment. The incidence of prespecified adverse events was low and similar in both groups. Interpretation Awake prone positioning of patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 reduces the incidence of treatment failure and the need for intubation without any signal of harm. These results support routine awake prone positioning of patients with COVID-19 who require support with high-flow nasal cannula. Funding Open AI inc, Rice Foundation, Projet Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique Interregional, Appel d'Offre 2020, Groupement Interregional de Recherche Clinique et d'Innovation Grand Ouest, Association pour la Promotion a Tours de la Reanimation Medicale, Fond de dotation du CHRU de Tours, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Ltd.

The optimal noninvasive modality for oxygenation support in COVID-19-associated hypoxemic respiratory failure and its association with healthcare worker infection remain uncertain. We report here our experience using high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) as the primary support mode for patients with COVID-19 in our institution.We conducted a single-centre historical cohort study of all COVID-19 patients treated with HFNO for at least two hours in our university-affiliated and intensivist-staffed intensive care unit (Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada) between 27 August 2020 and 30 April 2021. We report their clinical characteristics and outcomes. Healthcare workers in our unit cared for these patients in single negative pressure rooms wearing KN95 or fit-tested N95 masks; they underwent mandatory symptomatic screening for COVID-19 infection, as well as a period of asymptomatic screening.One hundred and forty-two patients were analysed, with a median [interquartile range (IQR)] age of 66 [59-73] yr; 71% were male. Patients had a median [IQR] Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score of 3 [2-3], median [IQR] oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry/fraction of inspired oxygen ratio of 120 [94-164], and a median [IQR] 4C score (a COVID-19-specific mortality score) of 12 [10-14]. Endotracheal intubation occurred in 48/142 (34%) patients, and overall hospital mortality was 16%. Barotrauma occurred in 21/142 (15%) patients. Among 27 symptomatic and 139 asymptomatic screening tests, there were no cases of HFNO-related COVID-19 transmission to healthcare workers.Our experience indicates that HFNO is an effective first-line therapy for hypoxemic respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients, and can be safely used without significant discernable infection risk to healthcare workers.RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La modalité non invasive optimale pour le soutien en oxygène lors d’insuffisance respiratoire hypoxémique liée à la COVID-19 et son association avec l’infection des travailleurs de la santé restent incertaines. Nous rapportons ici notre expérience avec l’utilisation de canules nasales à haut débit (CNHD) comme principale modalité de soutien pour les patients atteints de COVID-19 dans notre établissement. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude de cohorte historique monocentrique de tous les patients atteints de COVID-19 traités par CNHD pendant au moins deux heures dans notre unité de soins intensifs affiliée à l’université et dotée d’intensivistes (Hôpital général juif, Montréal, QC, Canada) entre le 27 août 2020 et le 30 avril 2021. Nous rapportons leurs caractéristiques cliniques et leurs résultats. Les travailleurs de la santé de notre unité ont soigné ces patients dans des chambres individuelles à pression négative en portant des masques KN95 ou N95 ajustés; ils ont subi un dépistage symptomatique obligatoire de l’infection à la COVID-19, ainsi qu’un dépistage en période asymptomatique. RéSULTATS: Cent quarante-deux patients ont été analysés, avec un âge médian [écart interquartile (ÉIQ)] de 66 [59-73] ans; 71 % étaient des hommes. Les patients avaient un score SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment) médian [ÉIQ] de 3 [2, 3], un ratio médian [ÉIQ] de saturation en oxygène par oxymétrie de pouls/fraction d’oxygène inspiré de 120 [94-164], et un score 4C (un score de mortalité spécifique à la COVID-19) médian [ÉIQ] de 12 [10–14]. Dans l’ensemble, 48/142 patients (34 %) ont reçu une intubation endotrachéale, et la mortalité hospitalière globale était de 16 %. Un barotraumatisme est survenu chez 21/142 (15 %) patients. Parmi les 27 tests de dépistage symptomatiques et 139 tests asymptomatiques, aucun cas de transmission de COVID-19 liée aux CNHD aux travailleurs de la santé n’a été observé. CONCLUSION: Notre expérience indique que les CNHD constituent un traitement de première intention efficace pour l’insuffisance respiratoire hypoxémique chez les patients atteints de COVID-19 qui peut être utilisé en toute sécurité, sans risque d’infection significatif discernable pour les travailleurs de la santé.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is responsible for millions of infections worldwide, and a substantial number of these patients will be admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Our objective was to describe the characteristics, outcomes and management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at a single designated pandemic centre in Montreal, Canada. METHODS: A descriptive analysis was performed on consecutive critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to the ICU at the Jewish General Hospital, a designated pandemic centre in Montreal, between Mar. 5 and May 21, 2020. Complete follow-up data corresponding to death or discharge from hospital health records were included to Aug. 4, 2020. We summarized baseline characteristics, management and outcomes, including mortality. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were included in this study. Twenty-one patients (19.8%) died during their hospital stay, and the ICU mortality was 17.0% (18/106); all patients were discharged home or died, except for 4 patients (2 awaiting a rehabilitation bed and 2 awaiting long-term care). Twelve of 65 patients (18.5%) requiring mechanical ventilation died. Prone positioning was used in 29 patients (27.4%), including in 10 patients who were spontaneously breathing; no patient was placed on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. High-flow nasal cannula was used in 51 patients (48.1%). Acute kidney injury was the most common complication, seen in 20 patients (18.9%), and 12 patients (11.3%) required renal replacement therapy. A total of 53 patients (50.0%) received corticosteroids. INTERPRETATION: Our cohort of critically ill patients with COVID-19 had lower mortality than that previously described in other jurisdictions. These findings may help guide critical care decision-making in similar health care systems in further COVID-19 surges.

Background Ultrasound is increasingly relied upon to estimate central venous pressure (CVP) in the echocardiography lab and using point-of-care systems in the intensive care unit and the emergency department. However, there is uncertainty regarding the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound-based parameters as reported in diverse studies.Methods A systematic review was performed by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database for studies evaluating ultrasound-based indicators of filling pressures in relation to catheterization-based CVP. Studies were screened for predefined inclusion criteria and rated for quality by duplicate observers. Standardized correlation coefficients for each ultrasound-based indicator were meta-analyzed using a random effects model.Results 3949 articles were screened and 64 met the criteria for inclusion. Inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter was assessed in 34 study measures and the pooled standardized correlation with invasive CVP was 0.74 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.84). IVC collapsibility was assessed in 20 study measures and the pooled standardized correlation with invasive CVP was -0.57 (95% CI -0.70 to -0.44). Tricuspid E/Ep was assessed in 6 study measures and the pooled standardized correlation with invasive CVP was 0.59 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.93). IVC parameters but not E/Ep remained correlated with CVP in mechanically ventilated patients, including cardiac surgery patients. Results were similar in studies featuring non-traditional users and cardiac specialists.Conclusions Echocardiographic IVC diameter, collapsibility, and tricuspid E/Ep ratio are significantly correlated with invasive CVP, albeit with important heterogeneity between studies. Most of these indicators are equally valid when applied in ventilated patients and by non-traditional users.

BACKGROUND: Inpatients are often prescribed cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) without a shared decision-making process. Since implementation of decision aids into practice is highly sensitive to the clinical milieu, we performed a pilot study to refine our study procedures and to evaluate the acceptability and potential effectiveness of a shared decision-making intervention when implemented in a Canadian hospital setting. METHODS: In this before–after pilot study, we recruited patients and family members on the medical wards of 2 Canadian teaching hospitals between September 2015 and March 2017. The intervention consisted of viewing a CPR decision video and completing a values-clarification worksheet; follow-up discussion with the physician was encouraged. The primary feasibility outcome was acceptability of the video, and the primary effectiveness outcome was change in the Decisional Conflict Scale score (lower scores being more desirable) after the intervention. Participants rated the extent of shared decision-making using the CollaboRATE instrument. RESULTS: Of the 71 participants (43 patients with a mean age of 79.0 [standard deviation (SD) 11.4] yr and 28 family members with a mean age of 61.0 [SD 10.0] yr), 65 (92%) rated the CPR decision video as good to excellent. The intervention was associated with an improvement in knowledge about CPR (+2.7 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2 to 3.3, effect size 1.5) and a reduction in the Decisional Conflict Scale score (−18.1 points, 95% CI −21.8 to −14.3, effect size 1.4). The 36 participants who had a discussion with a physician about CPR after watching the video rated the extent of shared decision-making as 6.3 (SD 1.7) (possible maximum score 9). There was a nonsignificant decrease in the proportion of patients with a medical order for CPR after the intervention (71% before v. 63% after, p = 0.06). INTERPRETATION: The CPR decision video was acceptable to patients and family members. Our decision-support intervention may improve knowledge, reduce decisional conflict and reduce the prevalence of medical orders for CPR in the Canadian hospital setting.

Background: Rapid response teams (RRTs) were developed to promote assessment of and early intervention for clinically deteriorating hospitalized patients. Although the ideal composition of RRTs is not known, their implementation does require significant resources. Objective: To test the effectiveness of a dedicated daytime/weekday intensive care unit (ICU) consult service without formal training of ward teams. Methods: Pre- and postintervention study with weekends/nights during implementation period acting as a concurrent control. Setting: An adult tertiary care university center in Montreal without an RRT. Intervention: A daytime/weekday ICU consult service with a dedicated intensivist. Results: Total hospital mortality rate did not differ between the control and the implementation period (6.65% vs 6.60%; P = .84). The hospital code blue rates also did not differ (1.21/1000 vs 1.14/1000 patient days; P = .58). In contrast, 30-day mortality of patients admitted to the ICU following an ICU consult decreased (39% vs 24% P = .01). Multivariate analysis confirmed this effect on 30-day mortality (odds ratio for implementation period: 0.53 [95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.85] P = .009). The 14-day ICU readmission rate was reduced with the intervention (5.1% vs 4.1%; P < .001). The effect on 30-day mortality and ICU readmissions were only present during daytime/weekdays. Conclusion: Implementation of an ICU consult service without any formal afferent limb training was associated with decreased mortality and 14-day readmission rates of patients admitted to the ICU. In contrast, hospital-wide mortality and code blue rates were unaffected.

Objective The air medical transportation industry has seen a steady rise in the use of mechanical circulatory support devices (eg, intra-aortic balloon pumps, ventricular assist devices, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) during transport missions, either for definitive management or repatriation. As these complex devices become more common, the industry will have to adapt to support their use in their clientele. The goal of this narrative review was to assess our current experiences regarding mechanical circulatory support devices in air medical transportation and to identify important factors to ensure successful transport. Methods We conducted a systematic search on MEDLINE and Embase using the following search terms: aeromedical transportation, air transportation, intra-aortic balloon pump, ventricular assist device, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Results were cross-referenced to identify articles addressing both air medical transport and mechanical circulatory support devices. Results After a systematic review of the available literature, 49 articles addressing mechanical support devices transported by rotary wing and fixed wing aircraft were reviewed. In summary, our review encompassed 811 total aerial transports (152 by balloon pumps, 12 by ventricular assist devices, and 647 by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). We found air medical transportation with these devices carried out in the public, private, or military sectors, to be safe, with low rates of serious adverse events. Dedicated training sessions focused on device troubleshooting and problem-solving during transport, optimal medical crew composition, predeparture logistical preparations, and on-demand specialist consultation can improve mission success. Conclusion We report that air medical transportation of patients supported by mechanical circulatory support devices is safe. Complications can be mitigated by training and addressed either during the predeparture or in-transportation phase.

BACKGROUND Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are overprescribed despite concerns regarding associated adverse drug events. OBJECTIVE To reduce inappropriate PPI prescriptions using hospitalization as the point of contact to effect meaningful change. DESIGN Before-after study design. SETTING Forty-six–bed medical clinical teaching unit in a 417-bed university teaching hospital in Montreal, Canada. PATIENTS Four hundred sixty-four consecutively admitted patients in the preintervention control group, and 640 consecutively admitted patients in the intervention group. INTERVENTION A monthly educational intervention paired with a Web-based quality improvement tool. MEASUREMENTS We determined the proportion of patients admitted on PPIs, their indications, and appropriateness of use. We then compared the proportion of patients whose PPIs were discontinued at discharge before and after our intervention. RESULTS Forty-four percent of patients were already using a PPI prior to their hospitalization. In evaluated patients, only 54% of these patients had an evidence-based indication for ongoing use. The proportion of PPIs discontinued at hospital discharge increased from 7.7% per month in the 6 months prior to intervention, to 18.5% per month postintervention (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Strategies to combat PPI overuse are needed to improve the overall quality of patient care. We significantly reduced discharge prescriptions for PPIs through the implementation of an educational initiative paired with a Web-based quality improvement tool. An active interventional strategy is likely required considering the increasingly recognized and preventable adverse events associated with PPI misuse. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2015;10:281–286. © 2015 Society of Hospital Medicine

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.

Objective: Early mobilization is safe, feasible, and associated with better outcomes in patients with critical illness. However, barriers to mobilization in clinical practice still exist. The objective of this study was to assess the knowledge and practice patterns of intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians, as well as the barriers and facilitators to early mobilization. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Setting: Intensive care units of 3 university-affiliated hospitals in Montreal, Canada. Participants: One hundred and thirty-eight ICU clinicians, including nurses, physicians, respiratory therapists, and physiotherapists. Interventions: None. Measurements: Perceived barriers, facilitators, knowledge, and practice patterns of early mobilization were assessed using a previously validated mobility survey tool. Main Results: The overall response rate was 50.0% (138 of 274). Early mobilization was not perceived as a top priority in 49% of respondents. Results showed that clinicians were not fully aware of the benefits of early mobilization as per the current literature. About 58% of clinicians did not feel well trained and informed to mobilize mechanically ventilated patients. Perceptions on patient-level barriers varied with clinicians’ professional training, but there was a high degree of interprofessional and intraprofessional disagreement on the permissible maximal level activity in different scenarios of critically ill patients. Conclusions: Our survey shows limited awareness, among our respondents, of the clinical benefits of early mobilization and high level of disagreement on the permissible maximal level of activity in the critically ill patients. Future studies should evaluate the role of knowledge translation in modifying these barriers and improving early mobilization.

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation and early defibrillation have been shown to improve outcomes of cardiac arrest. The significance of the post-arrest echocardiogram, specifically the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is unknown.We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who suffered from cardiac arrest between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2013. We included all patients who achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), and were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) or coronary care unit (CCU) of a tertiary care academic center. Patients who underwent echocardiography within 24 h of cardiac arrest were included for analysis. The primary outcome was survival.We identified 151 patients who achieved ROSC of which 97 underwent post-arrest echocardiogram within 24 h. 70.8% were males and the mean age was 67.8 years (SD: 15.9). The mean LVEF at 24 h was 35.7 (SD: 17.8). LVEF40% was not a predictor of survival at 30 days or hospital discharge. The only significant predictors on multivariate analyses were age, presence of shockable rhythm and time to ROSC.Although echocardiograms are frequently ordered, LVEF greater than 40% in patients who are resuscitated after a cardiac arrest is not a predictor of survival.

Use of protective ventilation has been shown to decrease mortality in medical-surgical ICUs. There is limited data on tidal volume use in ventilated patients in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU). We hypothesized that large tidal volumes are used in the CICU and that they could contribute to an increase in morbidity and mortality.We conducted a retrospective chart review of all mechanically ventilated patients with congestive heart failure or cardiac arrest in a single tertiary care CICU between April 2010 and February 2012. Ventilator settings were analyzed and tidal volume for predicted body weight (VT/PBW) was calculated for 51 patients.The median initial tidal volume was 525 ml (IQR: 500-600) and median VT/PBW was 9.3 ml/kg (IQR: 8.3-10.1). Overall mortality was 29.4%. On univariate analysis, patients that received a VT/PBW below the median, mortality was 23.1% (95% CI: 7.9-39.3) compared to 36.0% (95% CI: 17.2-55.0) in patients that received a VT/PBW above themedian (P = 0.31). On multivariate analysis, the OR for death was 9.0 (95% CI: 1.3-62.0, P = 0.03) with VT/PBW above the median.Mechanical ventilation with high tidal volumes was associated with increased mortality in patients with congestive heart failure and post cardiac arrest in our CICU.

Background After admission to intensive care, women have higher mortality rates than do men. The reasons for the greater mortality in women are not fully understood. Objective To determine if increased mortality in women was due to delays in the recognition of critical illness or to delays in timely admission to intensive care. Methods A total of 241 consecutive admissions to intensive care from medical and surgical units during a 12-month period were analyzed retrospectively. Patients’ demographics, illness severity, and delay between the time the patients would have fulfilled criteria for calling a medical emergency team and consultation with and admission to intensive care were analyzed. Results Delay from fulfillment of criteria for calling a medical emergency team and consultation with intensive care and from consultation to admission to intensive care did not differ between sexes. Despite similar delays in admission to intensive care, women had a higher 30-day mortality than did men (44.9% vs 30.5%; P = .02). The increased mortality was more pronounced in the medical patients (53% vs 34%; P = .02). Multivariate analysis of mortality data yielded a mortality odds ratio of 0.35 (95% CI, 0.16–0.74) for men, significantly different from values for women (P = .006). Conclusion After admission to intensive care from medical or surgical units, women had higher mortality rates than did men, and the difference was more pronounced in medical patients. The difference in mortality between sexes was not explained by delayed recognition of critical illness or delayed admission to intensive care.

Supplemental Material, Appendix_I_Survey_instrument_-_Copy for Interprofessional Survey of Perceived Barriers and Facilitators to Early Mobilization of Critically Ill Patients in Montreal, Canada by David E. Anekwe, Karen Kin-Yue Koo, Michel de Marchie, Peter Goldberg, Dev Jayaraman, and Jadranka Spahija in Journal of Intensive Care Medicine

Background Adverse events (AEs) in acute care hospitals are frequent and associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and costs. Measuring AEs is necessary for quality improvement and benchmarking purposes, but current detection methods lack in accuracy, efficiency, and generalizability. The growing availability of electronic health records (EHR) and the development of natural language processing techniques for encoding narrative data offer an opportunity to develop potentially better methods. The purpose of this study is to determine the accuracy and generalizability of using automated methods for detecting three high-incidence and high-impact AEs from EHR data: a) hospital-acquired pneumonia, b) ventilator-associated event and, c) central line-associated bloodstream infection. Methods This validation study will be conducted among medical, surgical and ICU patients admitted between 2013 and 2016 to the Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS) and the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC), which has both French and English sites. A random 60% sample of CHUS patients will be used for model development purposes (cohort 1, development set). Using a random sample of these patients, a reference standard assessment of their medical chart will be performed. Multivariate logistic regression and the area under the curve (AUC) will be employed to iteratively develop and optimize three automated AE detection models (i.e., one per AE of interest) using EHR data from the CHUS. These models will then be validated on a random sample of the remaining 40% of CHUS patients (cohort 1, internal validation set) using chart review to assess accuracy. The most accurate models developed and validated at the CHUS will then be applied to EHR data from a random sample of patients admitted to the MUHC French site (cohort 2) and English site (cohort 3)—a critical requirement given the use of narrative data –, and accuracy will be assessed using chart review. Generalizability will be determined by comparing AUCs from cohorts 2 and 3 to those from cohort 1. Discussion This study will likely produce more accurate and efficient measures of AEs. These measures could be used to assess the incidence rates of AEs, evaluate the success of preventive interventions, or benchmark performance across hospitals.

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.

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.

Importance Seriously ill hospitalized patients have identified communication and decision making about goals of care as high priorities for quality improvement in end-of-life care. Interventions to improve care are more likely to succeed if tailored to existing barriers. Objective To determine, from the perspective of hospital-based clinicians, (1) barriers impeding communication and decision making about goals of care with seriously ill hospitalized patients and their families and (2) their own willingness and the acceptability for other clinicians to engage in this process. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter survey of medical teaching units of nurses, internal medicine residents, and staff physicians from participating units at 13 university-based hospitals from 5 Canadian provinces. Main Outcomes and Measures Importance of 21 barriers to goals of care discussions rated on a 7-point scale (1 = extremely unimportant; 7 = extremely important). Results Between September 2012 and March 2013, questionnaires were returned by 1256 of 1617 eligible clinicians, for an overall response rate of 77.7% (512 of 646 nurses [79.3%], 484 of 634 residents [76.3%], 260 of 337 staff physicians [77.2%]). The following family member–related and patient-related factors were consistently identified by all 3 clinician groups as the most important barriers to goals of care discussions: family members’ or patients’ difficulty accepting a poor prognosis (mean [SD] score, 5.8 [1.2] and 5.6 [1.3], respectively), family members’ or patients’ difficulty understanding the limitations and complications of life-sustaining treatments (5.8 [1.2] for both groups), disagreement among family members about goals of care (5.8 [1.2]), and patients’ incapacity to make goals of care decisions (5.6 [1.2]). Clinicians perceived their own skills and system factors as less important barriers. Participants viewed it as acceptable for all clinician groups to engage in goals of care discussions—including a role for advance practice nurses, nurses, and social workers to initiate goals of care discussions and be a decision coach. Conclusions and Relevance Hospital-based clinicians perceive family member–related and patient-related factors as the most important barriers to goals of care discussions. All health care professionals were viewed as playing important roles in addressing goals of care. These findings can inform the design of future interventions to improve communication and decision making about goals of care.

To evaluate the ability of nurse clinician discharge flow coordinators (DFCs) to identify medical patients at risk of unplanned return to the hospital emergency department within 30 days of discharge and whether a higher predicted risk of return was correlated with preventability.Prospective cohort study of patients discharged from medical wards at 2 hospital sites of the McGill University Health Center between September 1, 2011, and January 1, 2012.Univariate and multivariate analyses of factors including the ability of DFCs to predict 30-day unplanned returns to the hospital. Assessment of the preventability of returns to the hospital was performed by chart review using prespecified criteria. The ability of DFCs to predict returns was compared to the LACE criteria (length of stay, acute admission through the emergency department, comorbidities, and emergency department visits in the past 6 months).We found that 25.0% (95% CI, 21.3-28.5) of our patients returned to the emergency department within 30 days. The DFC predictions were found to be significant in both univariate and multivariate analysis. Patient age, sex, and length of stay were not significant predictors in univariate or multivariate analysis; 13.9% (95% CI, 8.2-19.6) of returns were preventable and a further 25.8% (95% CI, 18.1-33.5) were potentially preventable with added services in the community. There was a trend toward more preventable or potentially preventable returns with higher predicted probability of return. In contrast the LACE criteria did not have a good predictive capacity in our patient population.In a large urban center, experienced nurse clinician DFCs were able to predict 30-day emergency department returns with reasonable accuracy. They were also able to identify the returns to the hospital that were most likely to be preventable. Our data suggests that DFCs can be used to target patients identified as having an increased probability of return with interventions that may be able to reduce the burden of return to hospital.

Background Previous interventions targeting nosocomial urinary tract infections have reduced catheterization and infections, but they require significant resources and may be susceptible to misclassification and surveillance bias. We sought to determine the effectiveness of a novel intervention at reducing catheterization and infections while exploring the potential for bias. Methods We conducted a prospective study of a brief monthly in-person educational intervention focusing on appropriate urinary catheter use. Results We studied 1,335 patients (13,753 patient days) on 1 control and 1 intervention ward. After the intervention, the device utilization rate was significantly reduced, with a relative risk of 0.49 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.76; P = .001) versus 1.02 (95% CI, 0.58-1.82; P = .93) for controls. Both wards demonstrated a reduction in catheter-associated infections after intervention, with an intervention relative risk of 0.42 (95% CI, 0.16-1.08; P = .07) and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.22-1.20; P = .12) for controls. There was no change in the rate of all nosocomial urine infections, with an intervention relative risk of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.38-1.65; P = .53) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.48-1.67; P = .72) for controls. Conclusion Our study demonstrates that our novel educational intervention significantly reduces urinary catheter use in hospitalized patients. The trend towards reduced catheter-associated infections after intervention, coupled with the absence of an improvement in all nosocomial infections supports a potential role of misclassification bias. We suggest that future prospective investigations explore this phenomenon using more robust outcome measures.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are overprescribed despite concerns regarding associated adverse drug events.To reduce inappropriate PPI prescriptions using hospitalization as the point of contact to effect meaningful change.Before-after study design.Forty-six-bed medical clinical teaching unit in a 417-bed university teaching hospital in Montreal, Canada.Four hundred sixty-four consecutively admitted patients in the preintervention control group, and 640 consecutively admitted patients in the intervention group.A monthly educational intervention paired with a Web-based quality improvement tool.We determined the proportion of patients admitted on PPIs, their indications, and appropriateness of use. We then compared the proportion of patients whose PPIs were discontinued at discharge before and after our intervention.Forty-four percent of patients were already using a PPI prior to their hospitalization. In evaluated patients, only 54% of these patients had an evidence-based indication for ongoing use. The proportion of PPIs discontinued at hospital discharge increased from 7.7% per month in the 6 months prior to intervention, to 18.5% per month postintervention (P = 0.03).Strategies to combat PPI overuse are needed to improve the overall quality of patient care. We significantly reduced discharge prescriptions for PPIs through the implementation of an educational initiative paired with a Web-based quality improvement tool. An active interventional strategy is likely required considering the increasingly recognized and preventable adverse events associated with PPI misuse.

Delay;Transfer;Mortality;Ward;Intensive careAbstractPurpose: The impact of delay in obtaining an intensive care unit (ICU) consult from inpatient wards isunclear. The goal of this study was to examine the effect of time to ICU consult from medical andsurgical wards on mortality and length of stay (LOS).Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study of 241 adult medical and surgical inpatientsadmitted at 2 tertiary care ICUs in Canada between 2007 and 2009. Neither institution has medicalemergency teams (METs). Patient demographics, time when the patient would have fulfilled METcalling criteria (MET time), time of ICU consult, and ICU admission were analyzed. The main outcomevariables were 30-day mortality and ICU LOS.Results: Multivariate analysis demonstrated an increase in mortality (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% confidenceinterval, 1.1-2.9; P = .01) with increased duration from MET time to ICU consult for medical patients.There was no effect of this period on ICU LOS in medical patients. In contrast, in surgical patients, theMET time to ICU consult duration was associated with an increased ICU LOS (coefficient, 2.1 fordelay; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-3.8; P = .02) but had no effect on mortality.Conclusions: Increased duration to ICU consult from MET time is associated with adverse outcomes.These adverse outcomes are different between medical and surgical patients.© 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Antibiotic use is an important quality improvement target. Nearly 50% of antibiotic use is unnecessary or inappropriate. To combat overuse, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) proposed "time-outs" to reevaluate antibiotics.To optimize antibiotic use through trainee-led time-outs.Before-after study.Internal medicine (2 units, 46 beds) at a university hospital.Inpatients (n = 679).From January 2012 until June 2013, while receiving monthly education on antimicrobial stewardship, resident physicians adjusted patients' antibiotic therapy through twice-weekly time-out audits using a structured electronic checklist.Antibiotic costs were standardized and compared in the year before and after the audits. Use was measured as World Health Organization defined daily doses (DDDs) per 1000 patient-days. Total antibiotic use and the use of moxifloxacin, carbapenems, antipseudomonal penicillins, and vancomycin were compared by using interrupted time series. Rates of nosocomial Clostridium difficile infection were compared by using incidence rate ratios.Total costs in the units decreased from $149,743CAD (January 2011 to January 2012) to $80,319 (January 2012 to January 2013), for a savings of $69,424 (46% reduction). Of the savings, $54,150 (78%) was related to carbapenems and $15,274 (22%) was due to other antibiotic classes. Adherence with the auditing process was 80%. In the time-series analyses, the only reliable and statistically significant change was a reduction in the rate of moxifloxicin use, by -1.9 DDDs per 1000 patient-days per month (95% CI, -3.8 to -0.02; P = 0.048). Rates of C. difficile infection decreased from 24.2 to 19.6 per 10,000 patient-days (incidence rate ratio, 0.8 [CI, 0.5 to 1.3]).Other temporal factors may confound the findings.An antibiotic self-stewardship bundle to implement the CDC's suggested time-outs seems to have reduced overall costs and targeted antibiotic use.None.