Search

Objectifs La Société de Réanimation de Langue Française (SRLF) alloue plusieurs bourses afin de promouvoir une recherche en soins critiques de qualité. L’objectif de cette étude était de déterminer l’association entre obtention d’une bourse et production scientifique. Matériel et Méthodes Chaque récipiendaire d’une bourse de la SRLF a été contacté entre Juin et Octobre 2020 via un formulaire en ligne permettant de connaitre l’état d’avancement du projet financé. Des analyses uni- et multivariées ont été réalisées pour déterminer les facteurs associés à la valorisation du projet (publication dans une revue à comité de lecture et/ou présentation en congrès). Résultats Entre 2007 et 2019, la SRLF a attribué 104 bourses à 95 récipiendaires pour un montant total de 1 572 500 euros. Sur les 86 (83%) récipiendaires qui ont répondu au questionnaire, 69 (80%) ont déclaré une valorisation scientifique de leur travail, via la publication d’un article (63%) et/ou la présentation en congrès (60%). En analyse multivariée, le seul facteur indépendamment associé à la valorisation scientifique était le délai écoulé depuis la réception de la bourse (odds-ratio (OR) et intervalle de confiance 95% 1.4 [1.14-1.82] par an, p=0.004). Conclusion La SRLF contribue au financement d’une recherche clinique et expérimentale de qualité. publiée dans des journaux à haut facteur d’impact.

Background The prevalence of pressure injuries (PIs) in critically ill patients has been extensively studied, but there is uncertainty regarding the risk factors. The main objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of PIs in critically ill patients. Secondary objectives were to describe PI, use of preventive measures for PI, and factors associated with occurrence of PI in the intensive care unit (ICU). Material and methods This was a 1-day point-prevalence study performed on a weekday in June 2017 in ICUs in France. On the same day, we noted the presence or absence of PI in all hospitalised patients of the participating ICUs, data on the ICUs, and the characteristics of patients and of PI. Results Eighty-six participating ICUs allowed the inclusion of 1228 patients. The prevalence of PI on the study day was 18.7% (95% confidence interval: 16.6–21.0). PIs acquired in the ICU were observed in 12.5% (95% confidence interval: 10.6–14.3) of critically ill patients on the study day. The most frequent locations of PI were the sacrum (57.4%), heel (35.2%), and face (8.7%). Severe forms of PI accounted for 40.8% of all PIs. Antiulcer mattresses were used in 91.5% of the patients, and active and/or passive mobilisation was performed for all the patients. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified longer length of stay in the ICU, a higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score, higher body weight, motor neurological disorder, high-dose steroids, and absence of oral nutrition on the study day as factors independently associated with occurrence of PI in the ICU. Conclusion This large point-prevalence study shows that PIs are found in about one of five critically ill patients despite extensive use of devices for preventing PI. Acquisition of PI in the ICU is strongly related to the patient's severity of illness on admission to the ICU and length of stay in the ICU.

Objectives Standard nursing interventions, especially bed-baths, in ICUs can lead to complications or adverse events defined as a physiologic change that can be life-threatening or that prolongs hospitalization. However, the frequency and type of these adverse events are rarely reported in the literature. The primary objective of our study was to describe the proportion of patients experiencing at least one serious adverse event during bed-bath. The secondary objectives were to determine the incidence of each type of serious adverse event and identify risk factors for these serious adverse events. Design Prospective multicenter observational study. Setting Twenty-four ICUs in France, Belgium, and Luxembourg. Patients The patients included in this study had been admitted to an ICU for less than 72 hours and required at least one of the following treatments: invasive ventilation, vasopressors, noninvasive ventilation, high-flow oxygen therapy. Serious adverse events were defined as cardiac arrest, accidental extubation, desaturation and/or mucus plugging/inhalation, hypotension and/or arrhythmia and/or agitation requiring therapeutic intervention, acute pain, accidental disconnection or dysfunction of equipment, and patient fall requiring additional assistance. Interventions None. Measurements and main results The study included 253 patients from May 1, 2018, to July 31, 2018 in 24 ICUs, representing 1,529 nursing procedures. The mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score II was 54 ± 19. Nursing care was administered by an average of 2 ± 1 caregivers and lasted between 11 and 20 minutes. Of the 253 patients included, 142 (56%) experienced at least one serious adverse event. Of the 1,529 nursing procedures, 295 (19%) were complicated by at least one serious adverse event. In multivariate analysis, the factors associated with serious adverse event were as follows: presence of a specific protocol (p = 0.011); tracheostomy (p = 0.032); administration of opioids (p = 0.007); presence of a physician (p = 0.0004); duration of nursing care between 6 and 10 minutes (p = 0.003), duration of nursing care between 11 and 20 minutes (p = 0.005), duration of nursing care greater than 40 minutes (p = 0.04) with a reference duration of nursing care between 20 and 40 minutes. Conclusions Serious adverse events were observed in one-half of patients and concerned one-fifth of nurses, confirming the need for caution. Further studies are needed to test systematic serious adverse event prevention strategies.

Background The death rate in intensive care units (ICUs) can reach 20%. More than half occurs after a decision of care withholding/withdrawal. We aimed at describing and evaluating the experience of ICU physicians and nurses involved in the end-of-life (EOL) procedure. Primary objective was the evaluation of the experience of EOL assessed by the CAESAR questionnaire. Secondary objectives were to describe factors associated with a low or high score and to examine the association between Numeric Analogic Scale and quality of EOL. Methods Consecutive adult patients deceased in 52 ICUs were included between April and June 2018. Characteristics of patients and caregivers, therapeutics and care involved after withdrawal were recorded. CAESAR score included 15 items, rated from 1 (traumatic experience) to 5 (comforting experience). The sum was rated from 15 to 75 (the highest, the best experience). Numeric Analogic Scale was rated from 0 (worst EOL) to 10 (optimal EOL). Results Five hundred and ten patients were included, 403 underwent decision of care withholding/withdrawal, and among them 362 underwent effective care withdrawal. Among the 510 patients, mean CAESAR score was 55/75 (± 6) for nurses and 62/75 (± 5) for physicians (P P = 0.06). CAESAR score and Numeric Analogic Scale were significantly but weakly correlated. They were significantly higher for both nurses and physicians if the patient died after a decision of withholding/withdrawal. In multivariable analysis, among the 362 patients with effective care withdrawal, disagreement on the intensity of life support between caregivers, non-invasive ventilation and monitoring and blood tests the day of death were associated with lower score for nurses. For physicians, cardiopulmonary resuscitation the day of death was associated with lower score in multivariable analysis. Conclusion Experience of EOL was better in patients with withholding/withdrawal decision as compared to those without. Our results suggest that improvement of nurses’ participation in the end-of-life process, as well as less invasive care, would probably improve the experience of EOL for both nurses and physicians. Registration: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT03392857.

National audience

International audience

International audience