Search

Purpose It is unknown whether protocols targeting systematic prevention and treatment of fever achieve lower mean body temperature than usual care in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The objective of the Randomised Evaluation of Active Control of temperature vs. ORdinary temperature management trial was to confirm the feasibility of such a protocol with a view to conducting a larger trial. Methods We randomly assigned 184 adults without acute brain pathologies who had a fever in the previous 12 h, and were expected to be ventilated beyond the calendar day after recruitment, to systematic prevention and treatment of fever or usual care. The primary outcome was mean body temperature in the ICU within 7 days of randomisation. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, ICU-free days and survival time censored at hospital discharge. Results Compared with usual temperature management, active management significantly reduced mean temperature. In both groups, fever generally abated within 72 h. The mean temperature difference between groups was greatest in the first 48 h, when it was generally in the order of 0.5 °C. Overall, 23 of 89 patients assigned to active management (25.8%) and 23 of 89 patients assigned to usual management (25.8%) died in hospital (odds ratio 1.0, 95% CI 0.51-1.96, P = 1.0). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in ICU-free days or survival to day 90. Conclusions Active temperature management reduced body temperature compared with usual care; however, fever abated rapidly, even in patients assigned to usual care, and the magnitude of temperature separation was small. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number, ACTRN12616001285448, Author(s): Paul J. Young [sup.1] [sup.2], Michael J. Bailey [sup.3], Frances Bass [sup.4] [sup.5], Richard W. Beasley [sup.2], Ross C. Freebairn [sup.2] [sup.6], Naomi E. Hammond [sup.4] [sup.5], Frank M. [...]

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2020. Other selected articles can be found online at https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2020. Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from http://www.springer.com/series/8901. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To illuminate opportunities for care in the context of deceased organ donation by exploring pre-existing family and healthcare professional characteristics, in-hospital experiences, and ongoing adjustment through the lenses of grief theory, systems theory, meaningmaking, narrative, and organ donation literature. Method: Qualitative longitudinal case studies explored individual and family change in five Australian families who had consented to Donation after Circulatory Determination of Death at a single centre. Participants attended semi-structured interviews at four, eight, and twelve months after the death. Findings: Family values, pre-existing relationships, and in-hospital experiences influenced first responses to their changed lives, understanding of the patient's death, and ongoing family adjustment. Novel behaviour that was conguent with family values was required at the hospital, especially if the patient had previously played a key role in family decision-making. This behaviour and emerging interactional patterns were drawn into family life over the first year of their bereavement. Recommendations: Training that includes lenses introduced in this study will enable healthcare professionals to confidently respond to individual and family psychosocial needs. Conclusion: The lenses of grief theory and systems thinking highlight opportunities for care tailored to the unique in-hospital context and needs that emerge in the months that follow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is significant interest in the potential for nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH), as a novel therapy for patients with COVID‐19 induced acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure requiring invasive ventilation. The scientific and biological rationale for nebulised heparin stems from the evidence for extensive activation of coagulation resulting in pulmonary microvascular thrombosis in COVID‐19 pneumonia. Nebulised delivery of heparin to the lung may limit alveolar fibrin deposition and thereby limit progression of lung injury. Importantly, laboratory studies show that heparin can directly inactivate the SARS‐CoV‐2 virus, thereby prevent its entry into and infection of mammalian cells. UFH has additional anti‐inflammatory and mucolytic properties that may be useful in this context. Methods and intervention: The Can nebulised HepArin Reduce morTality and time to Extubation in Patients with COVID‐19 Requiring invasive ventilation Meta‐Trial (CHARTER‐MT) is a collaborative prospective individual patient data analysis of on‐going randomised controlled clinical trials across several countries in five continents, examining the effects of inhaled heparin in patients with COVID‐19 requiring invasive ventilation on various endpoints. Each constituent study will randomise patients with COVID‐19 induced respiratory failure requiring invasive ventilation. Patients are randomised to receive nebulised heparin or standard care (open label studies) or placebo (blinded placebo‐controlled studies) while under invasive ventilation. Each participating study collect a pre‐defined minimum dataset. The primary outcome for the meta‐trial is the number of ventilator‐free days up to day 28 day, defined as days alive and free from invasive ventilation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intermittent feeding versus continuous feeding used different methods, employed shorter fasting intervals, ignored patients' posture in bed during feeds, and showed mixed results. Prolonged fasting intervals are hypothesized to have several benefits. Additionally, there is evidence for more efficient gastric emptying in the right lateral position. In this multicenter RCT, we aimed to compare the effects of three-times-a-day gastric feeding while in the right lateral tilt position (intermittent postural feeding) versus standard continuous gastric feeding (standard feeding) on gastrointestinal intolerance and mortality among mechanically ventilated patients in ICU., Methods: Adult ICU patients with gastric feeding tube in-situ and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation were randomized to either intermittent postural feeding group or to the standard feeding group. The feeding formula, target daily feed volume and posture turns were determined as per standard practice for all patients. Primary outcome was an incidence rate per 100 patient-days of gastrointestinal intolerance, a composite outcome of vomiting, diarrhea or constipation. Secondary outcomes were all-cause hospital mortality, gastrointestinal intolerance-free days, ventilator-free days, episodes of vomiting or diarrhea per patient, and mean diet volume ratio (diet received/diet prescribed)., Results: At five multidisciplinary ICUs, 120 mechanically ventilated, adult ICU patients (median age 65 years, 60% males) were randomly allocated to intermittent postural feeding (n = 61) and standard feeding (n = 59). The primary outcome did not differ between intermittent feeding arm versus standard arm (8.5, 95% confidence interval (CI): 5.9-11.8, versus 6.2, 95% CI: 4.1-9.1 per 100 patient-days; p = 0.23). Gastrointestinal intolerance-free days until day 14 were similar (6 [2-8] versus 5 [2-10]; p = 0.68) in both groups. Number of episodes per patient of vomiting, diarrhea, or constipation also did not differ in between groups. All-cause hospital mortality between intermittent feeding arm versus standard arm was 20% versus 31% (p = 0.17). There were no significant between-group differences in any of the other secondary outcomes., Conclusions: Intermittent gastric feeds delivered three-times-a-day while in the right lateral tilt position among mechanically ventilated patients was as well tolerated as the continuous enteral feeding. A definitive RCT to assess other clinically important outcomes is justified., Trial Registration: ACTRN12616000212459 https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=365526&isReview=true., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest Authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.)

Background: Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) is an intervention that can be used to rehabilitate the respiratory muscle deconditioning experienced by patients with critical illness, requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Clinicians are currently using mechanical threshold IMT devices that have limited resistance ranges., Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and acceptability of using an electronic device to facilitate IMT with participants requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation., Method: A dual-centre observational cohort study, with convenience sampling, was conducted at two tertiary intensive care units. Daily training supervised by intensive care unit physiotherapists was completed with the electronic IMT device. A priori definitions for feasibility, safety, and acceptability were determined. Feasibility was defined as more than 80% of planned sessions completed. Safety was defined as no major adverse events and less than 3% minor adverse event rate, and acceptability was evaluated following the acceptability of intervention framework principles., Results: Forty participants completed 197 electronic IMT treatment sessions. Electronic IMT was feasible, with 81% of planned sessions completed. There were 10% minor adverse events and no major adverse events. All the minor adverse events were transient without clinical consequences. All the participants who recalled completing electronic IMT sessions reported that the training was acceptable. Acceptability was demonstrated; over 85% of participants reported that electronic IMT was either helpful or beneficial and that electronic IMT assisted their recovery., Conclusion: Electronic IMT is feasible and acceptable to complete with critically ill participants who require prolonged mechanical ventilation. As all minor adverse events were transient without clinical consequences, electronic IMT can be considered a relatively safe intervention with patients who require prolonged mechanical ventilation., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest No conflicts to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Australian College of Critical Care Nurses Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To compare long-term psychological symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in intubated versus non-intubated ICU survivors., Design: Prospective, multicentre observational cohort study., Setting: Four tertiary medical-surgical ICUs in Australia., Participants: Intubated and non-intubated adult ICU survivors., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcomes : clinically significant psychological symptoms at 3- and 12-month follow-up using Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome-14 for post-traumatic stress disorder; Depression, Anxiety Stress Scales-21 for depression, anxiety, and stress. Secondary outcomes : HRQOL, using EuroQol-5D-5L questionnaire., Results: Of the 133 ICU survivors, 54/116 (47 %) had at least one clinically significant psychological symptom (i.e., post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, stress) at follow-up. Clinically significant scores for psychological symptoms were observed in 26 (39 %) versus 16 (32 %) at 3-months [odds ratio 1.4, 95 % confidence interval (0.66-3.13), p = 0.38]; 23 (37 %) versus 10 (31 %) at 12-months [odds ratio 1.3, 95 % confidence interval (0.53-3.31), p = 0.57] of intubated versus non-intubated survivors, respectively. Usual activities and mobility were the most commonly affected HRQOL dimension, with >30 % at 3 versus months and >20 % at 12-months of overall survivors reporting ≥ moderate problems. There was no difference between the groups in any of the EQ5D dimensions., Conclusions: Nearly one-in-two (47 %) of the intubated and non-intubated ICU survivors reported clinically significant psychological symptoms at 3 and 12-month follow-ups. Overall, more than 30 % at 3-months and over 20 % at 12-months of the survivors in both groups had moderate or worse problems with their usual activities and mobility. The presence of psychological symptoms and HRQOL impairments was similar between the groups., (© 2023 The Authors.)

There is a strong scientific rationale to use nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) in treating patients with COVID-19. This pilot study investigated whether nebulised UFH was safe and had any impact on mortality, length of hospitalisation and clinical progression, in the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19. This parallel group, open label, randomised trial included adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to two hospitals in Brazil. One hundred patients were planned to be randomised to either "standard of care" (SOC) or SOC plus nebulized UFH. The trial was stopped after randomisation of 75 patients due to falling COVID-19 hospitalisation rates. Significance tests were 1-sided test (10% significance level). The key analysis populations were intention to treat (ITT) and modified ITT (mITT) which excluded (from both arms) subjects admitted to ITU or who died within 24 h of randomisation. In the ITT population (n = 75), mortality was numerically lower for nebulised UFH (6 out of 38 patients; 15.8%) versus SOC (10 out of 37 patients; 27.0%), but not statistically significant; odds ratio (OR) 0.51, p = 0.24. However, in the mITT population, nebulised UFH reduced mortality (OR 0.2, p = 0.035). Length of hospital stay was similar between groups, but at day 29, there was a greater improvement in ordinal score following treatment with UFH in the ITT and mITT populations (p = 0.076 and p = 0.012 respectively), while mechanical ventilation rates were lower with UFH in the mITT population (OR 0.31; p = 0.08). Nebulised UFH did not cause any significant adverse events. In conclusion, nebulised UFH added to SOC in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was well tolerated and showed clinical benefit, particularly in patients who received at least 6 doses of heparin. This trial was funded by The J.R. Moulton Charity Trust and registered under REBEC RBR-8r9hy8f (UTN code: U1111-1263-3136)., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest TW reports receiving fees and grant support from Synairgen, Bergenbio, AstraZeneca, Janssen, UCB and Valneva in the area of the submitted work, and from GSK, Boehringer-Ingelheim, AZ, and Roche outside the area of the submitted work. CP reports receiving personal fees and grant support from EpiEndo, Eurodrug, Recipharm and Glycosynnovation, and has equity in Verona Pharma, outside of the submitted work. AW reports receiving fees from Theravance in the area of work, and personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, GSK and Novartis outside the submitted work. JS has equity in Ockham Biotech Ltd. who are developing inhaled heparin for the treatment of respiratory diseases. DS has received personal fees from Aerogen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cipla, CSL Behring, Epiendo, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Glenmark, Gossamerbio, Kinaset, Menarini, Novartis, Pulmatrix, Sanofi, Synairgen, Teva, Theravance and Verona., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors declare no conflict of interest. No funding was obtained for this work.

Background: There are limited published data on the epidemiology of skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. This study intended to describe the annual prevalence, characteristics, and outcomes of critically ill adult patients admitted to the ICU for an SSTI., Methods: This was a registry-based retrospective cohort study, using data submitted to the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database for all admissions with SSTI between 2006 and 2017. The inclusion criteria were as follows: primary diagnosis of SSTI and age ≥16 years. The exclusion criteria were as follows: ICU readmissions (during the same hospital admission) and transfers from ICUs from other hospitals. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcomes were ICU mortality and length of stay (LOS) in the ICU and hospital with independent predictors of outcomes., Results: Admissions due to SSTI accounted for 10 962 (0.7%) of 1 470 197 ICU admissions between 2006 and 2017. Comorbidities were present in 25.2% of the study sample. The in-hospital mortality was 9% (991/10 962), and SSTI necessitating ICU admission accounted for 0.07% of in-hospital mortality of all ICU admissions between 2006 and 2017. Annual prevalence of ICU admissions for SSTI increased from 0.4% to 0.9% during the study period, but in-hospital mortality decreased from 16.1% to 6.8%. The median ICU LOS was 2.1 days (interquartile range = 3.4), and the median hospital LOS was 12.1 days (interquartile range = 20.6). ICU LOS remained stable between 2006 and 2017 (2.0-2.1 days), whereas hospital LOS decreased from 15.7 to 11.2 days. Predictors for in-hospital mortality included Australian and New Zealand Risk of Death scores [odds ratio (OR): 1.07; confidence interval (CI) (1.05, 1.09); p < 0.001], any comorbidity except diabetes [OR: 2.00; CI (1.05, 3.79); p = 0.035], and admission through an emergency response call [OR: 2.07; CI (1.03, 4.16); p = 0.041]., Conclusions: SSTIs are uncommon as primary ICU admission diagnosis. Although the annual prevalence of ICU admissions for SSTI has increased, in-hospital mortality and hospital LOS have decreased over the last decade., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Australian College of Critical Care Nurses Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) has a strong scientific and biological rationale that warrants urgent investigation of its therapeutic potential in patients with COVID-19. UFH has antiviral effects and prevents the SARS-CoV-2 virus' entry into mammalian cells. In addition, UFH has significant anti-inflammatory and anticoagulant properties, which limit progression of lung injury and vascular pulmonary thrombosis., Methods: The INHALEd nebulised unfractionated HEParin for the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 (INHALE-HEP) metatrial is a prospective individual patient data analysis of on-going randomised controlled trials and early phase studies. Individual studies are being conducted in multiple countries. Participating studies randomise adult patients admitted to the hospital with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, who do not require immediate mechanical ventilation, to inhaled nebulised UFH or standard care. All studies collect a minimum core dataset. The primary outcome for the metatrial is intubation (or death, for patients who died before intubation) at day 28. The secondary outcomes are oxygenation, clinical worsening and mortality, assessed in time-to-event analyses. Individual studies may have additional outcomes., Analysis: We use a Bayesian approach to monitoring, followed by analysing individual patient data, outcomes and adverse events. All analyses will follow the intention-to-treat principle, considering all participants in the treatment group to which they were assigned, except for cases lost to follow-up or withdrawn., Trial Registration, Ethics and Dissemination: The metatrial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT04635241. Each contributing study is individually registered and has received approval of the relevant ethics committee or institutional review board. Results of this study will be shared with the World Health Organisation, published in scientific journals and presented at scientific meetings., (© 2020 British Pharmacological Society.)

End-of-life (EOL) care has become an integral part of intensive care medicine and includes the exploration of possibilities for deceased organ and tissue donation. Donation physicians are specialist doctors with expertise in EOL processes encompassing organ and tissue donation, who contribute significantly to improvements in organ and tissue donation services in many countries around the world. Donation physicians are usually also intensive care physicians, and thus they may be faced with the dual obligation of caring for dying patients and their families in the intensive care unit (ICU), whilst at the same time ensuring organ and tissue donation is considered according to best practice. This dual obligation poses specific ethical challenges that need to be carefully understood by clinicians, institutions and health care networks. These obligations are complementary and provide a unique skillset to care for dying patients and their families in the ICU. In this paper we review current controversies around EOL care in the ICU, including the use of palliative analgesia and sedation specifically with regards to withdrawal of cardiorespiratory support, the usefulness of the so-called doctrine of double effect to guide ethical decision-making, and the management of potential or perceived conflicts of interest in the context of dual professional roles., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)