The incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia using the PneuX System with or without elective endotracheal tube exchange: A pilot study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The PneuX System is a novel endotracheal tube and tracheal seal monitor, which has been designed to minimise the aspiration of oropharyngeal secretions. We aimed to determine the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in patients who were intubated with the PneuX System and to establish whether intermittent subglottic secretion drainage could be performed reliably and safely using the PneuX System.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>In this retrospective observational study, data was collected from 53 sequential patients. Nine (17%) patients were initially intubated with the PneuX System and 44 (83%) patients underwent elective exchange to the PneuX System. There were no episodes of VAP while the PneuX System was <it>in situ</it>. On an intention to treat basis, the incidence VAP was 1.8%. There were no complications from, or failure of, subglottic secretion drainage during the study.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our study demonstrates that a low incidence of VAP is possible using the PneuX System. Our study also demonstrates that elective exchange and intermittent subglottic secretion drainage can be performed reliably and safely using the PneuX System.</p

Overview of medical errors and adverse events

Safety is a global concept that encompasses efficiency, security of care, reactivity of caregivers, and satisfaction of patients and relatives. Patient safety has emerged as a major target for healthcare improvement. Quality assurance is a complex task, and patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are more likely than other hospitalized patients to experience medical errors, due to the complexity of their conditions, need for urgent interventions, and considerable workload fluctuation. Medication errors are the most common medical errors and can induce adverse events. Two approaches are available for evaluating and improving quality-of-care: the room-for-improvement model, in which problems are identified, plans are made to resolve them, and the results of the plans are measured; and the monitoring model, in which quality indicators are defined as relevant to potential problems and then monitored periodically. Indicators that reflect structures, processes, or outcomes have been developed by medical societies. Surveillance of these indicators is organized at the hospital or national level. Using a combination of methods improves the results. Errors are caused by combinations of human factors and system factors, and information must be obtained on how people make errors in the ICU environment. Preventive strategies are more likely to be effective if they rely on a system-based approach, in which organizational flaws are remedied, rather than a human-based approach of encouraging people not to make errors. The development of a safety culture in the ICU is crucial to effective prevention and should occur before the evaluation of safety programs, which are more likely to be effective when they involve bundles of measures

Nucleic acid amplification tests in the diagnosis of tuberculous pleuritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Conventional tests for tuberculous pleuritis have several limitations. A variety of new, rapid tests such as nucleic acid amplification tests – including polymerase chain reaction – have been evaluated in recent times. We conducted a systematic review to determine the accuracy of nucleic acid amplification (NAA) tests in the diagnosis of tuberculous pleuritis. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 38 English and Spanish articles (with 40 studies), identified via searches of six electronic databases, hand searching of selected journals, and contact with authors, experts, and test manufacturers. Sensitivity, specificity, and other measures of accuracy were pooled using random effects models. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to summarize overall test performance. Heterogeneity in study results was formally explored using subgroup analyses. RESULTS: Of the 40 studies included, 26 used in-house ("home-brew") tests, and 14 used commercial tests. Commercial tests had a low overall sensitivity (0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43, 0.77), and high specificity (0.98; 95% CI 0.96, 0.98). The positive and negative likelihood ratios for commercial tests were 25.4 (95% CI 16.2, 40.0) and 0.40 (95% CI 0.24, 0.67), respectively. All commercial tests had consistently high specificity estimates; the sensitivity estimates, however, were heterogeneous across studies. With the in-house tests, both sensitivity and specificity estimates were significantly heterogeneous. Clinically meaningful summary estimates could not be determined for in-house tests. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that commercial NAA tests may have a potential role in confirming (ruling in) tuberculous pleuritis. However, these tests have low and variable sensitivity and, therefore, may not be useful in excluding (ruling out) the disease. NAA test results, therefore, cannot replace conventional tests; they need to be interpreted in parallel with clinical findings and results of conventional tests. The accuracy of in-house nucleic acid amplification tests is poorly defined because of heterogeneity in study results. The clinical applicability of in-house NAA tests remains unclear