8 research outputs found

    Physicians' and nurses' opinions on selective decontamination of the digestive tract and selective oropharyngeal decontamination: a survey

    Get PDF
    Contains fulltext : 89741.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)INTRODUCTION: Use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) and selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD) in intensive care patients has been controversial for years. Through regular questionnaires we determined expectations concerning SDD (effectiveness) and experience with SDD and SOD (workload and patient friendliness), as perceived by nurses and physicians. METHODS: A survey was embedded in a group-randomized, controlled, cross-over multicenter study in the Netherlands in which, during three 6-month periods, SDD, SOD or standard care was used in random order. At the end of each study period, all nurses and physicians from participating intensive care units received study questionnaires. RESULTS: In all, 1024 (71%) of 1450 questionnaires were returned by nurses and 253 (82%) of 307 by physicians. Expectations that SDD improved patient outcome increased from 71% and 77% of respondents after the first two study periods to 82% at the end of the study (P = 0.004), with comparable trends among nurses and physicians. Nurses considered SDD to impose a higher workload (median 5.0, on a scale from 1 (low) to 10 (high)) than SOD (median 4.0) and standard care (median 2.0). Both SDD and SOD were considered less patient friendly than standard care (medians 4.0, 4.0 and 6.0, respectively). According to physicians, SDD had a higher workload (median 5.5) than SOD (median 5.0), which in turn was higher than standard care (median 2.5). Furthermore, physicians graded patient friendliness of standard care (median 8.0) higher than that of SDD and SOD (both median 6.0). CONCLUSIONS: Although perceived effectiveness of SDD increased as the trial proceeded, both among physicians and nurses, SOD and SDD were, as compared to standard care, considered to increase workload and to reduce patient friendliness. Therefore, education about the importance of oral care and on the effects of SDD and SOD on patient outcomes will be important when implementing these strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN35176830

    Nonelective surgery at night and in-hospital mortality: Prospective observational data from the European Surgical Outcomes Study

    No full text
    Contains fulltext : 152541.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that sleep deprivation associated with night-time working may adversely affect performance resulting in a reduction in the safety of surgery and anaesthesia. OBJECTIVE: Our primary objective was to evaluate an association between nonelective night-time surgery and in-hospital mortality. We hypothesised that urgent surgery performed during the night was associated with higher in-hospital mortality and also an increase in the duration of hospital stay and the number of admissions to critical care. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. This is a secondary analysis of a large database related to perioperative care and outcome (European Surgical Outcome Study). SETTING: Four hundred and ninety-eight hospitals in 28 European countries. PATIENTS: Men and women older than 16 years who underwent nonelective, noncardiac surgery were included according to time of the procedure. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; the secondary outcome was the duration of hospital stay and critical care admission. RESULTS: Eleven thousand two hundred and ninety patients undergoing urgent surgery were included in the analysis with 636 in-hospital deaths (5.6%). Crude mortality odds ratios (ORs) increased sequentially from daytime [426 deaths (5.3%)] to evening [150 deaths (6.0%), OR 1.14; 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 1.38] to night-time [60 deaths (8.3%), OR 1.62; 95% confidence interval 1.22 to 2.14]. Following adjustment for confounding factors, surgery during the evening (OR 1.09; 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.31) and night (OR 1.20; 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.6) was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative death. Admittance rate to an ICU increased sequentially from daytime [891 (11.1%)], to evening [347 (13.8%)] to night time [149 (20.6%)]. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing nonelective urgent noncardiac surgery, in-hospital mortality was associated with well known risk factors related to patients and surgery, but we did not identify any relationship with the time of day at which the procedure was performed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01203605

    Nonelective surgery at night and in-hospital mortality

    No full text
    BACKGROUND Evidence suggests that sleep deprivation associated with night-time working may adversely affect performance resulting in a reduction in the safety of surgery and anaesthesia. OBJECTIVE Our primary objective was to evaluate an association between nonelective night-time surgery and in-hospital mortality. We hypothesised that urgent surgery performed during the night was associated with higher in-hospital mortality and also an increase in the duration of hospital stay and the number of admissions to critical care. DESIGN A prospective cohort study. This is a secondary analysis of a large database related to perioperative care and outcome (European Surgical Outcome Study). SETTING Four hundred and ninety-eight hospitals in 28 European countries. PATIENTS Men and women older than 16 years who underwent nonelective, noncardiac surgery were included according to time of the procedure. INTERVENTION None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; the secondary outcome was the duration of hospital stay and critical care admission. RESULTS Eleven thousand two hundred and ninety patients undergoing urgent surgery were included in the analysis with 636 in-hospital deaths (5.6%). Crude mortality odds ratios (ORs) increased sequentially from daytime [426 deaths (5.3%)] to evening [150 deaths (6.0%), OR 1.14; 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 1.38] to night-time [60 deaths (8.3%), OR 1.62; 95% confidence interval 1.22 to 2.14]. Following adjustment for confounding factors, surgery during the evening (OR 1.09; 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.31) and night (OR 1.20; 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.6) was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative death. Admittance rate to an ICU increased sequentially from daytime [891 (11.1%)], to evening [347 (13.8%)] to night time [149 (20.6%)]. CONCLUSION In patients undergoing nonelective urgent noncardiac surgery, in-hospital mortality was associated with well known risk factors related to patients and surgery, but we did not identify any relationship with the time of day at which the procedure was performed

    Immunocompromised patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome : Secondary analysis of the LUNG SAFE database

    Get PDF
    The aim of this study was to describe data on epidemiology, ventilatory management, and outcome of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in immunocompromised patients. Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis on the cohort of immunocompromised patients enrolled in the Large Observational Study to Understand the Global Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Failure (LUNG SAFE) study. The LUNG SAFE study was an international, prospective study including hypoxemic patients in 459 ICUs from 50 countries across 5 continents. Results: Of 2813 patients with ARDS, 584 (20.8%) were immunocompromised, 38.9% of whom had an unspecified cause. Pneumonia, nonpulmonary sepsis, and noncardiogenic shock were their most common risk factors for ARDS. Hospital mortality was higher in immunocompromised than in immunocompetent patients (52.4% vs 36.2%; p < 0.0001), despite similar severity of ARDS. Decisions regarding limiting life-sustaining measures were significantly more frequent in immunocompromised patients (27.1% vs 18.6%; p < 0.0001). Use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) as first-line treatment was higher in immunocompromised patients (20.9% vs 15.9%; p = 0.0048), and immunodeficiency remained independently associated with the use of NIV after adjustment for confounders. Forty-eight percent of the patients treated with NIV were intubated, and their mortality was not different from that of the patients invasively ventilated ab initio. Conclusions: Immunosuppression is frequent in patients with ARDS, and infections are the main risk factors for ARDS in these immunocompromised patients. Their management differs from that of immunocompetent patients, particularly the greater use of NIV as first-line ventilation strategy. Compared with immunocompetent subjects, they have higher mortality regardless of ARDS severity as well as a higher frequency of limitation of life-sustaining measures. Nonetheless, nearly half of these patients survive to hospital discharge. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02010073. Registered on 12 December 2013

    Death in hospital following ICU discharge : insights from the LUNG SAFE study

    Get PDF
    Altres ajuts: Italian Ministry of University and Research (MIUR)-Department of Excellence project PREMIA (PREcision MedIcine Approach: bringing biomarker research to clinic); Science Foundation Ireland Future Research Leaders Award; European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), Brussels; St Michael's Hospital, Toronto; University of Milan-Bicocca, Monza, Italy.Background: To determine the frequency of, and factors associated with, death in hospital following ICU discharge to the ward. Methods: The Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE study was an international, multicenter, prospective cohort study of patients with severe respiratory failure, conducted across 459 ICUs from 50 countries globally. This study aimed to understand the frequency and factors associated with death in hospital in patients who survived their ICU stay. We examined outcomes in the subpopulation discharged with no limitations of life sustaining treatments ('treatment limitations'), and the subpopulations with treatment limitations. Results: 2186 (94%) patients with no treatment limitations discharged from ICU survived, while 142 (6%) died in hospital. 118 (61%) of patients with treatment limitations survived while 77 (39%) patients died in hospital. Patients without treatment limitations that died in hospital after ICU discharge were older, more likely to have COPD, immunocompromise or chronic renal failure, less likely to have trauma as a risk factor for ARDS. Patients that died post ICU discharge were less likely to receive neuromuscular blockade, or to receive any adjunctive measure, and had a higher pre- ICU discharge non-pulmonary SOFA score. A similar pattern was seen in patients with treatment limitations that died in hospital following ICU discharge. Conclusions: A significant proportion of patients die in hospital following discharge from ICU, with higher mortality in patients with limitations of life-sustaining treatments in place. Non-survivors had higher systemic illness severity scores at ICU discharge than survivors. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02010073

    Resolved versus confirmed ARDS after 24&#160;h: insights from the LUNG SAFE study

    No full text
    Purpose: To evaluate patients with resolved versus confirmed ARDS, identify subgroups with substantial mortality risk, and to determine the utility of day 2 ARDS reclassification. Methods: Our primary objective, in this secondary LUNG SAFE analysis, was to compare outcome in patients with resolved versus confirmed ARDS after 24\ua0h. Secondary objectives included identifying factors associated with ARDS persistence and mortality, and the utility of day 2 ARDS reclassification. Results: Of 2377 patients fulfilling the ARDS definition on the first day of ARDS (day 1) and receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, 503 (24%) no longer fulfilled the ARDS definition the next day, 52% of whom initially had moderate or severe ARDS. Higher tidal volume on day 1 of ARDS was associated with confirmed ARDS [OR 1.07 (CI 1.01\u20131.13), P = 0.035]. Hospital mortality was 38% overall, ranging from 31% in resolved ARDS to 41% in confirmed ARDS, and 57% in confirmed severe ARDS at day 2. In both\ua0resolved and confirmed\ua0ARDS, age, non-respiratory SOFA score, lower PEEP and P/F ratio, higher peak pressure and respiratory rate were each\ua0associated with mortality. In confirmed ARDS, pH and the presence of immunosuppression or neoplasm were also associated\ua0with mortality. The increase in area under the receiver operating curve for ARDS reclassification on day 2 was marginal. Conclusions: ARDS, whether resolved or confirmed at day 2, has a high mortality rate. ARDS reclassification at day 2 has limited predictive value for mortality. The substantial mortality risk in severe confirmed ARDS suggests that complex interventions might best be tested in this population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02010073. \ua9 2018, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature and ESICM

    Correction to: Potentially modifiable factors contributing to outcome from acute respiratory distress syndrome: the LUNG SAFE study

    No full text
    Correction to: Intensive Care Med (2016) 42:1865\u20131876 DOI 10.1007/s00134-016-4571-

    Mechanical ventilation in patients with cardiogenic pulmonary edema : a sub-analysis of the LUNG SAFE study

    No full text
    Patients with acute respiratory failure caused by cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE) may require mechanical ventilation that can cause further lung damage. Our aim was to determine the impact of ventilatory settings on CPE mortality. Patients from the LUNG SAFE cohort, a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients undergoing mechanical ventilation, were studied. Relationships between ventilatory parameters and outcomes (ICU discharge/hospital mortality) were assessed using latent mixture analysis and a marginal structural model. From 4499 patients, 391 meeting CPE criteria (median age 70 [interquartile range 59-78], 40% female) were included. ICU and hospital mortality were 34% and 40%, respectively. ICU survivors were younger (67 [57-77] vs 74 [64-80] years, p < 0.001) and had lower driving (12 [8-16] vs 15 [11-17] cmHO, p < 0.001), plateau (20 [15-23] vs 22 [19-26] cmHO, p < 0.001) and peak (21 [17-27] vs 26 [20-32] cmHO, p < 0.001) pressures. Latent mixture analysis of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation on ICU day 1 revealed a subgroup ventilated with high pressures with lower probability of being discharged alive from the ICU (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79 [95% confidence interval 0.60-1.05], p = 0.103) and increased hospital mortality (HR 1.65 [1.16-2.36], p = 0.005). In a marginal structural model, driving pressures in the first week (HR 1.12 [1.06-1.18], p < 0.001) and tidal volume after day 7 (HR 0.69 [0.52-0.93], p = 0.015) were related to survival. Higher airway pressures in invasively ventilated patients with CPE are related to mortality. These patients may be exposed to an increased risk of ventilator-induced lung injury. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02010073
    corecore