Antimicrobial de-escalation in the critically ill patient and assessment of clinical cure: the DIANA study

Purpose: The DIANA study aimed to evaluate how often antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) of empirical treatment is performed in the intensive care unit (ICU) and to estimate the effect of ADE on clinical cure on day 7 following treatment initiation. Methods: Adult ICU patients receiving empirical antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infection were studied in a prospective observational study from October 2016 until May 2018. ADE was defined as (1) discontinuation of an antimicrobial in case of empirical combination therapy or (2) replacement of an antimicrobial with the intention to narrow the antimicrobial spectrum, within the first 3 days of therapy. Inverse probability (IP) weighting was used to account for time-varying confounding when estimating the effect of ADE on clinical cure. Results: Overall, 1495 patients from 152 ICUs in 28 countries were studied. Combination therapy was prescribed in 50%, and carbapenems were prescribed in 26% of patients. Empirical therapy underwent ADE, no change and change other than ADE within the first 3 days in 16%, 63% and 22%, respectively. Unadjusted mortality at day 28 was 15.8% in the ADE cohort and 19.4% in patients with no change [p = 0.27; RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.60\u20131.14)]. The IP-weighted relative risk estimate for clinical cure comparing ADE with no-ADE patients (no change or change other than ADE) was 1.37 (95% CI 1.14\u20131.64). Conclusion: ADE was infrequently applied in critically ill-infected patients. The observational effect estimate on clinical cure suggested no deleterious impact of ADE compared to no-ADE. However, residual confounding is likely

Nurses' perceptions of aids and obstacles to the provision of optimal end of life care in ICU

Contains fulltext : 172380.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19

The genetic make-up of an individual contributes to the susceptibility and response to viral infection. Although environmental, clinical and social factors have a role in the chance of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and the severity of COVID-191,2, host genetics may also be important. Identifying host-specific genetic factors may reveal biological mechanisms of therapeutic relevance and clarify causal relationships of modifiable environmental risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection and outcomes. We formed a global network of researchers to investigate the role of human genetics in SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity. Here we describe the results of three genome-wide association meta-analyses that consist of up to 49,562 patients with COVID-19 from 46 studies across 19 countries. We report 13 genome-wide significant loci that are associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe manifestations of COVID-19. Several of these loci correspond to previously documented associations to lung or autoimmune and inflammatory diseases3–7. They also represent potentially actionable mechanisms in response to infection. Mendelian randomization analyses support a causal role for smoking and body-mass index for severe COVID-19 although not for type II diabetes. The identification of novel host genetic factors associated with COVID-19 was made possible by the community of human genetics researchers coming together to prioritize the sharing of data, results, resources and analytical frameworks. This working model of international collaboration underscores what is possible for future genetic discoveries in emerging pandemics, or indeed for any complex human disease

Inflammation and Nutritional Science for Programs/Policies and Interpretation of Research Evidence (INSPIRE).

An increasing recognition has emerged of the complexities of the global health agenda-specifically, the collision of infections and noncommunicable diseases and the dual burden of over- and undernutrition. Of particular practical concern are both 1) the need for a better understanding of the bidirectional relations between nutritional status and the development and function of the immune and inflammatory response and 2) the specific impact of the inflammatory response on the selection, use, and interpretation of nutrient biomarkers. The goal of the Inflammation and Nutritional Science for Programs/Policies and Interpretation of Research Evidence (INSPIRE) is to provide guidance for those users represented by the global food and nutrition enterprise. These include researchers (bench and clinical), clinicians providing care/treatment, those developing and evaluating programs/interventions at scale, and those responsible for generating evidence-based policy. The INSPIRE process included convening 5 thematic working groups (WGs) charged with developing summary reports around the following issues: 1) basic overview of the interactions between nutrition, immune function, and the inflammatory response; 2) examination of the evidence regarding the impact of nutrition on immune function and inflammation; 3) evaluation of the impact of inflammation and clinical conditions (acute and chronic) on nutrition; 4) examination of existing and potential new approaches to account for the impact of inflammation on biomarker interpretation and use; and 5) the presentation of new approaches to the study of these relations. Each WG was tasked with synthesizing a summary of the evidence for each of these topics and delineating the remaining gaps in our knowledge. This review consists of a summary of the INSPIRE workshop and the WG deliberation