Burnout in cardiac anesthesiologists. results from a national survey in italy

Objective: There is increasing burnout incidence among medical disciplines, and physicians working in emergency settings seem at higher risk. Cardiac anesthesiology is a stressful anesthesiology subspecialty dealing with high-risk patients. The authors hypothesized a high risk of burnout in cardiac anesthesiologists. Design: National survey conducted on burnout Setting: Italian cardiac centers. Participants: Cardiac anesthesiologists. Interventions: The authors administered via email an anonymous questionnaire divided into 3 parts. The first 2 parts evaluated workload and private life. The third part consisted of the Maslach Burnout Inventory test with its 3 constituents: high emotional exhaustion, high depersonalization, and low personal accomplishment. Measurements and Main Results: The authors measured the prevalence and risk of burnout through the Maslach Burnout Inventory questionnaire and analyzed factors influencing burnout. Among 670 contacts from 71 centers, 382 cardiac anesthesiologists completed the survey (57%). The authors found the following mean Maslach Burnout Inventory values: 14.5 ± 9.7 (emotional exhaustion), 9.1 ± 7.1 (depersonalization), and 33.7 ± 8.9 (personal accomplishment). A rate of 34%, 54%, and 66% of respondents scored in “high” or “moderate-high” risk of burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment, respectively). The authors found that, if offered to change subspecialty, 76% of respondents would prefer to remain in cardiac anesthesiology. This preference and parenthood were the only 2 investigated factors with a protective effect against all components of burnout. Significantly lower burnout scores were found in more experienced anesthesiologists. Conclusion: A relatively high incidence of burnout was found in cardiac anesthesiologists, especially regarding high depersonalization and low personal accomplishment. Nonetheless, most of the respondents would choose to remain in cardiac anesthesiology

Experienced Use of Dexmedetomidine in the Intensive Care Unit: A Report of a Structured Consensus

OBJECTIVE: Management of pain, agitation and delirium (PAD) remains to be a true challenge in critically ill patients. The pharmacological proprieties of dexmedetomidine (DEX) make it an ideal candidate drug for light and cooperative sedation, but many practical questions remain unanswered. This structured consensus from 17 intensivists well experienced on PAD management and DEX use provides indications for the appropriate use of DEX in clinical practice. METHODS: A modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used. In four predefined patient populations, the clinical scenarios do not properly cope by the current recommended pharmacological strategies (except DEX), and the possible advantages of DEX use were identified and voted for agreement, after reviewing literature data. RESULTS: Three scenarios in medical patients, five scenarios in patients with acute respiratory failure undergoing non-invasive ventilation, three scenarios in patients with cardiac surgery in the early postoperative period and three scenarios in patients with overt delirium were identified as challenging with the current PAD strategies. In these scenarios, the use of DEX was voted as potentially useful by most of the panellists owing to its specific pharmacological characteristics, such as conservation of cognitive function, lack of effects on the respiratory drive, low induction of delirium and analgesia effects. CONCLUSION: DEX might be considered as a first-line sedative in different scenarios even though conclusive data on its benefits are still lacking

Guidelines on the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms: updates from the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (SICVE)

The objective of these Guidelines was to revise and update the previous 2016 Italian Guidelines on Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Disease, in accordance with the National Guidelines System (SNLG), to guide every practitioner toward the most correct management pathway for this pathology. The methodology applied in this update was the GRADE-SIGN version methodology, following the instructions of the AGREE quality of reporting checklist as well. The first methodological step was the formulation of clinical questions structured according to the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) model according to which the Recommendations were issued. Then, systematic reviews of the Literature were carried out for each PICO question or for homogeneous groups of questions, followed by the selection of the articles and the assessment of the methodological quality for each of them using qualitative checklists. Finally, a Considered Judgment form was filled in for each clinical question, in which the features of the evidence as a whole are assessed to establish the transition from the level of evidence to the direction and strength of the recommendations. These guidelines outline the correct management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm in terms of screening and surveillance. Medical management and indication for surgery are discussed, as well as preoperative assessment regarding patients' background and surgical risk evaluation. Once the indication for surgery has been established, the options for traditional open and endovascular surgery are described and compared, focusing specifically on patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms as well. Finally, indications for early and late postoperative follow-up are explained. The most recent evidence in the Literature has been able to confirm and possibly modify the previous recommendations updating them, likewise to propose new recommendations on prospectively relevant topics

Light sedation with dexmedetomidine: a practical approach for the intensivist in different ICU patients

Light sedation, corresponding to a Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale between 0 and -1 is a priority of modern critical care practice. Dexmedetomidine, a highly selective, central, α2-adrenoceptor agonist, is increasingly administered in the intensive care units (ICUs) as an effective drug to induce light sedation, analgesia and a quasi-physiological sleep in critically ill patients. Although in general dexmedetomidine is well tolerated, side effects as bradycardia, hypertension, and hypotension may occur. Although a general dosing range is suggested, different ICU patients may require different and highly precise titration that may significantly vary due to neurological status, cardio-respiratory function, base-line blood pressure, heart rate, liver efficiency, age and co-administration of other sedatives. This review analyzes the use of dexmedetomidine in different settings including pediatric, adult, medical and surgical patients starting with some considerations on delirium prevention and sleep quality in critically ill patients and how dexmedetomidine may contribute to these crucial aspects. Dexmedetomidine use in specific sub-populations with unique characteristics will be detailed, with a special attention to a safe use

Comment on Savioli et al. Mild Head Trauma: Is Antiplatelet Therapy a Risk Factor for Hemorrhagic Complications? Medicina 2021, 57, 357

We read the article of Savioli G. et al. [...

Early extubation with immediate non-invasive ventilation versus standard weaning in intubated patients for coronavirus disease 2019: a retrospective multicenter study

In patients intubated for hypoxemic acute respiratory failure (ARF) related to novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), we retrospectively compared two weaning strategies, early extubation with immediate non-invasive ventilation (NIV) versus standard weaning encompassing spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), with respect to IMV duration (primary endpoint), extubation failures and reintubations, rate of tracheostomy, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay and mortality (additional endpoints). All COVID-19 adult patients, intubated for hypoxemic ARF and subsequently extubated, were enrolled. Patients were included in two groups, early extubation followed by immediate NIV application, and conventionally weaning after passing SBT. 121 patients were enrolled and analyzed, 66 early extubated and 55 conventionally weaned after passing an SBT. IMV duration was 9 [6-11] days in early extubated patients versus 11 [6-15] days in standard weaning group (p\u2009=\u20090.034). Extubation failures [12 (18.2%) vs. 25 (45.5%), p\u2009=\u20090.002] and reintubations [12 (18.2%) vs. 22 (40.0%) p\u2009=\u20090.009] were fewer in early extubation compared to the standard weaning groups, respectively. Rate of tracheostomy, ICU mortality, and ICU length of stay were no different between groups. Compared to standard weaning, early extubation followed by immediate NIV shortened IMV duration and reduced the rate of extubation failure and reintubation

Emotional status and fear in patients scheduled for elective surgery during COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide cross-sectional survey (COVID-SURGERY)

Background Fragmented data exist on the emotional and psychological distress generated by hospital admission during the pandemic in specific populations of patients, and no data exists on patients scheduled for surgery. The aim of this multicentre nationwide prospective cross-sectional survey was to evaluate the impact of pandemic on emotional status and fear of SARS-CoV-2 contagion in a cohort of elective surgical patients in Italy, scheduled for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Twenty-nine Italian centres were involved in the study, for a total of 2376 patients surveyed (mean age of 58 years ± 16.61; 49.6% males). The survey consisted of 28 total closed questions, including four study outcome questions. More than half of patients had at least one chronic disease (54%), among which cardiovascular diseases were the commonest (58%). The most frequent type of surgery was abdominal (20%), under general anaesthesia (64%). Almost half of the patients (46%) declared to be frightened of going to the hospital for routine checkups; 55% to be afraid of getting SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization and 62% were feared of being hospitalised without seeing family members. Having an oncological disease and other patient-related, centre-related or perioperative factors were independently associated with an increased risk of fear of SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization and of being hospitalised without seeing family members. A previous infection due to SARS-COV-2 was associated with a reduced risk of worse emotional outcomes and fear of SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. Patients who showed the most emotionally vulnerable profile (e.g. use of sleep-inducing drugs, higher fear of surgery or anaesthesia) were at higher risk of worse emotional status towards the hospitalization during COVID-19 pandemic. Being operated in hospitals with lower surgical volume and with COVID-19 wards was associated with worse emotional status and fear of contagion. Conclusions Additional fear and worse emotional status may be frequent in patients scheduled for elective surgery during COVID-19 pandemic. More than half of the participants to the survey were worried about not being able to receive family visits. Psychological support may be considered for patients at higher risk of psychological distress to improve perioperative wellbeing during the pandemic