Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012." DESIGN: A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. METHODS: The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality

Factors that influence nurses' assessment of patient acuity and response to acute deterioration.

BACKGROUND: nurses play a crucial role in the early recognition and management of the deteriorating patient. They are responsible for the care they provide to their patients, part of which is the monitoring of vital signs (blood pressure, pulse, respiratory rate and temperature), which are fundamental in the surveillance of deterioration. The aim of this study was to discover what factors influence how nurses assess patient acuity and their response to acute deterioration. METHODS: a generic qualitative approach was used. Some 10 nurses working in an acute NHS trust were interviewed using a semi- structured approach, with equal representation from medical and surgical inpatient wards. RESULTS: the main themes identified were collegial relationships, intuition, and interpretation of the MEWS system (Modified Early Warning Score). Collegial relationships with the medical staff had some influence on the nurses' assessment, as they tended to accept the medical peers' assessment as absolute, rather than their own assessment. It was also highlighted that nurses relied on the numerical escalation of the MEWS system to identify the deteriorating patient, instead of their own clinical judgement of the situation. Interestingly, the nurses found no difficulty in escalating the patient's care to medical staff when the patient presented with a high MEWS score. The difficulty arose when the MEWS score was low-the participants found it challenging to authenticate their findings. CONCLUSION: this study has identified several confounding factors that influence the ways in which nurses assess patient acuity and their response to acute deterioration. The information provides a crucial step forward in identifying strategies to develop further training

"I really should've gone to the doctor": older adults and family caregivers describe their experiences with community-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND: Responding to acute illness symptoms can often be challenging for older adults. The primary objective of this study was to describe how community-dwelling older adults and their family members responded to symptoms of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). METHODS: A qualitative study that used face-to-face semi-structured interviews to collect data from a purposeful sample of seniors aged 60+ and their family members living in a mid-sized Canadian city. Data analysis began with descriptive and interpretive coding, then advanced as the research team repeatedly compared emerging thematic categories to the raw data. Searches for disconfirming evidence and member checking through focus groups provided additional data and helped ensure rigour. RESULTS: Community-acquired pneumonia symptoms varied greatly among older adults, making decisions to seek care difficult for them and their family members. Both groups took varying amounts of time as they attempted to sort out what was wrong and then determine how best to respond. Even after they concluded something was wrong, older adults with confirmed pneumonia continued to wait for days, to over a week, before seeking medical care. Participants provided diverse reasons for this delay, including fear, social obligations (work, family, leisure), and accessibility barriers (time, place, systemic). Several older adults and family members regretted their delays in seeking help. CONCLUSION: Treatment-seeking delay is a variable, multi-phased decision-making process that incorporates symptom assessment plus psychosocial and situational factors. Public health and health care professionals need to educate older adults about the potential causes and consequences of unnecessary waits. Such efforts may reduce the severity of community-acquired pneumonia upon presentation at clinics and hospitals, and that, in turn, could potentially improve health outcomes

Long-term consequences of an intensive care unit stay in older critically ill patients: design of a longitudinal study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Modern methods in intensive care medicine often enable the survival of older critically ill patients. The short-term outcomes for patients treated in intensive care units (ICUs), such as survival to hospital discharge, are well documented. However, relatively little is known about subsequent long-term outcomes. Pain, anxiety and agitation are important stress factors for many critically ill patients. There are very few studies concerned with pain, anxiety and agitation and the consequences in older critically ill patients. The overall aim of this study is to identify how an ICU stay influences an older person's experiences later in life. More specific, this study has the following objectives: (1) to explore the relationship between pain, anxiety and agitation during ICU stays and experiences of the same symptoms in later life; and (2) to explore the associations between pain, anxiety and agitation experienced during ICU stays and their effect on subsequent health-related quality of life, use of the health care system (readmissions, doctor visits, rehabilitation, medication use), living situation, and survival after discharge and at 6 and 12 months of follow-up.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A prospective, longitudinal study will be used for this study. A total of 150 older critically ill patients in the ICU will participate (ICU group). Pain, anxiety, agitation, morbidity, mortality, use of the health care system, and health-related quality of life will be measured at 3 intervals after a baseline assessment. Baseline measurements will be taken 48 hours after ICU admission and one week thereafter. Follow-up measurements will take place 6 months and 12 months after discharge from the ICU. To be able to interpret trends in scores on outcome variables in the ICU group, a comparison group of 150 participants, matched by age and gender, recruited from the Swiss population, will be interviewed at the same intervals as the ICU group.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Little research has focused on long term consequences after ICU admission in older critically ill patients. The present study is specifically focussing on long term consequences of stress factors experienced during ICU admission.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN52754370">ISRCTN52754370</a></p

A predictive model for the early identification of patients at risk for a prolonged intensive care unit length of stay

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients with a prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay account for a disproportionate amount of resource use. Early identification of patients at risk for a prolonged length of stay can lead to quality enhancements that reduce ICU stay. This study developed and validated a model that identifies patients at risk for a prolonged ICU stay.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a retrospective cohort study of 343,555 admissions to 83 ICUs in 31 U.S. hospitals from 2002-2007. We examined the distribution of ICU length of stay to identify a threshold where clinicians might be concerned about a prolonged stay; this resulted in choosing a 5-day cut-point. From patients remaining in the ICU on day 5 we developed a multivariable regression model that predicted remaining ICU stay. Predictor variables included information gathered at admission, day 1, and ICU day 5. Data from 12,640 admissions during 2002-2005 were used to develop the model, and the remaining 12,904 admissions to internally validate the model. Finally, we used data on 11,903 admissions during 2006-2007 to externally validate the model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The variables that had the greatest impact on remaining ICU length of stay were those measured on day 5, not at admission or during day 1. Mechanical ventilation, PaO₂: FiO₂ratio, other physiologic components, and sedation on day 5 accounted for 81.6% of the variation in predicted remaining ICU stay. In the external validation set observed ICU stay was 11.99 days and predicted total ICU stay (5 days + day 5 predicted remaining stay) was 11.62 days, a difference of 8.7 hours. For the same patients, the difference between mean observed and mean predicted ICU stay using the APACHE day 1 model was 149.3 hours. The new model's r²was 20.2% across individuals and 44.3% across units.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A model that uses patient data from ICU days 1 and 5 accurately predicts a prolonged ICU stay. These predictions are more accurate than those based on ICU day 1 data alone. The model can be used to benchmark ICU performance and to alert physicians to explore care alternatives aimed at reducing ICU stay.</p

A922 Sequential measurement of 1 hour creatinine clearance (1-CRCL) in critically ill patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI)

Meeting abstrac

Patient Safety in Internal Medicine

AbstractHospital Internal Medicine (IM) is the branch of medicine that deals with the diagnosis and non-surgical treatment of diseases, providing the comprehensive care in the office and in the hospital, managing both common and complex illnesses of adolescents, adults, and the elderly. IM is a key ward for Health National Services. In Italy, for example, about 17.3% of acute patients are discharged from the IM departments. After the epidemiological transition to chronic/degenerative diseases, patients admitted to hospital are often poly-pathological and so requiring a global approach as in IM. As such transition was not associated—with rare exceptions—to hospital re-organization of beds and workforce, IM wards are often overcrowded, burdened by off-wards patients and subjected to high turnover and discharge pressure. All these factors contribute to amplify some traditional clinical risks for patients and health operators. The aim of our review is to describe several potential errors and their prevention strategies, which should be implemented by physicians, nurses, and other healthcare professionals working in IM wards