17 research outputs found
Preventable trauma deaths: from panel review to population based-studies
Preventable trauma deaths are defined as deaths which could be avoided if optimal care has been delivered. Studies on preventable trauma deaths have been accomplished initially with panel reviews of pre-hospital and hospital charts. However, several investigators questioned the reliability and validity of this method because of low reproducibility of implicit judgments when they are made by different experts. Nevertheless, number of studies were published all around the world and ultimately gained some credibility, particularly in regions where comparisons were made before and after trauma system implementation with a resultant fall in mortality. During the last decade of century the method of comparing observed survival with probability of survival calculated from large trauma registries has obtained popularity. Preventable trauma deaths were identified as deaths occurred notwithstanding a high calculated probability of survival. In recent years, preventable trauma deaths studies have been replaced by population-based studies, which use databases representative of overall population, therefore with high epidemiologic value. These databases contain readily available information which carry out the advantage of objectivity and large numbers. Nowadays, population-based researches provide the strongest evidence regarding the effectiveness of trauma systems and trauma centers on patient outcomes
Study protocol: The DOse REsponse Multicentre International collaborative initiative (DO-RE-MI)
INTRODUCTION: Current practices for renal replacement therapy in intensive care units (ICUs) remain poorly defined. The DOse REsponse Multicentre International collaborative initiative (DO-RE-MI) will address the issue of how the different modes of renal replacement therapy are currently chosen and performed. Here, we describe the study protocol, which was approved by the Scientific and Steering Committees. METHODS: DO-RE-MI is an observational, multicentre study conducted in ICUs. The primary end-point will be the delivered dose of dialysis, which will be compared with ICU mortality, 28-day mortality, hospital mortality, ICU length of stay and number of days of mechanical ventilation. The secondary end-point will be the haemodynamic response to renal replacement therapy, expressed as percentage reduction in noradrenaline (norepinephrine) requirement. Based on the the sample analysis calculation, at least 162 patients must be recruited. Anonymized patient data will be entered online in electronic case report forms and uploaded to an internet website. Each participating centre will have 2 months to become acquainted with the electronic case report forms. After this period official recruitment will begin. Patient data belong to the respective centre, which may use the database for its own needs. However, all centres have agreed to participate in a joint effort to achieve the sample size needed for statistical analysis. CONCLUSION: The study will hopefully help to collect useful information on the current practice of renal replacement therapy in ICUs. It will also provide a centre-based collection of data that will be useful for monitoring all aspects of extracorporeal support, such as incidence, frequency, and duration
Effect of a quality improvement program on compliance to the sepsis bundle in non-ICU patients: a multicenter prospective before and after cohort study
ObjectiveSepsis and septic shock are major challenges and economic burdens to healthcare, impacting millions of people globally and representing significant causes of mortality. Recently, a large number of quality improvement programs focused on sepsis resuscitation bundles have been instituted worldwide. These educational initiatives have been shown to be associated with improvements in clinical outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a multi-faceted quality implementing program (QIP) on the compliance of a “simplified 1-h bundle” (Sepsis 6) and hospital mortality of severe sepsis and septic shock patients out of the intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsEmergency departments (EDs) and medical wards (MWs) of 12 academic and non-academic hospitals in the Lombardy region (Northern Italy) were involved in a multi-faceted QIP, which included educational and organizational interventions. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock according to the Sepsis-2 criteria were enrolled in two different periods: from May 2011 to November 2011 (before-QIP cohort) and from August 2012 to June 2013 (after-QIP cohort).Measurements and main resultsThe effect of QIP on bundle compliance and hospital mortality was evaluated in a before–after analysis. We enrolled 467 patients in the before-QIP group and 656 in the after-QIP group. At the time of enrollment, septic shock was diagnosed in 50% of patients, similarly between the two periods. In the after-QIP group, we observed increased compliance to the “simplified rapid (1 h) intervention bundle” (the Sepsis 6 bundle – S6) at three time-points evaluated (1 h, 13.7 to 18.7%, p = 0.018, 3 h, 37.1 to 48.0%, p = 0.013, overall study period, 46.2 to 57.9%, p < 0.001). We then analyzed compliance with S6 and hospital mortality in the before- and after-QIP periods, stratifying the two patients’ cohorts by admission characteristics. Adherence to the S6 bundle was increased in patients with severe sepsis in the absence of shock, in patients with serum lactate <4.0 mmol/L, and in patients with hypotension at the time of enrollment, regardless of the type of admission (from EDs or MWs). Subsequently, in an observational analysis, we also investigated the relation between bundle compliance and hospital mortality by logistic regression. In the after-QIP cohort, we observed a lower in-hospital mortality than that observed in the before-QIP cohort. This finding was reported in subgroups where a higher adherence to the S6 bundle in the after-QIP period was found. After adjustment for confounders, the QIP appeared to be independently associated with a significant improvement in hospital mortality. Among the single S6 procedures applied within the first hour of sepsis diagnosis, compliance with blood culture and antibiotic therapy appeared significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality.ConclusionA multi-faceted QIP aimed at promoting an early simplified bundle of care for the management of septic patients out of the ICU was associated with improved compliance with sepsis bundles and lower in-hospital mortality
Organizational network in trauma management in Italy
In Italy, as in other western countries, trauma is a leading cause of death during the first four decades of life, with almost 18.000 of deaths per year. Since 80s organized systems for trauma care, including a pre-hospital emergency medical system and a network of hospitals designated as Trauma Centres, have been developed in north American countries. Effectiveness of trauma systems has been investigated comparing the post-system to the pre-system trauma care with the method of panel evaluation of preventable death rates and comparison of observed survival with expected probability of survival. In Italy, a pre-hospital emergency medical system has been implemented on a national scale, while a trauma network has not been developed. Nowadays, trauma patients are often admitted to the closest hospital, independently from local resources. The Superior Council of Ministry of Health has presented in 2004 a new trauma system model (SIAT) based on the recognition in the field of patients with more serious injuries and the transportation to general hospitals with resources and multidisciplinary teams specialized in trauma care (trauma team). The designation of few trauma team hospitals, one highly specialized Centre (CTS) and two area Centres (CTZ) every two millions of inhabitants allows each Centre to treat at least 250 severe trauma patients per year to increase experience. Less severe injured patients may be treated in non-trauma team acute care facilities, according to the inclusive system model. The development of trauma team services in some Italian hospitals has demonstrated an increase in survival and a decrease in preventable death rate from 42% to 7,6%. Economic studies of Ministry of Health have established that the implementation of a trauma system model on a national scale with a 25% decrease of preventable trauma deaths and disabilities would save 7500 million of euros of public money. Therefore, in our country the concentration of severely injured patients in few well-equipped and specialized hospitals may be associated to better outcomes and decrease of social-costs
Delivered dose of renal replacement therapy and mortality in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury
Introduction The optimal dialysis dose for the treatment of acute kidney injury (AKI) is controversial. We sought to evaluate the relationship between renal replacement therapy (RRT) dose and outcome. Methods We performed a prospective multicentre observational study in 30 intensive care units (ICUs) in eight countries from June 2005 to December 2007. Delivered RRT dose was calculated in patients treated exclusively with either continuous RRT (CRRT) or intermittent RRT (IRRT) during their ICU stay. Dose was categorised into more-intensive (CRRT = 35 ml/kg/hour, IRRT = 6 sessions/week) or less-intensive (CRRT < 35 ml/kg/hour, IRRT < 6 sessions/week). The main outcome measures were ICU mortality, ICU length of stay and duration of mechanical ventilation. Results Of 15,200 critically ill patients admitted during the study period, 553 AKI patients were treated with RRT, including 338 who received CRRT only and 87 who received IRRT only. For CRRT, the median delivered dose was 27.1 ml/kg/hour (interquartile range (IQR) = 22.1 to 33.9). For IRRT, the median dose was 7 sessions/week (IQR = 5 to 7). Only 22% of CRRT patients and 64% of IRRT patients received a more-intensive dose. Crude ICU mortality among CRRT patients were 60.8% vs. 52.5% (more-intensive vs. less-intensive groups, respectively). In IRRT, this was 23.6 vs. 19.4%, respectively. On multivariable analysis, there was no significant association between RRT dose and ICU mortality (Odds ratio (OR) more-intensive vs. less-intensive: CRRT OR = 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.66 to 2.21; IRRT OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 0.48 to 4.67). Among survivors, shorter ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation were observed in the more-intensive RRT groups (more-intensive vs. less-intensive for all: CRRT (median): 15 (IQR = 8 to 26) vs. 19.5 (IQR = 12 to 33.5) ICU days, P = 0.063; 7 (IQR = 4 to 17) vs. 14 (IQR = 5 to 24) ventilation days, P = 0.031; IRRT: 8 (IQR = 5.5 to 14) vs. 18 (IQR = 13 to 35) ICU days, P = 0.008; 2.5 (IQR = 0 to 10) vs. 12 (IQR = 3 to 24) ventilation days, P = 0.026). Conclusions After adjustment for multiple variables, these data provide no evidence for a survival benefit afforded by higher dose RRT. However, more-intensive RRT was associated with a favourable effect on ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation among survivors. This result warrants further exploration
Why can't Igive you my organs after my heart has stopped beating?" An overview of the main clinical, organisational, ethical and legal issues concerning organ donation after circulatory death in Italy
Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is a valuable option for the procurement of functioning organs for transplantation. Clinical results are promising and public acceptance is quite good in most western countries. Yet, although DCD is widespread in Europe, several problems still persist in Italy as well as in some other countries. This paper aims to describe the main clinical, organisational, ethical and legal issues at stake, bearing in mind the particular situation created by Italian legislation. Currently, as regards DCD, Italy is somewhat different from other countries. Therefore, every effort should be made for the safe and effective implementation of DCD programs: uncontrolled DCD programs should be promoted and encouraged, within the framework of shared and authoritative rules. At the same time, we need to tackle the question of controlled DCD, promoting debate among all involved subjects regarding the fundamental issues of end-of-life care within protocols that best integrate the highest standard of care for the dying and the legitimate interests of those awaiting a life-saving organ
"Why can't I give you my organs after my heart has stopped beating?" An overview of the main clinical, organisational, ethical and legal issues concerning organ donation after circulatory death in Italy
Donation after circulatory death (DCD) is a valuable option for the procurement of functioning organs for transplantation. Clinical results are promising and public acceptance is quite good in most western countries. Yet, although DCD is widespread in Europe, several problems still persist in Italy as well as in some other countries. This paper aims to describe the main clinical, organisational, ethical and legal issues at stake, bearing in mind the particular situation created by Italian legislation. Currently, as regards DCD, Italy is somewhat different from other countries. Therefore, every effort should be made for the safe and effective implementation of DCD programs: uncontrolled DCD programs should be promoted and encouraged, within the framework of shared and authoritative rules. At the same time, we need to tackle the question of controlled DCD, promoting debate among all involved subjects regarding the fundamental issues of end-of-life care within protocols that best integrate the highest standard of care for the dying and the legitimate interests of those awaiting a life-saving organ
Incidence of carbapenem-resistant gram negatives in Italian transplant recipients: A nationwide surveillance study
Background: Bacterial infections remain a challenge to solid organ transplantation. Due to the alarming spread of carbapenem-resistant gram negative bacteria, these organisms have been frequently recognized as cause of severe infections in solid organ transplant recipients. Methods and Findings: Between 15 May and 30 September 2012 we enrolled 887 solid organ transplant recipients in Italy with the aim to describe the epidemiology of gram negative bacteria spreading, to explore potential risk factors and to assess the effect of early isolation of gram negative bacteria on recipients' mortality during the first 90 days after transplantation. During the study period 185 clinical isolates of gram negative bacteria were reported, for an incidence of 2.39 per 1000 recipient-days. Positive cultures for gram negative bacteria occurred early after transplantation (median time 26 days; incidence rate 4.33, 1.67 and 1.14 per 1,000 recipientdays in the first, second and third month after SOT, respectively). Forty-nine of these clinical isolates were due to carbapenem-resistant gram negative bacteria (26.5%; incidence 0.63 per 1000 recipient-days). Carbapenems resistance was particularly frequent among Klebsiella spp. isolates (49.1%). Recipients with longer hospital stay and those who received either heart or lung graft were at the highest risk of testing positive for any gram negative bacteria. Moreover recipients with longer hospital stay, lung recipients and those admitted to hospital for more than 48h before transplantation had the highest probability to have culture(s) positive for carbapenem-resistant gram negative bacteria. Forty-four organ recipients died (0.57 per 1000 recipient-days) during the study period. Recipients with at least one positive culture for carbapenem-resistant gram negative bacteria had a 10.23-fold higher mortality rate than those who did not. Conclusion: The isolation of gram-negative bacteria is most frequent among recipient with hospital stays >48 hours prior to transplant and in those receiving either heart or lung transplants. Carbapenemresistant gram negative isolates are associated with significant mortality