OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review to understand the rapid response team's (RRT) effect on patient outcomes.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and two trial registers. The studies published up to May 6, 2022, from the inception date of the databases were included. Two researchers filtered the title, abstract and full text. The Version 2 of the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool were used separately for randomized and non-randomized controlled trials for quality appraisal.
RESULTS: Sixty-one eligible studies were identified, four randomized controlled trials(RCTs), four non-randomized controlled trials, six interrupted time-series(ITS) design , and 47 pretest-posttest studies. A total of 52 studies reported hospital mortality, 51 studies reported cardiopulmonary arrests, 18 studies reported unplanned ICU admissions and ten studies reported LOS.
CONCLUSION: This systematic review found the variation in context and the type of RRT interventions restricts direct comparisons. The evidence for improving several aspects of patient outcomes was inconsistent, with most studies demonstrating that RRT positively impacts patient outcomes.
DESIGN: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter randomized trial.
SETTING: Tertiary care hospitals.
INTERVENTIONS: Cardiac surgery patients (n = 1,000) with postoperative myocardial dysfunction (defined as patients with intraaortic balloon pump and/or high-dose standard inotropic support) will be randomized to receive a continuous infusion of either levosimendan (0.05-0.2 μg/[kg min]) or placebo for 24-48 hours.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point will be 30-day mortality. Secondary end points will be mortality at 1 year, time on mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, decision to stop the study drug due to adverse events or to start open-label levosimendan, and length of intensive care unit and hospital stay. We will test the hypothesis that levosimendan reduces 30-day mortality in cardiac surgery patients with postoperative myocardial dysfunction.
CONCLUSIONS: This trial is planned to determine whether levosimendan could improve survival in patients with postoperative low cardiac output syndrome. The results of this double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial may provide important insights into the management of low cardiac output in cardiac surgery.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The package known as "Preemie Mom: A Guide for You" was designed based on Stufflebeam's model and has four phases: (1) content evaluation from available sources of information, (2) input evaluation based on mothers' need related to premature baby care, (3) process evaluation for package designing and content drafting, and (4) product evaluation to determine its feasibility. The contents were extracted and collated for validation by consulting various specialists in related fields. A final draft was drawn based on comments given by experts. Comments from the mothers were taken for formatting, visual appearance, and content flow for easy understanding and usage.
RESULTS: All ten existing articles and eight relevant documents were gathered and critically appraised. The package was designed based on 11 main components related to the care of premature baby after discharge. The content validation was accepted at a minimum score of 0.85 for the item-level content validity index analysis. Both experts and mothers were agreed that the package is easy to use and well accepted as a guide after discharge. The agreement rate by the mothers was at 93.33% and greater for the front page, writing style, structure, presentation, and motives of the package.
CONCLUSIONS: "Preemie Mom: A Guide for You" is a validated health educational package and ready to be used to meet the needs of the mother for premature baby care at home.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred patients were randomly recruited and then further randomly divided into two groups of 50 patients each. The first group used the POC PCT test along with the standard sepsis parameter monitoring, while the second group had the standard monitoring only (C-reactive protein [CRP] level, total white count, temperature and tracheal aspirate culture). Serial PCT test results and CRP levels were monitored on days 1, 3, 7 and 9. The patients were followed up for 28-day mortality.
RESULTS: Eighty-five patients completed the trial, of whom 43 were in the PCT group and 42 were in the control group. The PCT group had a significantly lower mean (SD) antibiotic treatment duration (10.28 [2.68] days) than the control group (11.52 [3.06]). The mean (SD) difference was -1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.48 to 0.01; t-statistic [df] = -1.997 [83]; P = 0.049). The PCT group also had a higher number of antibiotic-free days alive during the 28 days after VAP onset than the control group (mean [SD], 10.79 [7.61] vs. 8.72 [6.41]). The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was the sole factor for the decrease in duration after VAP onset (regression coefficient β [95% CI], -0.70 [-1.19 to -0.20]; P = 0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: The POC procalcitonin test can reduce the antibiotic treatment duration in patients with VAP.
BACKGROUND: Mobilizing ICU patients remains a challenge, despite its safety, feasibility and positive short-term outcomes.
DESIGN: A cross-sectional point prevalence study.
METHODS: All patients who were eligible and admitted to the adult ICUs during March 2018 were recruited. Data were analysed by using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 24 for Windows.
RESULTS: The prevalence of EM practice was 65.6%. The most frequently reported avoidable and unavoidable factors inhibit mobility were deep sedation and vasopressor infusion, respectively. Level II of activity was the most common level of activity performed in ICU patients. The invasive ventilated patient had 12.53 the odds to stay in bed as compared to non-invasive ventilated patient. An average adherence rate of EM protocol was 52.5%.
OBJECTIVE: This study analyses the effect of estimating EGP for ICU patients with very low SI (severe insulin resistance) and its impact on identified, model-based insulin sensitivity identification, modeling accuracy, and model-based glycemic clinical control.
METHODS: Using clinical data from 717 STAR patients in 3 independent cohorts (Hungary, New Zealand, and Malaysia), insulin sensitivity, time of insulin resistance, and EGP values are analyzed. A method is presented to estimate EGP in the presence of non-physiologically low SI. Performance is assessed via model accuracy.
RESULTS: Results show 22%-62% of patients experience 1+ episodes of severe insulin resistance, representing 0.87%-9.00% of hours. Episodes primarily occur in the first 24 h, matching clinical expectations. The Malaysian cohort is most affected. In this subset of hours, constant model-based EGP values can bias identified SI and increase blood glucose (BG) fitting error. Using the EGP estimation method presented in these constrained hours significantly reduced BG fitting errors.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients early in ICU stay may have significantly increased EGP. Increasing modeled EGP in model-based glycemic control can improve control accuracy in these hours. The results provide new insight into the frequency and level of significantly increased EGP in critical illness.
Objective: To determine if lung recruitment associated with PEEP titration according to the best respiratory-system compliance decreases 28-day mortality of patients with moderate to severe ARDS compared with a conventional low-PEEP strategy.
Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, randomized trial conducted at 120 intensive care units (ICUs) from 9 countries from November 17, 2011, through April 25, 2017, enrolling adults with moderate to severe ARDS.
Interventions: An experimental strategy with a lung recruitment maneuver and PEEP titration according to the best respiratory-system compliance (n = 501; experimental group) or a control strategy of low PEEP (n = 509). All patients received volume-assist control mode until weaning.
Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality until 28 days. Secondary outcomes were length of ICU and hospital stay; ventilator-free days through day 28; pneumothorax requiring drainage within 7 days; barotrauma within 7 days; and ICU, in-hospital, and 6-month mortality.
Results: A total of 1010 patients (37.5% female; mean [SD] age, 50.9 [17.4] years) were enrolled and followed up. At 28 days, 277 of 501 patients (55.3%) in the experimental group and 251 of 509 patients (49.3%) in the control group had died (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.42; P = .041). Compared with the control group, the experimental group strategy increased 6-month mortality (65.3% vs 59.9%; HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.38; P = .04), decreased the number of mean ventilator-free days (5.3 vs 6.4; difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -2.1 to -0.1; P = .03), increased the risk of pneumothorax requiring drainage (3.2% vs 1.2%; difference, 2.0%; 95% CI, 0.0% to 4.0%; P = .03), and the risk of barotrauma (5.6% vs 1.6%; difference, 4.0%; 95% CI, 1.5% to 6.5%; P = .001). There were no significant differences in the length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, ICU mortality, and in-hospital mortality.
Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with moderate to severe ARDS, a strategy with lung recruitment and titrated PEEP compared with low PEEP increased 28-day all-cause mortality. These findings do not support the routine use of lung recruitment maneuver and PEEP titration in these patients.
Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01374022.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective study was conducted at the single centre ICU in Hospital Sultanah Aminah (HSA) Malaysia. External validation of APACHE IV involved a cohort of 916 patients who were admitted in 2009. Model performance was assessed through its calibration and discrimination abilities. A first-level customisation using logistic regression approach was also applied to improve model calibration.
RESULTS: APACHE IV exhibited good discrimination, with an area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.78. However, the model's overall fit was observed to be poor, as indicated by the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test (Ĉ = 113, P <0.001). Predicted in-ICU mortality rate (28.1%) was significantly higher than the actual in-ICU mortality rate (18.8%). Model calibration was improved after applying first-level customisation (Ĉ = 6.39, P = 0.78) although discrimination was not affected.
CONCLUSION: APACHE IV is not suitable for application in HSA ICU, without further customisation. The model's lack of fit in the Malaysian study is attributed to differences in the baseline characteristics between HSA ICU and APACHE IV datasets. Other possible factors could be due to differences in clinical practice, quality and services of health care systems between Malaysia and the United States.
DESIGN: A multicenter, retrospective, descriptive cohort study.
SETTING: Ten multidisciplinary PICUs in Asia.
PATIENTS: All mechanically ventilated children meeting the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference criteria for PARDS between 2009 and 2015.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data on epidemiology, ventilation, adjunct therapies, and clinical outcomes were collected. Patients were followed for 100 days post diagnosis of PARDS. A total of 373 patients were included. There were 89 (23.9%), 149 (39.9%), and 135 (36.2%) patients with mild, moderate, and severe PARDS, respectively. The most common risk factor for PARDS was pneumonia/lower respiratory tract infection (309 [82.8%]). Higher category of severity of PARDS was associated with lower ventilator-free days (22 [17-25], 16 [0-23], 6 [0-19]; p < 0.001 for mild, moderate, and severe, respectively) and PICU free days (19 [11-24], 15 [0-22], 5 [0-20]; p < 0.001 for mild, moderate, and severe, respectively). Overall PICU mortality for PARDS was 113 of 373 (30.3%), and 100-day mortality was 126 of 317 (39.7%). After adjusting for site, presence of comorbidities and severity of illness in the multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model, patients with moderate (hazard ratio, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.03-3.45]; p = 0.039) and severe PARDS (hazard ratio, 3.18 [95% CI, 1.68, 6.02]; p < 0.001) had higher risk of mortality compared with those with mild PARDS.
CONCLUSIONS: Mortality from PARDS is high in Asia. The Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference definition of PARDS is a useful tool for risk stratification.