OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the effectiveness of co-bedding compared with separate (individual) care for stable preterm twins in the neonatal nursery in promoting growth and neurodevelopment and reducing short- and long-term morbidities, and to determine whether co-bedding is associated with significant adverse effects.As secondary objectives, we sought to evaluate effects of co-bedding via the following subgroup analyses: twin pairs with different weight ranges (very low birth weight [VLBW] < 1500 grams vs non-VLBW), twins with versus without significant growth discordance at birth, preterm versus borderline preterm twins, twins co-bedded in incubator versus cot at study entry, and twins randomized by twin pair versus neonatal unit.

SEARCH METHODS: We used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group (CNRG). We used keywords and medical subject headings (MeSH) to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (hosted by EBSCOHOST), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and references cited in our short-listed articles, up to February 29, 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials with randomization by twin pair and/or by neonatal unit. We excluded cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data using standard methods of the CNRG. Two review authors independently assessed the relevance and risk of bias of retrieved records. We contacted the authors of included studies to request important information missing from their published papers. We expressed our results using risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) when appropriate, along with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). We adjusted the unit of analysis from individual infants to twin pairs by averaging measurements for each twin pair (continuous outcomes) or by counting outcomes as positive if developed by either twin (dichotomous outcomes).

MAIN RESULTS: Six studies met the inclusion criteria; however, only five studies provided data for analysis. Four of the six included studies were small and had significant limitations in design. As each study reported outcomes differently, data for most outcomes were effectively contributed by a single study. Study authors reported no differences between co-bedded twins and twins receiving separate care in terms of rate of weight gain (MD 0.20 grams/kg/d, 95% CI -1.60 to 2.00; one study; 18 pairs of twins; evidence of low quality); apnea, bradycardia, and desaturation (A/B/D) episodes (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.18 to 4.05; one study; 62 pairs of twins; evidence of low quality); episodes in co-regulated states (MD 0.96, 95% CI -3.44 to 5.36; one study; three pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); suspected or proven infection (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.31; three studies; 65 pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); length of hospital stay (MD -4.90 days, 95% CI -35.23 to 25.43; one study; three pairs of twins; evidence of very low quality); and parental satisfaction measured on a scale of 0 to 55 (MD -0.38, 95% CI -4.49 to 3.73; one study; nine pairs of twins; evidence of moderate quality). Although co-bedded twins appeared to have lower pain scores 30 seconds after heel lance on a scale of 0 to 21 (MD -0.96, 95% CI -1.68 to -0.23; two studies; 117 pairs of twins; I(2) = 75%; evidence of low quality), they had higher pain scores 90 seconds after the procedure (MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.86; one study; 62 pairs of twins). Substantial heterogeneity in the outcome of infant pain response after heel prick at 30 seconds post procedure and conflicting results at 30 and 90 seconds post procedure precluded clear conclusions.

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.

Methods: A total of 11 isolates from respiratory cultures in intensive care unit of a 24 bed tertiary hospital obtained over a one months period and one isolate obtained from the nebuliser during environmental screening were investigated. The bacteria were identified by Phoenix 100 system. The clonal relatedness was evaluated by PFGE and semi-automated repetitive sequence-based PCR. Genotyping tests were repeated for 10 serial subcultures.

Results: PFGE and DiversiLab yielded 10 genotypic profiles for 12 isolates. Four to eight different genotypes were observed from 10 subcultures of the same isolate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among 60 registered nurses in the ICU at Taiping Hospital. to assess the nurses' knowledge and attitude level using the Knowledge and Attitude on prevention of PUs questionnaire. A descriptive analysis and Pearson Correlation were used to analyze the data.

RESULT: From a total of 60 nurses 36 (60%) of nurses demonstrated a moderate level of KAP, and 17 (28%) demonstrated a high level of knowledge. They also exhibited neutral attitudes towards PUs prevention 49 (82%). The findings revealed a positive relationship between nurses' KAP toward implementing preventive measures on PUs (p=0.04; r=0.3). The findings show that nurses regularly performed the assessment of the risk factors of PUs for all hospitalized patients when performing PUs care. However, the plan for preventive nursing care was not properly reviewed.

Methods: This cross-sectional study, which was carried out at the Paediatric Intensive Care Unit of Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM) in Kelantan, Malaysia, had involved 60 neonates admitted for suspected sepsis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV) and the area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for PCT were determined at initial presentation (0 h) as well as 12 h and 24 h after presentation in comparison to blood culture as the gold standard.

Results: The study consisted of 27 (45.0%) male and 33 (55.0%) female neonates with a mean (SD) age of 76.8 (48.25) h. At cut-off PCT value of > 2 ng/mL, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 66.7%, 66.7%, 33.3% and 88.9% at 0 h. The respective parameters were 83.3%. 56.3%, 32.3% and 93.1% at 12 h and 83.3%, 52.1%, 30.3% and 92.6% at 24 h. AUC was 71.6%, 76.6% and 71.7% at 0 h, 12 h and 24 h.

AIM: To determine the range of physical assessment skills practised by critical care nurses and their adoption factors.

STUDY DESIGN: This study uses a cross-sectional survey design. A self-administered questionnaire evaluating 40 physical assessment skills was conducted with 133 staff nurses (response rate: 96.4%) in three critical care units at a Malaysian government hospital between November 2019 and January 2020.

RESULTS: Most nurses applied 32 (80%) skills during every working shift, involving the vital signs and all body systems except the gastrointestinal system. Five skills (12.5%) were occasionally applied, while three skills (7.5%) were rarely applied or not part of most nurses' clinical practice. About 20% of the nurses did not routinely check the respiration rate. Medical and surgical intensive care unit nurses (U = 1129, p care settings challenges the assertion that physical assessment is vital to critical care nursing roles. Concerns highlighted by the nurses should be addressed by nursing management so that the application of physical assessment skills can be enhanced, especially in critical care settings.

Methods: A total of 110 severe TBI patients, aged 18-60, who underwent emergency brain surgery were randomised into Group T (TCI) (n = 55) and Group S (sevoflurane) (n = 55). Anaesthesia was maintained in Group T with propofol target plasma concentration of 3-6 μg/mL and in Group S with minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane 1.0-1.5. Both groups received TCI remifentanil 2-8 ng/mL for analgesia. After the surgery, patients were managed in the intensive care unit and were followed up until discharge for the outcome parameters.

Results: Demographic characteristics were comparable in both groups. Differences in Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score at discharge were not significant between Group T and Group S (P = 0.25): the percentages of mortality (GOS 1) [27.3% versus 16.4%], vegetative and severe disability (GOS 2-3) [29.1% versus 41.8%] and good outcome (GOS 4-5) [43.6% versus 41.8%] were comparable in both groups. There were no significant differences in other outcome parameters.