MAIN BODY: Although the first Asian intensive care units (ICUs) surfaced in the 1960s and the 1970s and specialisation started in the 1990s, multiple challenges still exist, including the lack of intensivists, critical care nurses, and respiratory therapists in many countries. This is aggravated by the brain drain of skilled ICU staff to high-income countries. Critical care societies have been integral to the development of the discipline and have increasingly contributed to critical care education, although critical care research is only just starting to take off through collaboration across groups. Sepsis, increasingly aggravated by multidrug resistance, contributes to a significant burden of critical illness, while epidemics and pandemics continue to haunt the continent intermittently. In particular, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has highlighted the central role of critical care in pandemic response. Accessibility to critical care is affected by lack of ICU beds and high costs, and quality of critical care is affected by limited capability for investigations and treatment in low- and middle-income countries. Meanwhile, there are clear cultural differences across countries, with considerable variations in end-of-life care. Demand for critical care will rise across the continent due to ageing populations and rising comorbidity burdens. Even as countries respond by increasing critical care capacity, the critical care community must continue to focus on training for ICU healthcare workers, processes anchored on evidence-based medicine, technology guided by feasibility and impact, research applicable to Asian and local settings, and rallying of governments for support for the specialty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, data on mechanical ventilation and clinical outcomes were collected. Predictors of mortality were analyzed by univariate and multivariable logistic regression. A scoring system was generated to predict 28-day mortality.

METHODS: The D-PRISM study was a multinational, survey-based investigation to assess the diagnosis and treatment of pneumonia in the ICU. A self-administered online questionnaire was distributed to intensive care clinicians from 72 countries between September to November 2022. The questionnaire included sections on professional profiles, current clinical practice in diagnosing and managing CAP, HAP, and VAP, and the availability of microbiology diagnostic tests. Multivariable analysis using multiple regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between reported antibiotic duration and organisational variables collected in the study.

RESULTS: A total of 1296 valid responses were collected from ICU clinicians, spread between low-and-middle income (LMIC) and high-income countries (HIC), with LMIC respondents comprising 51% of respondents. There is heterogeneity across the diagnostic processes, including clinical assessment, where 30% (389) did not consider radiological evidence essential to diagnose pneumonia, variable collection of microbiological samples, and use and practice in bronchoscopy. Microbiological diagnostics were least frequently available in low and lower-middle-income nation settings. Modal intended antibiotic treatment duration was 5-7 days for all types of pneumonia. Shorter durations of antibiotic treatment were associated with antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs, high national income status, and formal intensive care training.