Search

Background: Research in critical care extends from the bench to the bedside, involving multiple departments, specialties, and funding organizations. Because of this diversity, it has been difficult for all stakeholders to collectively identify challenges and establish priorities.Objective: To define a comprehensive agenda for critical care research using input from a broad range of stakeholders to serve as a blueprint for future initiatives.Methods: The Critical Care Societies Collaborative (CCSC), consisting of the leadership of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN), the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP), the American Thoracic Society (ATS), and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), joined the US Critical Illness and Injury Trials Group (USCIITG) in forming a task force to define a comprehensive critical care research agenda. This group of 25 identified experts was divided into subgroups to address basic, translational, clinical, implementation, and educational research. The subgroups met via conference calls, and the entire task force met in person for a 2-day session. The result was a detailed discussion of the research priorities that served as the basis for this report.Results: The task force identified challenges, specific priority areas, and recommendations for process improvements to support critical care research. Additionally, four overarching themes emerged: 1) the traditional "silo-ed" approach to critical care research is counterproductive and should be modified; 2) an approach that more effectively links areas of research (ie, basic and translational research, or clinical research and implementation) should be embraced; 3) future approaches to human research should account for disease complexity and patient heterogeneity; and 4) an enhanced infrastructure for critical care research is essential for future success.Conclusions: This document contains the themes/recommendations developed by a large, multiprofessional cross section of critical care scientists, clinicians, and educators. It provides a unique framework for future research in critical care medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The United States Critical Illness and Injury Trials (USCIIT) Group is an inclusive, grassroots "network of networks" with the dual missions of fostering investigator-initiated hypothesis testing and developing recommendations for strategic plans at a national level. The USCIIT Group's transformational approach enlists multidisciplinary investigative teams across institutions, critical illness and injury professional organizations, federal agencies that fund clinical and translational research, and industry partners. The USCIIT Group is endorsed by all major critical illness and injury professional organizations spanning the specialties of anesthesiology, emergency medicine, internal medicine, neurology, nursing, pediatrics, pharmacy and nutrition, surgery and trauma, and respiratory and physical therapy. Recent successes provide the opportunity to significantly increase the dialogue necessary to advance clinical and translational research on behalf of our community. More than 200 investigators are now involved across > 30 academic and community hospitals. Collectively, USCIIT Group investigators have enrolled > 10,000 patients from academic and community hospitals in studies during the last 3 years. To keep our readership "ahead of the curve," this article provides a vision for critical illness and injury research based on (1) programmatic organization of large-scale, multicentered collaborative studies and (2) annual strategic planning at a national scale across disciplines and stakeholders.

Study Objectives: The distal airways are likely to contribute to asthma pathobiology and symptoms but have rarely been specifically evaluated in relation to systemic oral therapy. We hypothesized that treatment with montelukast, an oral cysteinyl-leukotriene receptor antagonist, would improve both proximal and distal lung physiology in patients with mild asthma., Design: Randomized, double-blind, crossover design., Setting: Academic referral center., Patients: Subjects with mild asthma limited to using short-acting inhaled beta(2)-agonists., Interventions: Nineteen subjects with mild asthma underwent a baseline assessment of lung function, lung mechanics, and symptoms, followed by randomization to therapy with montelukast, 10 mg taken in the evening, or placebo in a crossover, double-blind fashion. Each treatment phase lasted 4 weeks, with a 2-week washout period. A repeat evaluation was performed during the last week of each treatment phase., Measurements and Results: Montelukast resulted in improvement in (mean +/- SD) proximal and distal lung function parameters (change in FEV(1): montelukast, 0.16 +/- 0.06 L; placebo, -0.05 +/- 0.05 L; p = 0.008); change in specific conductance: montelukast, 7.2 +/- 2.9% predicted; placebo, -17 +/- 8% predicted; p = 0.007; change in % predicted residual volume [RV]: montelukast, 18.4 +/- 8.3% predicted; placebo, 3.0 +/- 2.9% predicted; p = 0.05). Improvement in symptoms (ie, wheeze and chest tightness) correlated with improvements in RV while receiving montelukast, but not while receiving placebo (Pearson coefficients: 0.55 and 0.66, respectively; p < 0.008 and 0.04, respectively)., Conclusions: The systemically acting oral agent montelukast improves proximal and distal lung physiology. Improvements in distal lung function correlate with improvements in asthma symptoms.