Search

Patient safety huddles are brief, multidisciplinary conversations that focus on a specific topic or event. Huddles have been shown to improve communication among healthcare providers in a variety of settings, including the intensive care unit (ICU). This paper presents key features of patient safety huddles and describes the ways in which huddle techniques may be particularly relevant to the practice of critical care., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers and uninfected patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 as a result of transmission from infected patients and health-care workers. In the absence of high-quality evidence on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, clinical practice of infection control and prevention in ICUs varies widely. Using a Delphi process, international experts in intensive care, infectious diseases, and infection control developed consensus statements on infection control for SARS-CoV-2 in an ICU. Consensus was achieved for 31 (94%) of 33 statements, from which 25 clinical practice statements were issued. These statements include guidance on ICU design and engineering, health-care worker safety, visiting policy, personal protective equipment, patients and procedures, disinfection, and sterilisation. Consensus was not reached on optimal return to work criteria for health-care workers who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or the acceptable disinfection strategy for heat-sensitive instruments used for airway management of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Well designed studies are needed to assess the effects of these practice statements and address the remaining uncertainties., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests PN reports honoraria for lectures and other educational events from Tabuk Pharmaceuticals, and is a member of Edward Lifesciences Advisory Board Panel, outside of the submitted work. JVD reports personal fees (paid to institution) from Edwards India, outside the submitted work. MB reports honoraria for lectures and another educational event from Angelini, Bayer, bioMérieux, Cipla, Gilead Sciences, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Pfizer, and Shionogi; grants from Pfizer and MSD, outside of the submitted work; and is on the advisory board of Cidara Therapeutics. JDW reports honoraria (paid to institution) for lectures and other educational events from MSD and Pfizer, outside of the submitted work. BD reports research grants from Ministry of Science and Technology, People's Republic of China (research grant 2020YFC0841300), and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (2020-I2M-2-005 and 2019-I2M-1-001), outside of the submitted work. LE reports consulting fees (paid to institution) for the National Emerging Special Pathogen Training and Education Centre, outside of the submitted work. SJ reports academic consultation fees from Drager, Fisher-Paykel, Medtronic, Baxter International, and Fresenius–Xenios; and honoraria for lectures and other educational events from Fisher-Paykel and Baxter, outside of the submitted work. MK reports honoraria from Merck and Pfizer for lectures and other educational events, outside of the submitted work. JM reports research grants (paid to institution) from Covidien (Medtronic) and Canadian Institutes of Health Research; personal consultation fees from Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Faron Pharmaceuticals; honoraria from Medtronic for lectures and other educational events; and a consulting agreement signed with Vyaire, outside of the submitted work. MSN reports personal consulting fees from Abbvie, outside of the submitted work. AP reports research grants from Novo Nordisk Foundation, Pfizer, and Fresenius Kabi, outside of the submitted work. MS reports research grants and advisory board fees from NewB; research grants from DSTL, Critical Pressure, and Apollo Therapeutics; speaking fees (paid to institution) from Amormed, advisory board fees from Biotest, GE, Baxter, Roche, and Bayer; and honoria from Shionogi, outside of the submitted work. BV reports research grants and honoraria for the guest lecture and other educational events from Baxter, outside of the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

While the world is grappling with the consequences of a global pandemic related to SARS-CoV-2 causing severe pneumonia, available evidence points to bacterial infection with Streptococcus pneumoniae as the most common cause of severe community acquired pneumonia (SCAP). Rapid diagnostics and molecular testing have improved the identification of co-existent pathogens. However, mortality in patients admitted to ICU remains staggeringly high. The American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America have updated CAP guidelines to help streamline disease management. The common theme is use of timely, appropriate and adequate antibiotic coverage to decrease mortality and avoid drug resistance. Novel antibiotics have been studied for CAP and extend the choice of therapy, particularly for those who are intolerant of, or not responding to standard treatment, including those who harbor drug resistant pathogens. In this review, we focus on the risk factors, microbiology, site of care decisions and treatment of patients with SCAP., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest GN has no conflicts of interest with the published work. MN has received consultant support from Pfizer, Abbvie, Merck, Shionogi, and Thermo Fisher. He has received research support from Merck, Shiongi and Bayer., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A paucity of studies have assessed the epidemiology of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) that require ICU admission. We conducted a study on this group of patients with the primary objective of defining the incidence, epidemiology, and mortality rate of CAP in the ICUs in Louisville, Kentucky. The secondary objective was to estimate the number of patients who were hospitalized and the number of deaths that were associated with CAP in ICU in the United States., Research Questions: What is epidemiology of CAP in the ICU in Louisville, Kentucky, and the projected incidence in the United States?, Study Design and Methods: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective population-based cohort study. The setting was all nine adult hospitals in Louisville, Kentucky. The annual incidence of CAP in the ICU per 100,000 adults was calculated for the whole adult population of Louisville. The number of patients who were hospitalized because of CAP in ICU in the United States was estimated by multiplying the Louisville incidence rate of CAP in ICU by the 2014 US adult population., Results: From a total of 7,449 unique patients who were hospitalized with CAP, 1,707 patients (23%) were admitted to the ICU. The incidence of CAP in the ICU was 145 cases per 100,000 population of adults. Cases of CAP in the ICU were clustered in patients from areas of the city with high poverty. The mortality rate of patients with CAP in ICU was 27% at 30 days and 47% at one year. In the United States, the estimated number of patients who were hospitalized with CAP requiring the ICU was 356,326 per year, and the estimated number of deaths at 30 days and one year were 96,206 and 167,474, respectively., Interpretation: Almost one in five patients who are hospitalized with CAP requires intensive care. Poverty is associated with CAP in the ICU. Nearly one-half of patients with CAP in the ICU will die within one year. Because of its significant burden, CAP in the ICU should be a high priority in research agenda and health policy., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Intensive care units (ICUs) are an appropriate focus of antibiotic stewardship program efforts because a large proportion of any hospital's use of parenteral antibiotics, especially broad-spectrum, occurs in the ICU. Given the importance of antibiotic stewardship for critically ill patients and the importance of critical care practitioners as the front line for antibiotic stewardship, a workshop was convened to specifically address barriers to antibiotic stewardship in the ICU and discuss tactics to overcome these. The working definition of antibiotic stewardship is "the right drug at the right time and the right dose for the right bug for the right duration." A major emphasis was that antibiotic stewardship should be a core competency of critical care clinicians. Fear of pathogens that are not covered by empirical antibiotics is a major driver of excessively broad-spectrum therapy in critically ill patients. Better diagnostics and outcome data can address this fear and expand efforts to narrow or shorten therapy. Greater awareness of the substantial adverse effects of antibiotics should be emphasized and is an important counterargument to broad-spectrum therapy in individual low-risk patients. Optimal antibiotic stewardship should not focus solely on reducing antibiotic use or ensuring compliance with guidelines. Instead, it should enhance care both for individual patients (by improving and individualizing their choice of antibiotic) and for the ICU population as a whole. Opportunities for antibiotic stewardship in common ICU infections, including community- and hospital-acquired pneumonia and sepsis, are discussed. Intensivists can partner with antibiotic stewardship programs to address barriers and improve patient care.

Purpose of Review: Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is a form of nosocomial pneumonia, distinct from ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). This review compares HAP and VAP, highlighting differences in natural history, risk factors, and bacteriology that necessitate a different approach to the therapy of HAP, compared with VAP., Recent Findings: HAP can arise out of the ICU, or in the ICU, and can lead to severe illness, including the need for intubation and mechanical ventilation. New American and European nosocomial pneumonia guidelines make therapy recommendations for HAP. The American guidelines recommend broader spectrum therapy than the European guidelines, but recent studies support the idea that not all HAP patients need antipseudomonal therapy. When the American guideline approach to HAP has been studied, it led to both overtreatment and inappropriate therapy for the identified pathogens. An algorithm, modified from the European guideline, proposes an approach to therapy that necessitates dual antipseudomonal therapy in less than 25% of all HAP patients., Summary: Although more prospective therapy trials of HAP are needed, based on currently available data, it is possible to use an approach that provides appropriate therapy without the overuse of broad-spectrum therapy.

Objective: To define clinical features associated with Intensive Care Unit (ICU) infections caused by multi-drug resistant organisms (MDRO) and their impact on patient outcome., Design: A single-center, retrospective case-control study was carried out between January 2010 and May 2010., Setting: A medical ICU (MICU) in the United States., Patients: The study included a total of 127 MDRO-positive patients and 186 MDRO-negative patients., Interventions: No interventions were carried out., Results: Out of a total of 313 patients, MDROs were present in 127 (41.7%). Based on the multivariate analysis, only infection as a cause of admission [OR 3.3 (1.9-5.8)]), total days of ventilation [OR 1.07 (1.01-1.12)], total days in hospital [OR 1.04 (1.01-1.07)], immunosuppression [OR 2.04 (1.2-3.5)], a history of hyperlipidemia [OR 2.2 (1.2-3.8)], surgical history [OR 1.82 (1.05-3.14)] and age [OR 1.02 (1.00-1.04)] were identified as clinical factors independently associated to MDROs, while the Caucasian race was negatively associated to MDROs. The distribution of days on ventilation, days in hospital and days of antibiotic treatment prior to infection differed between the MDRO-positive and MDRO-negative groups. The MDRO-positive patients showed a greater median number of days in hospital and days of antibiotic treatment before infection, with a greater median number of days in hospital, days of antibiotic treatment and days of ventilation after infection, compared to the MDRO-negative patients. The mortality rate was not significantly different between the two groups. Appropriate empirical antibiotic therapy was prescribed in 82% of the MDRO-positive cases - such treatment being started within 24h after onset of the infection in 68.5% of the cases., Conclusion: Defining clinical factors associated with MDRO infections and administering timely and appropriate empirical antibiotic therapy may help reduce the mortality associated with these infections. In our hospital we did not withhold broad spectrum drugs as empirical therapy in patients with clinical features associated to MDRO infection. Our rate of appropriate empirical therapy was therefore high, which could explain the absence of excessive mortality in patients infected with MDROs., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier España, S.L.U. y SEMICYUC. All rights reserved.)

Pneumonia is a leading cause of hospital-acquired infections, although reported rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) have been declining in recent years. A multifaceted infection prevention approach, using a “ventilator bundle,” has been shown to reduce the frequency of VAP, while improving other patient outcomes. Because of difficulties in defining VAP, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Service introduced a new streamlined ventilator-associated event (VAE) definition in 2013 for the surveillance of complications in mechanically ventilated patients. VAE measures are increasingly being measured by institutions in the United States in place of VAP rates and as a potential measure of the quality of intensive care unit (ICU) care. However, there is increased recognition that the streamlined definitions identify a different subset of patients than those identified by traditional VAP surveillance and that VAP prevention strategies may not impact all the causes of VAE. Also, VAP and VAE rates may not always reflect the quality of care in a given ICU, especially since patient factors, beyond the control of the hospital, may impact the rates of VAP and VAE. In this review, we discuss the issues related to VAP as a quality measure and the areas of uncertainty related to the new VAE definitions., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Introduction: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common cause of nosocomial infection, and is related to significant utilization of health-care resources. In the past decade, new data have emerged about VAP epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention., Results: Classifying VAP strictly based on time since hospitalization (early- and late-onset VAP) can potentially result in undertreatment of drug-resistant organisms in ICUs with a high rate of drug resistance, and overtreatment for patients not infected with resistant pathogens. A combined strategy incorporating diagnostic scoring systems, such as the Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (CPIS), and either a quantitative or qualitative microbiological specimen, plus serial measurement of biomarkers, leads to responsible antimicrobial stewardship. The newly proposed ventilator-associated events (VAE) surveillance definition, endorsed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has low sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing VAP and the ability to prevent VAE is uncertain, making it a questionable surrogate for the quality of ICU care. The use of adjunctive aerosolized antibiotic treatment can provide high pulmonary concentrations of the drug and may facilitate shorter durations of therapy for multi-drug-resistant pathogens. A group of preventive strategies grouped as a 'ventilator bundle' can decrease VAP rates, but not to zero, and several recent studies show that there are potential barriers to implementation of these prevention strategies., Conclusion: The morbidity and mortality related to VAP remain high and, in the absence of a gold standard test for diagnosis, suspected VAP patients should be started on antibiotics based on recommendations per the 2005 ATS guidelines and knowledge of local antibiotic susceptibility patterns. Using a combination of clinical severity scores, biomarkers, and cultures might help with reducing the duration of therapy and achieving antibiotic de-escalation.

Over the last two decades, considerable progress has been made in the understanding of disease mechanisms and infection control strategies related to infections, particularly pneumonia, in critically ill patients. Patient-centered and preventative strategies assume paramount importance in this era of limited health-care resources, in which effective targeted therapy is required to achieve the best outcomes. Risk stratification using severity scores and inflammatory biomarkers is a promising strategy for identifying sick patients early during their hospital stay. The emergence of multidrug-resistant pathogens is becoming a major hurdle in intensive care units. Cooperation, education, and interaction between multiple disciplines in the intensive care unit are required to limit the spread of resistant pathogens and to improve care. In this review, we summarize findings from major publications over the last year in the field of respiratory infections in critically ill patients, putting an emphasis on a newer understanding of pathogenesis, use of biomarkers, and antibiotic stewardship and examining new treatment options and preventive strategies.

Objective: To validate a set of predictors of adverse outcomes in patients with ICU-acquired pneumonia in relation to clinically relevant assessment at 28 days., Design: Prospective, observational study., Setting: Six medical and surgical ICUs of a university hospital., Patients: Three hundred thirty-five patients with ICU-acquired pneumonia., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Development of predictors of adverse outcomes was defined when at least one of the following criteria was present at an evaluation made 72-96 hours after starting treatment: no improvement of PaO2/FIO2, need for intubation due to pneumonia, persistence of fever or hypothermia with purulent respiratory secretions, greater than or equal to 50% increase in radiographic infiltrates, or occurrence of septic shock or multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. We also assessed the inflammatory response by different serum biomarkers. The presence of predictors of adverse outcomes was related to mortality and ventilator-free days at day 28. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was evaluated and related to mortality at day 28.One hundred eighty-four (55%) patients had at least one predictor of adverse outcomes. The 28-day mortality was higher for those with versus those without predictors of adverse outcomes (45% vs 19%, p<0.001), and ventilator-free days were lower (median [interquartile range], 0 [0-17] vs 22 [0-28]) for patients with versus patients without predictors of adverse outcomes (p<0.001). The lack of improvement of PaO2/FIO2 and lack of improvement in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score from day 1 to day 5 were independently associated with 28-day mortality and fewer ventilator-free days. The marginal structural analysis showed an odds ratio of death 2.042 (95% CI, 1.01-4.13; p=0.047) in patients with predictors of adverse outcomes. Patients with predictors of adverse outcomes had higher serum inflammatory response accordingly to biomarkers evaluated., Conclusions: The presence of any predictors of adverse outcomes was associated with mortality and decreased ventilator-free days at day 28. The lack of improvement in the PaO2/FIO2 and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was independently associated with mortality in the multivariate analysis.

Objective: Intensive care units (ICUs) in different parts of the world provide care to patients with advanced age and terminal illness at different rates and in different patterns. In the United States, ICU beds make up a disproportionate number of acute care beds. Nearly half of all patients who die in U.S. hospitals have received ICU, some of which may be futile. The objective of this study was to examine ways in which the delivery of futile care in the ICU can cause harm to patients other than those receiving the futile care., Design: Review of available studies of patient and family attitudes about cardiopulmonary resuscitation and other supportive modalities, including antibiotic therapy, and the relationship of the delivery of such care to the outcomes of others treated in the ICU., Patients: Those treated in ICUs and those receiving futile care., Measurements and Main Results: Compared with younger patients, the elderly in the United States use more ICU care, at higher cost, have more serious comorbidities, and have a higher mortality rate. Certain populations demand ICU care more than others and often with less benefit than less-demanding populations. In a situation of unlimited resources, the provision of ICU care, even when futile, has been viewed as an individual patient decision with no harm to others within the hospital. However, even with unlimited resources, the use of antibiotics for those who are receiving futile care can be considered unethical by egalitarian theory because it can lead to antibiotic resistance that may make the treatment of other patients impossible. In the setting of limited resources, like in pandemic influenza, or with the potential limiting of resources, in a pay-for-performance environment, the provision of futile care can also harm the hospital population as a whole., Conclusions: The delivery of futile care is not only an individual patient decision, but must be viewed in a broader context. Societal awareness of this problem is necessary, and better scoring systems to identify when ICU care has limited benefit are needed to address these difficult and challenging realities.

Antibiotic-resistant organisms are common in intensive care unit infection and can be either Gram-positive or Gram-negative. A number of studies have evaluated whether these organisms can lead to excess morbidity, mortality, or cost. In general, the studies are confounded by a number of methodologic issues, including the selection of an appropriate control population. Cases and controls must be appropriately matched for the presence of infection, the presence of infection with similar organisms (but ones that are either antibiotic-sensitive or -resistant), and severity of illness. In addition, studies must account for the therapies given to patients who are infected with resistant organisms because resistance is an important risk factor for inadequate empirical therapy, and such therapy is itself a potent determinant of a number of adverse outcomes, including mortality. To date, the data with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococcus are inconsistent with regard to the effect on mortality rates, although infection with both organisms can lead to excess length of stay and increased cost of care. When studies have been adequately controlled and powered, infection with vancomycin-resistant enterococcus has had more of an effect on the mortality rate than infection with antibiotic-sensitive enterococci. Infection with resistant Gram-negatives also has adverse impact on outcome, with excess mortality being seen in patient groups infected with Acinetobacter and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. If we are to minimize the effect of resistance on medical outcomes and cost, it will be necessary to have a current knowledge of each intensive care unit's pathogens and susceptibility patterns, so that empirical therapy will have a good likelihood of being effective. In addition, new therapeutic agents may improve on the efficacy of older agents and could reduce cost if they allow for some patients to leave the hospital and to finish therapy with an oral formulation of a highly bioavailable agent.

We hypothesized that a "closed" intensive care unit (ICU) was more efficient that an "open" one. ICU admissions were retrospectively analyzed before and after ICU closure at one hospital; prospective analysis in that ICU with an open ICU nearby was done. Illness severity was gauged by the Mortality Prediction Model (MPM0). Outcomes included mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and mechanical ventilation (MV). There were no differences in age, MPM0, and use of MV. ICU and hospital LOS were lower when "closed" (ICU LOS: prospective 6.1 versus 12.6 d, p < 0.0001; retrospective 6.1 versus 9.3 d, p < 0.05; hospital LOS: prospective 19.2 versus 33.2 d, p < 0.008; retrospective 22.2 versus 31.2 d, p < 0.02). Days on MV were lower when "closed" (prospective 2.3 versus 8.5 d, p < 0.0005; retrospective 3.3 versus 6.4 d, p < 0.05). Pooled data revealed the following: MV predicted ICU LOS; ICU organization and MPM0 predicted days on MV; MV and ICU organization predicted hospital LOS; mortality predictors were open ICU (odds ratio [OR] 1.5, p < 0.04), MPM0 (OR 1.16 for MPM0 increase 0.1, p < 0.002), and MV (OR 2.43, p < 0.0001). We conclude that patient care is more efficient with a closed ICU, and that mortality is not adversely affected.

The normal upper and lower respiratory tract are not colonized by enteric gram-negative bacteria (EGNB), but when serious illness develops, both sites may harbor these organisms. Colonization at either site is more likely when the severity of illness increases, and in critically ill patients, Pseudomonas species are the most common colonizing organisms, especially in the tracheobronchial tree. Many of the risk factors for colonization by EGNB have also been recognized as predisposing conditions for nosocomial pneumonia, and colonization may precede and predict this infection. Colonization should be viewed as a marker of a sick patient who had multiple host impairments; it is these defects that often allow colonization to progress to invasive infection. One pathogenetic mechanism that mediates colonization is an increase in epithelial cell bacterial adherence for EGNB. Many of the clinical conditions that favor colonization lead to an alteration in epithelial cell surface susceptibility to bacterial binding. Factors that influence adherence include cellular variables, bacterial surface characteristics and exoproducts, and the microenvironmental conditions at the airway surface. In order for adherence to mediate colonization, mucociliary clearance and other lower respiratory tract defenses must be abnormal. Based on an understanding of colonization pathogenesis, rational strategies for nosocomial pneumonia prophylaxis may emerge.