Search

The aim of this study was to define the core (minimum) competencies required of a specialist in adult intensive care medicine (ICM). This is the second phase of a 3-year project to develop an internationally acceptable competency-based training programme in ICM for Europe (CoBaTrICE). Consensus techniques (modified Delphi and nominal group) were used to enable interested stakeholders (health care professionals, educators, patients and their relatives) to identify and prioritise core competencies. Online and postal surveys were used to generate ideas. A nominal group of 12 clinicians met in plenary session to rate the importance of the competence statements constructed from these suggestions. All materials were presented online for a second round Delphi prior to iterative editorial review. The initial surveys generated over 5,250 suggestions for competencies from 57 countries. Preliminary editing permitted us to encapsulate these suggestions within 164 competence stems and 5 behavioural themes. For each of these items the nominal group selected the minimum level of expertise required of a safe practitioner at the end of their specialist training, before rating them for importance. Individuals and groups from 29 countries commented on the nominal group output; this informed the editorial review. These combined processes resulted in 102 competence statements, divided into 12 domains. Using consensus techniques we have generated core competencies which are internationally applicable but still able to accommodate local requirements. This provides the foundation upon which an international competency based training programme for intensive care medicine can be built. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health care providers, hospital administrators, and politicians face competing challenges to reduce clinical errors, control expenditure, increase access and throughput, and improve quality of care. The safe management of the acutely ill inpatient presents particular difficulties. In the first of five Lancet articles on this topic we discuss patients’ safety in the acute hospital. We also present a framework in which responsibility for improvement and better integration of care can be considered at the level of patient, local environment, hospital, and health care system; and the other four papers in the series will examine in greater detail methods for measuring, monitoring, and improving inpatient safety. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: To establish priorities for research in critical care medicine in the UK using survey and nominal group (NG) techniques.Design: The senior doctor and nurse from 325 intensive care units (ICUs) in the UK were invited to contribute up to ten research questions relevant to intensive care organisation, practice or outcomes. These were then ranked twice using a Likert scale by a panel (nominal group) consisting of ten doctors (two trainees) and two nurses from university teaching and district general (community) hospitals. The first ratings were performed privately, and the second after group discussion. Thirty questions, ten each with strong, moderate or weak support, were then returned for rating by the originating ICU staff and the results compared with those of the NG.Results: One hundred eighty-five respondents (35.6 % university teaching, 62.1% district general, 2.3 % not stated) provided 811 questions of which 722 were research hypotheses. The most frequently identified topics were the evaluation of high dependency care, ICU characteristics, treatments for acute lung injury and acute renal failure, nurse:patient ratios, pulmonary artery catheterisation, aspects of medical and nursing practice, protocol evaluation, and interhospital transfers. These were condensed into 100 topics for consideration by the NG. Discussion and re-rating by the group resulted in strong support being offered for 37 topics, moderate support for 48, and weak support for 21. Following circulation of ten questions from each category, nine questions achieved strong support from both ICU staff and the NG. These were the effect on outcomes from critical illness of early intervention, high dependency care, nurse:patient ratios, interhospital transfers, early enteral feeding, optimisation of perioperative care, hospital type, regionalisation of paediatric intensive care and the use of pulmonary artery catheters. The absence of any questions relating to interventions targetting mediators of the immuno-inflammatory response could be a consequence of the failure of recent studies in sepsis to demonstrate benefits in outcome.Conclusions: The intensive care community in the UK appears to prioritise research into organisational aspects of clinical practice and practical aspects of organ-system support. Health services research and the biological sciences need to develop collaborative methods for evaluating interventions and outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A physiological sickness scoring system (SS), based on the APACHE II score, has been used to assess outcome from critical illness in 128 patients admitted to a general intensive care unit. Physiological data were collected on each patient from admission until death or discharge from the unit, and survival was recorded as survival to home. The admission SS correctly classified 80.6% of survivors, and 70.4% of non-survivors. Predictive power did not improve with time using the daily SS. However, when the proportional change in SS over time was included in the analysis, predictive power improved; and at day 4, 87.1% of survivors and 75% of non-survivors were correctly classified. At intermediate levels of sickness severity (admission score of 13-18), a reduction in SS of 30% by day 4 reduced the risk of death by 32%; at higher levels (greater than 18) a similar reduction in SS was associated with a 47% reduction in death-risk. Failure to obtain a reduction in score by day 4 was associated with increased risk of death. Survivors consistently showed a greater fall in SS by day 4 than non-survivors. The APACHE score and its modifications provide an accurate, unitary measure of physiological disturbance. Correction of abnormal physiology, and the measurement of responsiveness to therapy are important components in the prediction of outcome from critical illness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) in patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are associated with increased morbidity, mortality and economic costs. Many BSIs are associated with central venous catheters (CVCs). The Infection in Critical Care Quality Improvement Programme (ICCQIP) was established to initiate surveillance of BSIs in English ICUs., Methods: A web-based data capture system was launched on 1 st May 2016 to collect all positive blood cultures (PBCs), patient-days and CVC-days. National Health Service (NHS) trusts in England were invited to participate in the surveillance programme. Data were linked to the antimicrobial resistance dataset maintained by Public Health England and to mortality data., Findings: Between 1 st May 2016 and 30 th April 2017, 84 ICUs (72 adult ICUs, seven paediatric ICUs and five neonatal ICUs) based in 57 of 147 NHS trusts provided data. In total, 1474 PBCs were reported, with coagulase-negative staphylococci, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecium being the most commonly reported organisms. The rates of BSI and ICU-associated CVC-BSI were 5.7, 1.5 and 1.3 per 1000 bed-days and 2.3, 1.0 and 1.5 per 1000 ICU-CVC-days in adult, paediatric and neonatal ICUs, respectively. There was wide variation in BSI and CVC-BSI rates within ICU types, particularly in adult ICUs (0-44.0 per 1000 bed-days and 0-18.3 per 1000 ICU-CVC-days)., Conclusions: While the overall rates of ICU-associated CVC-BSIs were lower than 2.5 per 1000 ICU-CVC-days across all age ranges, large differences were observed between ICUs, highlighting the importance of a national standardized surveillance system to identify opportunities for improvement. Data linkage provided clinically important information on resistance patterns and patient outcomes at no extra cost to participating trusts., (Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 1995, the University of Birmingham, UK, School of Medicine and Dentistry replaced lecture-based basic life support (BLS) teaching with a peer-led, practical programme. We present our 15-yr experience of peer-led healthcare undergraduate training and examination with a literature review., Methods: A literature review of healthcare undergraduate peer-led practical skills teaching was performed though Pubmed. The development of the Birmingham course is described, from its inception in 1995-2011. Training methods include peer-led training and assessment by senior students who complete an European Resuscitation Council-endorsed instructor course. Student assessors additionally undergo training in assessment and communication skills. The course has been developed by parallel research evaluation and peer-reviewed publication. Course administration is by an experienced student committee with senior clinician support. Anonymous feedback from the most recent courses and the current annual pass rates are reported., Results: The literature review identified 369 publications of which 28 met our criteria for inclusion. Largely descriptive, these are highly positive about peer involvement in practical skills teaching using similar, albeit smaller, courses to that described below. Currently approximately 600 first year healthcare undergraduates complete the Birmingham course; participant numbers increase annually. Successful completion is mandatory for students to proceed to the second year of studies. First attempt pass rate is 86%, and close to 100% (565/566 students, 99.8%) following re-assessment the same day. 97% of participants enjoyed the course, 99% preferred peer-tutors to clinicians, 99% perceived teaching quality as "good" or "excellent", and felt they had sufficient practice. Course organisation was rated "good" or "excellent" by 91%. Each year 3-4 student projects have been published or presented internationally. The annual cost of providing the course is currently £15,594.70 (Eur 18,410), or approximately £26 (Eur 30) per student., Conclusions: This large scale, peer-led BLS course demonstrates that such programmes can have excellent outcomes with outstanding participant satisfaction. Peer-tutors and assessors are competent, more available and less costly than clinical staff. Student instructors develop skills in teaching, assessment and appraisal, organisation and research. Sustainability is possible given succession-planning and consistent leadership., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Patients with central venous catheters (CVCs) are at increased risk of bloodstream infections and sepsis-related death. CVC-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) are costly and account for a significant proportion of hospital-acquired infections. The aim of this audit was to assess current practice and staff knowledge of CVC post-insertion care and therefore identify aspects of CVC care with potential for improvement. We conducted a prospective audit over 28 consecutive days at a university teaching hospital investigating current practice of CVC post-insertion care in wards with high CVC usage. A multiple choice questionnaire on best practice of CVC insertion and care was distributed among clinical staff. Rates of breaches in catheter care and CRBSIs were calculated and statistical significance assumed when P<0.05. Data was recorded from 151 CVCs in 106 patients giving a total of 721 catheter days. In all, 323 breaches in care were identified giving a failure rate of 44.8%, with significant differences between intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU wards (P<0.001). Dressings (not intact) and caps and taps (incorrectly placed) were identified as the major lapses in CVC care with 158 and 156 breaches per 1000 catheter days, respectively. During the study period four CRBSIs were identified, producing a CRBSI rate of 5.5 per 1000 catheter days (95% confidence interval: 0.12-10.97). There are several opportunities to improve CVC post-insertion care. Future interventions to improve reliability of care should focus on implementing best practice rather than further education.