Search

RESUMO Objetivo: Fornecer recomendações para nortear o manejo clínico do potencial doador em morte encefálica. Métodos: O presente documento foi formulado em dois painéis compostos por uma força tarefa integrada por 27 especialistas de diferentes áreas que responderam a questões dirigidas aos seguintes temas: ventilação mecânica, hemodinâmica, suporte endócrino-metabólico, infecção, temperatura corporal, transfusão sanguínea, e uso de checklists. Os desfechos considerados foram: parada cardíaca, número de órgãos retirados ou transplantados e função/sobrevida dos órgãos transplantados. A qualidade das evidências das recomendações foi avaliada pelo sistema Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Resultados: Foram geradas 19 recomendações a partir do painel de especialistas. Dessas, 7 foram classificadas como fortes, 11 fracas e uma foi considerada boa prática clínica. Conclusão: Apesar da concordância entre os membros do painel em relação à maior parte das recomendações, o grau de recomendação é fraco em sua maioria. Abstract Objective: To contribute to updating the recommendations for brain-dead potential organ donor management. Methods: A group of 27 experts, including intensivists, transplant coordinators, transplant surgeons, and epidemiologists, answered questions related to the following topics were divided into mechanical ventilation, hemodynamics, endocrine-metabolic management, infection, body temperature, blood transfusion, and checklists use. The outcomes considered were cardiac arrests, number of organs removed or transplanted as well as function / survival of transplanted organs. The quality of evidence of the recommendations was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to classify the recommendations. Results: A total of 19 recommendations were drawn from the expert panel. Of these, 7 were classified as strong, 11 as weak and 1 was considered a good clinical practice. Conclusion: Despite the agreement among panel members on most recommendations, the grade of recommendation was mostly weak.

Background: The effectiveness of evidence-based, goal-directed care to reduce losses of brain-dead potential organ donors through cardiac arrest is unclear. DONORS aimed to determine whether guiding clinical management with an evidence-based goal-directed checklist can reduce losses of potential organ donors to cardiac arrest. Methods: This open cluster randomized trial assigned adult intensive care units from hospitals across Brazil with 10 or more annual brain death reports to guide the management of potential donors with the checklist (intervention group) or to maintain usual care without the checklist (control group). Intervention group was instructed to apply a checklist with 13 clinical goals and 14 corresponding actions, every six hours, from study enrollment to organ retrieval. Consecutive potential donors between 14 and 90 years of age were included. Primary outcome was incidence of loss of brain-dead potential organ donors to cardiac arrest at the individual level. A prespecified sensitivity analysis assessed checklist adherence as an effect modifier. Findings: Among 1771 potential donors screened, 1535 were included from 63 hospitals: 31 assigned to checklist guidance (743 potential donors) and 32 to usual care (792 potential donors). Seventy (9.4%) potential donors at intervention hospitals and 117 (14.8%) at control met the primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 1.05; P=0.09). Median checklist adherence was 79% (interquartile range, 64% to 90%). Among those with adherence greater than 79%, primary outcome rate was lower than control group (5.3% vs. 14.8%; HR, 0.45; 9% CI, 0.26 to 0.75). Among those with low adherence, primary outcome rate was comparable to the control group. Interpretation: Overall use of the checklist in preventing donor loss due to cardiac arrest was inconclusive. However, predefined subgroup analysis suggests that high adherence to the checklist may reduce donor losses to cardiac arrest. Funding: Brazilian Ministry of Health through PROADI-SUS. Declaration of Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Ethics Approval Statement: In accordance with ethical principles stated in the Resolution No. 466/2012 of the Brazilian National Health Council/Ministry of Health, the Research Ethics Committee of each participating hospital approved the conduct of this study with a waiver of consent for eligible potential donors. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03179020 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03179020)

Background The quality of clinical care of brain-dead potential organ donors may help reduce donor losses caused by irreversible or unreversed cardiac arrest and increase the number of organs donated. We sought to determine whether an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist for donor management in intensive care units (ICUs) can reduce donor losses to cardiac arrest. Methods/design The DONORS study is a multicentre, cluster-randomised controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio designed to compare an intervention group (goal-directed checklist for brain-dead potential organ donor management) with a control group (standard ICU care). The primary outcome is loss of potential donors due to cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes are the number of actual organ donors and the number of solid organs recovered per actual donor. Exploratory outcomes include the achievement of relevant clinical goals during the management of brain-dead potential organ donors. The present statistical analysis plan (SAP) describes all primary statistical procedures that will be used to evaluate the results and perform exploratory and sensitivity analyses of the trial. Discussion The SAP of the DONORS study aims to describe its analytic procedures, enhancing the transparency of the study. At the moment of SAP subsmission, 63 institutions have been randomised and were enrolling study participants. Thus, the analyses reported herein have been defined before the end of the study recruitment and database locking. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03179020. Registered on 7 June 2017.

Objective To contribute to updating the recommendations for brain-dead potential organ donor management. Method A group of 27 experts, including intensivists, transplant coordinators, transplant surgeons, and epidemiologists, joined a task force formed by the General Coordination Office of the National Transplant System/Brazilian Ministry of Health (CGSNT-MS), the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (AMIB), the Brazilian Association of Organ Transplantation (ABTO), and the Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network (BRICNet). The questions were developed within the scope of the 2011 Brazilian Guidelines for Management of Adult Potential Multiple-Organ Deceased Donors. The topics were divided into mechanical ventilation, hemodynamic support, endocrine-metabolic management, infection, body temperature, blood transfusion, and use of checklists. The outcomes considered for decision-making were cardiac arrest, number of organs recovered or transplanted per donor, and graft function/survival. Rapid systematic reviews were conducted, and the quality of evidence of the recommendations was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Two expert panels were held in November 2016 and February 2017 to classify the recommendations. A systematic review update was performed in June 2020, and the recommendations were reviewed through a Delphi process with the panelists between June and July 2020. Results A total of 19 recommendations were drawn from the expert panel. Of these, 7 were classified as strong (lung-protective ventilation strategy, vasopressors and combining arginine vasopressin to control blood pressure, antidiuretic hormones to control polyuria, serum potassium and magnesium control, and antibiotic use), 11 as weak (alveolar recruitment maneuvers, low-dose dopamine, low-dose corticosteroids, thyroid hormones, glycemic and serum sodium control, nutritional support, body temperature control or hypothermia, red blood cell transfusion, and goal-directed protocols), and 1 was considered a good clinical practice (volemic expansion). Conclusion Despite the agreement among panel members on most recommendations, the grade of recommendation was mostly weak. The observed lack of robust evidence on the topic highlights the importance of the present guideline to improve the management of brain-dead potential organ donors.

IntroductionThere is an increasing demand for multi-organ donors for organ transplantation programmes. This study protocol describes the Donation Network to Optimise Organ Recovery Study, a planned cluster randomised controlled trial that aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist for brain-dead potential organ donor management in intensive care units (ICUs) in reducing the loss of potential donors due to cardiac arrest.Methods and analysisThe study will include ICUs of at least 60 Brazilian sites with an average of ≥10 annual notifications of valid potential organ donors. Hospitals will be randomly assigned (with a 1:1 allocation ratio) to the intervention group, which will involve the implementation of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist for potential organ donor maintenance, or the control group, which will maintain the usual care practices of the ICU. Team members from all participating ICUs will receive training on how to conduct family interviews for organ donation. The primary outcome will be loss of potential donors due to cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes will include the number of actual organ donors and the number of organs recovered per actual donor.Ethics and disseminationThe institutional review board (IRB) of the coordinating centre and of each participating site individually approved the study. We requested a waiver of informed consent for the IRB of each site. Study results will be disseminated to the general medical community through publications in peer-reviewed medical journals.Trial registration numberNCT03179020; Pre-results.

Background: Hypertension is a public health problem and a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary program based on group and individual care versus group-only care, to promote blood pressure control in hypertensive patients in primary health care. Methods: Randomized controlled clinical trial. The study was conducted within the primary health care, in two units of the Family Health Strategy, covering 11,000 individuals, in Porto Alegre, Brazil. Two hundred and 56 patients, older than 40 years old and with uncontrolled hypertension, systolic blood pressure (BP) ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg or ≥130 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥80 mmHg for individuals with diabetes. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to a health care program aiming for blood pressure control, with the multidisciplinary program group or with the multidisciplinary program plus personalized care group. Primary outcome measures were reduction in systolic BP from baseline to 6 months. Secondary measures included proportion of patients with systolic or diastolic BP controlled. Student t test, Pearson’s chi-squared test, Fisher’s exact test, Mann-Whitney U test, Wilcoxon signed-ranks test and generalized estimating equation (GEE) model were used in the analysis. Results: The baseline characteristics of participants were similar between groups. After 6 months of follow-up, systolic BP decreased markedly in both groups (Δ - 11.8 mmHg [SD, 20.2] in the multidisciplinary program group and Δ - 12.9 mmHg [SD, 19.2] in the personalized care group; p < 0.001). Similarly, we noted a significant change in diastolic BP over time in both groups (Δ - 8.1 mmHg [SD, 10.8] in the multidisciplinary program group and Δ - 7. 0 mmHg [SD, 11.5] in the personalized care group; p < 0.001). Conclusions: The study demonstrates similar effectiveness of a group intervention in comparison to a personalized education program in hypertension patients to achieve BP control. These findings indicate that the intervention can be for all hypertensive patients assisted in primary health care.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov IdentifierNCT01696318 (May 2013).

Functional impairment has a direct impact on quality of life of ICU-survivors, because it limits autonomy and physical and mental abilities. So, these patients are more susceptible to chronic illness, increased long-term mortality.

Background Patient education on pharmacological therapy may increase medication adherence and decrease hospitalizations. Our aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of pharmaceutical care at emergency department discharge in patients with hypertension and/or diabetes. Methods/design This is a randomized controlled trial. Participants will be recruited from a public emergency department at Restinga district in Porto Alegre, southern Brazil. A total of 380 patients will be randomly assigned into 2 groups at the moment of emergency department discharge after receiving medical orientations: an intervention group, consisting of a structured individual counseling session by a pharmacist in addition to written orientations, or a control group, consisting only of written information about the disease. Outcomes will be assessed in an ambulatory visit 2 months after the randomization. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with high medication adherence assessed using the Morisky-Green Test and the Brief Medication Questionnaire. The secondary outcomes are reduction of blood pressure, glycated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose, quality of life and number of visits to the emergency department. Discussion Pharmaceutical care interventions have shown to be feasible and effective in increasing medication adherence in both hospital outpatient and community pharmacy settings. However, there have been no previous assessments of the effectiveness of pharmacy care interventions initiated in patients discharged from emergency departments. Our hypothesis is that pharmaceutical counseling is also effective in this population. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01978925 (11 November 2013) and Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials U1111-1149-8922 (5 November 2013). Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0579-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Delirium is associated with worse outcomes among intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Data about risk factors for delirium in Latin American ICUs are scarce.