Search

Objective: To study the impact of delayed admission by more than 4 hours on the outcomes of critically ill patients., Methods: This was a retrospective observational study in which adult patients admitted directly from the emergency department to the intensive care unit were divided into two groups: Timely Admission if they were admitted within 4 hours and Delayed Admission if admission was delayed for more than 4 hours. Intensive care unit length of stay and hospital/intensive care unit mortality were compared between the groups. Propensity score matching was performed to correct for imbalances. Logistic regression analysis was used to explore delayed admission as an independent risk factor for intensive care unit mortality., Results: During the study period, 1,887 patients were admitted directly from the emergency department to the intensive care unit, with 42% being delayed admissions. Delayed patients had significantly longer intensive care unit lengths of stay and higher intensive care unit and hospital mortality. These results were persistent after propensity score matching of the groups. Delayed admission was an independent risk factor for intensive care unit mortality (OR = 2.6; 95%CI 1.9 - 3.5; p < 0.001). The association of delay and intensive care unit mortality emerged after a delay of 2 hours and was highest after a delay of 4 hours., Conclusion: Delayed admission to the intensive care unit from the emergency department is an independent risk factor for intensive care unit mortality, with the strongest association being after a delay of 4 hours.

Objective: To evaluate the hypothesis that the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) at the time of intensive care unit discharge is associated with readmission and to identify the MEWS that most reliably predicts intensive care unit readmission within 48 hours of discharge., Methods: This was a retrospective observational study of the MEWSs of discharged patients from the intensive care unit. We compared the demographics, severity scores, critical illness characteristics, and MEWSs of readmitted and non-readmitted patients, identified factors associated with readmission in a logistic regression model, constructed a Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve of the MEWS in predicting the probability of readmission, and presented the optimum criterion with the highest sensitivity and specificity., Results: The readmission rate was 2.6%, and the MEWS was a significant predictor of readmission, along with intensive care unit length of stay > 10 days and tracheostomy. The ROC curve of the MEWS in predicting the readmission probability had an AUC of 0.82, and a MEWS > 6 carried a sensitivity of 0.78 (95%CI 0.66 - 0.9) and specificity of 0.9 (95%CI 0.87 - 0.93)., Conclusion: The MEWS is associated with intensive care unit readmission, and a score > 6 has excellent accuracy as a prognostic predictor.

Background: Sepsis and septic shock are major causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, associated with a high economic and social burden on healthcare systems and communities, yet with few definite treatment modalities. The efficacy of steroids in the management of sepsis or septic shock remains a controversy and subject of investigation due to their theoretical beneficial effects., Methods: This was a systematic literature review and meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials of hydrocortisone usage in sepsis or septic shock as of 2000, following the GRADE methodology, considering a primary outcome of 28 day all-cause mortality., Results: Ten randomized control trials were included in the review, 9 of which reported 28 day mortality either as a primary or secondary outcome. Relative risk of dying at 28 days was 0.93 in favor of hydrocortisone (95% CI: 0.86-1.01; P = 0.056). Other secondary outcomes of the review were similarly statistically insignificant. The quality of evidence was graded as very low to low., Conclusion: Hydrocortisone, when used in sepsis or septic shock, in critically ill adult patients showed a statistically insignificant trend towards decreasing 28 day all-cause mortality. This warrants consideration of clinical significance for each patient individually., (© 2019 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Background: ICU readmission is associated with poor outcomes. Few studies have directly compared the outcomes of early versus late readmissions, especially in Saudi Arabia. Objective: To compare the outcomes between early and late ICU readmissions, mainly with regards to hospital mortality. Methods: This retrospective study included unique patients who, within the same hospitalization, were admitted to the ICU, discharged to the general wards, and then readmitted to the ICU of King Saud Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, between January 01, 2015, and June 30, 2022. Patients readmitted within 2 calendar days were grouped into the Early readmission group, while those readmitted after 2 calendar days were in the Late readmission group. Results: A total of 997 patients were included, of which 753 (75.5%) belonged to the Late group. The mortality rate in the Late group was significantly higher than that in the Early group (37.6% vs. 29.5%, respectively; 95% CI: 1%–14.8%; P = 0.03). The readmission length of stay (LOS) and severity score of both groups were similar. The odds ratio of mortality for the Early group was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.51–0.98, P = 0.04); other significant risk factors were age (OR = 1.023, 95% CI: 1.016–1.03; P < 0.001) and readmission LOS (OR = 1.017, 95% CI: 1.009–1.026; P < 0.001). The most common reason for readmission in the Early group was high Modified Early Warning Score, while in the Late group, it was respiratory failure followed by sepsis or septic shock. Conclusion: Compared with late readmission, early readmission was associated with lower mortality, but not with lower LOS or severity score. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of ConScientiae Saúde is the property of Nove de Julho University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Rapid Response Teams were developed to provide interventions for deteriorating patients. Their activation depends on timely detection of deterioration. Automated calculation of warning scores may lead to early recognition, and improvement of RRT effectiveness. Method: This was a "Before" and "After" study, in the "Before" period ward nurses activated RRT after manually recording vital signs and calculating warning scores. In the "After" period, vital signs and warning calculations were automatically relayed to RRT through a wireless monitoring network. Results: When compared to the before group, the after group had significantly lower incidence and rate of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (2.3 / 1000 inpatient days versus 3.8 / 1000 inpatient days respectively, p = 0.01), significantly shorter length of hospital stay and lower hospital mortality, but significantly higher number of RRT activations. In multivariable logistic regression model, being in the "After" group decreases odds of CPR by 33% (OR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.46–0.99]; p = 0.04). There was no difference between groups in ICU admission. Conclusion: Automated activation of the RRT significantly reduced CPR events and rates, improved CPR success rate, reduced hospital length of stay and mortality, but increased the number of RRT activations. There were no differences in unplanned ICU admission or readmission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Practices of Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) orders show discrepancies worldwide, but there are only few such studies from Saudi Arabia. Objective: To describe the practice of DNR orders in a Saudi Arabian tertiary care ICU. Methods: This retrospective study included all patients who died with a DNR order at the ICU of King Saud Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, between January 1 to December 31, 2021. The percentage of early DNR (i.e., ≤48 hours of ICU admission) and late DNR (>48 hours) orders were determined and the variables between the two groups were compared. The determinants of late DNR were also investigated. Results: A total of 723 cases met the inclusion criteria, representing 14.9% of all ICU discharges and 63% of all ICU deaths during the study period. The late DNR group comprised the majority of the cases (78.3%), and included significantly more patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), community acquired pneumonia (CAP), acute kidney injury, and COVID-19, and significantly fewer cases of readmissions and malignancies. Septic shock lowered the odds of a late DNR (OR = 0.4, 95% CI: 0.2–0.9; P = 0.02), while ARDS (OR = 3.3, 95% CI: 2–5.4; P < 0.001), ischemic stroke (OR = 2.5, 95% CI: 1.1–5.4; P = 0.02), and CAP (OR = 2, 95% CI: 1.3–3.1; P = 0.003) increased the odds of a late DNR. Conclusion: There was a higher frequency of late DNR orders in our study compared to those reported in several studies worldwide. Cases with potential for a favorable outcome were more likely to have a late DNR order, while those with expected poorer outcomes were more likely to have an early DNR order. The discrepancies highlight the need for clearer guidelines to achieve consistency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of the Society of Thoracic Carido-Vascular Anaesthesia & Intensive Care is the property of Gogus Kalp Damar Anestezi ve Yogun Bakim Dernegi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

All the patients were intubated.A sterile green gown over a personal protective equipment (PPE) kit was worn for every patient before intubation. Thirdly, if the patient is agitated or not cooperative, there is a risk of minor trauma to the staff.[[9]] Similarly, in the present study, 78 skilled anaesthesiologists with more than 10 years of experience performed intubation on 1,000 patients. Introduction Health-care workers (HCWs), especially anaesthe siologists, are at a high risk of contracting coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 as they are involved in aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). [Extracted from the article]

Background: Corona virus disease is caused by the enveloped, single stranded RNA virus known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) becoming the deadliest disease of the century. Its global outbreak has led researchers to develop drugs or vaccines to prevent the spread of the disease. Favipiravir is an approved orally administered antiviral drug that selectively inhibits RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, used off-label to treat COVID-19. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of this drug for severe COVID-19 infection. Methods: This was an observational retrospective study, carried out at the ICU of King Saud Medical City (KSMC) from June 2020 to August 2020. Including a total of one thousand six hundred and ninety-nine patients (n=1699). Categorized into a treatment group (193 patients) who received Favipiravir along with standard care, and non-treatment group (1506 patients) who received standard care only. Results: ICU all-cause mortality was similar in both groups i.e., (Treated group 38.3% Vs Untreated group 39.4%, 95% CI of difference: -6.6% to +8.4%; p = 0.8). The subgroup analysis of survivors as compared to deceased in the treatment group showed that survivors had significantly lower age, international normalising ratio (INR), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and creatinine. The mean ICU length of stay (LOS) was shorter for survivors compared to deceased (11.2± 8.03 Vs 16.7±9.8 days respectively), while hospital LOS was almost similar between the two groups. Advanced age (OR 1.03 [95% CI: 1.01--1.06]; p=0.004), higher INR and BUN were significantly associated with increased odds of mortality. Comparison of lab investigations at day 1 and day 10 in the treatment group (regardless of outcome) showed that there was a significant increase in Alanine transaminase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALK), and Bilirubin, while an insignificant trend of increase in Aspartate transaminase (AST) and creatinine was recorded. Conclusion: In this study, Favipiravir showed better therapeutic responses in patients with severe COVID-19 infection, in terms of average duration of stay in the intensive care unit and was well tolerated in the younger age, but showed no mortality benefit. However, elevated levels of inflammatory markers, including increased ALT, AST, BUN, bilirubin, and creatinine, needs to be carefully examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The incidence and mortality rate of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in elderly patients were higher than the younger population. Different scoring systems, including The quick Sequential Organ Function Assessment (qSOFA), Combination of Confusion, Urea, Respiratory Rate, Blood Pressure, and Age ≥ 65 (CURB-65), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) and National Early Warning Score (NEWS), were used widely for predicting mortality and ICU admission of patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). This study aimed to identify the most suitable score system for better hospitalization. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed elderly patients with CAP in Minhang Hospital, Fudan University from 1 January 2018 to 1 January 2020. We recorded information of the patients including age, gender, underlying disease, consciousness state, vital signs, physiological and laboratory variables and further calculated the qSOFA, CURB-65, MEWS, and NEWS scores. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to predict the mortality risk and ICU admission. Kaplan–Meier survival curves were used in survival rate. Results: In total, 1044 patients were selected for analysis and divided into two groups, namely survivor groups (902 cases) and non-survivor groups (142 cases). Depending on ICU admission enrolled patients were classified into ICU admission (n = 102) and non-ICU admission (n = 942) groups. Mortality expressed as AUC values were 0.844 (p < 0.001), 0.868 (p < 0.001), 0.927 (p < 0.001) and 0.892 (p < 0.001) for qSOFA, CURB 65, MEWS and NEWS, respectively. There were clear differences in MEWS vs CURB-65 (p < 0.0001), MEWS vs NEWS (p < 0.001), MEWS vs qSOFA (p < 0.0001). For ICU-admission, the AUC values of qSOFA, CURB-65, MEWS and NEWS scores were 0.866 (p < 0.001), 0.854 (p < 0.001), 0.922 (p < 0.001), 0.976 (p < 0.001), respectively. There were significant differences in NEWS vs CURB-65 (p < 0.0001), NEWS vs MEWS (p < 0.001), NEWS vs qSOFA (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: We explored the outcome prediction values of CURB65, qSOFA, MEWS and NEWS for patients aged 65-years and older with community-acquired pneumonia. We found that MEWS showed superiority over the other severity scores in predicting hospital mortality, and NEWS showed superiority over the other scores in predicting ICU admission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The aerosol box (AB), an improvised device used during the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic, has attracted both interest and controversy. Several simulated studies have examined its protective efficacy as well as intubation efficiency. The aim of this study was to evaluate the practical conduct of intubation using the AB in patients undergoing elective, oncological surgery during the pandemic. Methods: This prospective, observational study included adult patients undergoing oncological surgery. Thirteen anaesthesiologists performed 132 intubations using one of three ABs designated as AB 1, AB 2 and AB 3. The primary outcome was the difference in the time to intubation (TTI) between patients with Mallampati score MP I-II (Group 1) and MP III-IV (Group 2). Secondary outcomes included first-pass success rate, fall in peripheral oxygen saturation to < 95%, total number of attempts and failure to intubate using the AB. Results: The mean TTI was not significantly different in Group 1 and Group 2 (71.02 (61.66) s vs. 101.35 (121.94) s respectively, P = 0.119). Desaturation during intubation was seen in 20 patients (15.1%). First pass success rate was achieved in 109 patients (82.6%). Twenty-one patients (15.9%) needed more than one attempt to intubate and the box had to be removed in 8 patients (6.1%) for facilitating intubation. The Mallampati score did not significantly influence either desaturation or first pass success rate. Conclusion: There was a non-significant increasing TTI trend in patients with a higher MP score with the use of an aerosol box. However, this did not translate to a clinically significant difference in the overall intubation outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]