Bronchoscopy safety precautions for diagnosing COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis-A simulation study.

OBJECTIVES: With the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), clinicians have used personal protective equipment to avoid transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. However, they still face occupational risk of infection, when treating COVID-19 patients. This may be highest during invasive diagnostic procedures releasing aerosols and droplets. Thereby, the use of diagnostic procedures for Covid-19 associated aspergillosis may be delayed or impeded, as use of bronchoscopy has been discouraged. This leads to avoidance of a crucial procedure for diagnosing invasive aspergillosis. We intent to visualise aerosol and droplet spread and surface contamination during bronchoscopy and address which measures can avoid exposure of health-care workers. METHODS: We created a simulation model to visualise aerosol and droplet generation as well as surface contamination by nebulising fluorescent solution detected by using ultraviolet light- and slow-motion capture. We repurposed covers for ultrasound transducers or endoscopic cameras to prevent surface and ambient air contamination. RESULTS: In our bronchoscopy simulation model, we noticed extensive aerosol generation, droplet spread and surface contamination. Exposure of health-care workers and contamination of surfaces can be efficiently reduced by repurposing covers for ultrasound transducers or endoscopic cameras to seal the tube opening during bronchoscopy in mechanically ventilated patients. CONCLUSION: Adequate personal protective equipment and safety strategies allow to minimise contamination during bronchoscopy in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients.

[Handoffs in the intensive care unit]. / Übergaben auf der Intensivstation.

BACKGROUND: Effective handoffs in the intensive care unit (ICU) are key to patient safety. PURPOSE: This article aims to raise awareness of the significance of structured and thorough handoffs and highlights possible challenges as well as means for improvement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the available literature, the evidence regarding handoffs in ICUs is summarized and suggestions for practical implementation are derived. RESULTS: The quality of handoffs has an impact on patient safety. At the same time, communication in the intensive care setting is particularly challenging due to the complexity of cases, a disruptive work environment, and a multitude of inter- and intraprofessional interactions. Hierarchical team structures, deficiencies in feedback and error-management culture, (technical) language barriers in communication, as well as substantial physical and psychological stress may negatively influence the effectiveness of handoffs. Sets of interventions such as the implementation of checklists, mnemonics, and communication workshops contribute to a more structured and thorough handoff process and have the potential to significantly improve patient safety. CONCLUSION: Effective handoffs are the cornerstone of high-quality and safe patient care but face particular challenges in ICUs. Interventional measures such as structuring handoff concepts and periodic communication trainings can help to improve handoffs and thus increase patient safety.

CCC meets ICU: redefining the role of critical care of cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Currently the majority of cancer patients are considered ineligible for intensive care treatment and oncologists are struggling to get their patients admitted to intensive care units. Critical care and oncology are frequently two separate worlds that communicate rarely and thus do not share novel developments in their fields. However, cancer medicine is rapidly improving and cancer is eventually becoming a chronic disease. Oncology is therefore characterized by a growing number of older and medically unfit patients that receive numerous novel drug classes with unexpected side effects. DISCUSSION: All of these changes will generate more medically challenging patients in acute distress that need to be considered for intensive care. An intense exchange between intensivists, oncologists, psychologists and palliative care specialists is warranted to communicate the developments in each field in order to improve triage and patient treatment. Here, we argue that "critical care of cancer patients" needs to be recognized as a medical subspecialty and that there is an urgent need to develop it systematically. CONCLUSION: As prognosis of cancer improves, novel therapeutic concepts are being introduced and more and more older cancer patients receive full treatment the number of acutely ill patients is growing significantly. This development a major challenge to current concepts of intensive care and it needs to be redefined who of these patients should be treated, for how long and how intensively.

[COVID-19: The Intensive Care Point-of-View]. / COVID-19 aus Sicht der Intensivmedizin.

Approx. 93 % of COVID-19 infections are mild, and not all severely ill patients are transferred to the intensive care unit. But the Corona crisis implies high demands on intensive care medicine. Many treatment modalities of COVID patients are "best practice", but some aspects remain unclear at present. This article deals with diagnostics, monitoring and therapy with COVID-19 patients in intensive care units and with a suitable hygiene concepts.A hygiene concept is obligatory and must ensure - in addition to general measures - the training of employees and the hygienic discharge of material. Ideally, a cohort isolation is implemented.Monitoring of patients with COVID-19 is not different from other intensive care patients and should be adapted to the clinical situation of the individual patient. In laboratory analysis the typical abnormality of COVID-19 patients should be taken into account. In case of increasing inflammatory parameters, fungal infections should be tested.Due to the formation of aerosols, disconnection of the respiratory system must be avoided in invasive ventilation. If a disconnection from the respirator is necessary, the tube should be disconnected. After extubation, an intermittent NIV treatment for atelectase prophylaxis can be performed.

Treatment of invasive fungal infections in clinical practice: a multi-centre survey on customary dosing, treatment indications, efficacy and safety of voriconazole.

Invasive fungal infections are frequent and often deadly complications in patients with malignant hematological diseases. Voriconazole is a third generation triazole antifungal with broad activity against most clinically relevant fungal pathogens. Clinical practice often deviates from insights gained from controlled randomized trials. We conducted a multi-centre survey to evaluate efficacy, safety, treatment indications and dosing of voriconazole outside clinical trials. Patients receiving voriconazole were documented via electronic data capturing. An analysis was conducted after submission of 100 episodes from September 2004 to November 2005. Voriconazole was administered for suspected or proven invasive fungal infection (IFI) (57%), as empirical treatment in patients with fever of unknown origin (21%) and secondary (19%) as well as primary (3%) prophylaxis of IFI. Investigators' assessment of fungal infection often diverted from EORTC/MSG 2002 criteria. A favorable response was reported in 61.4% for suspected or proven IFI and 52.4% for empirical treatment. Mortality was 15%, 26.7% of which was attributable to IFI. Breakthrough fungal infections occurred in four (21.1%) patients with voriconazole as secondary prophylaxis. Toxicity and adverse events comprised elevated liver enzymes and visual disturbances. Although indications frequently deviated from clinical evidence and legal approval, voriconazole showed efficacy and safety, comparable to major controlled clinical trials. Data from this survey demonstrate the difficulty of putting drugs to their approved use in IFI.