Comparison of complication types in patients receiving vesicant intravenous antimicrobials or vasopressors via midlines and peripherally inserted central catheters.

We assessed adverse events in hospitalized patients receiving selected vesicant antibiotics or vasopressors administered through midline catheters or peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC). The rates of catheter-related bloodstream infections, thrombosis, and overall events were similar across the two groups, while occlusion was higher in the PICC group.

The impact of a blood-culture diagnostic stewardship intervention on utilization rates and antimicrobial stewardship.

Blood-culture overutilization is associated with increased cost and excessive antimicrobial use. We implemented an intervention in the adult intensive care unit (ICU), combining education based on the DISTRIBUTE algorithm and restriction to infectious diseases and ICU providers. Our intervention led to reduced blood-culture utilization without affecting safety metrics.

Safety and efficacy of electrical stimulation for lower-extremity muscle weakness in intensive care unit 2019 Novel Coronavirus patients: A phase I double-blinded randomized controlled trial.

Background: Intensive care unit (ICU) prolonged immobilization may lead to lower-extremity muscle deconditioning among critically ill patients, particularly more accentuated in those with 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) infection. Electrical stimulation (E-Stim) is known to improve musculoskeletal outcomes. This phase I double-blinded randomized controlled trial examined the safety and efficacy of lower-extremity E-Stim to prevent muscle deconditioning. Methods: Critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU were randomly assigned to control (CG) or intervention (IG) groups. Both groups received daily E-Stim (1 h) for up to 14 days on both gastrocnemius muscles (GNMs). The device was functional in the IG and non-functional in the CG. Primary outcomes included ankle strength (Ankles) measured by an ankle-dynamometer, and GNM endurance (GNMe) in response to E-Stim assessed with surface electromyography (sEMG). Outcomes were measured at baseline, 3 and 9 days. Results: Thirty-two (IG = 16, CG = 16) lower extremities in 16 patients were independently assessed. The mean time between ICU admission and E-Stim therapy delivery was 1.8 ± 1.9 days (p = 0.29). At 3 days, the IG showed an improvement compared to the CG with medium effect sizes for Ankles (p = 0.06, Cohen's d = 0.77) and GNMe (p = 0.06, d = 0.69). At 9 days, the IG GNMe was significantly higher than the CG (p = 0.04, d = 0.97) with a 6.3% improvement from baseline (p = 0.029). E-Stim did not alter vital signs (i.e., heart/respiratory rate, blood saturation of oxygen), showed no adverse events (i.e., pain, skin damage, discomfort), nor interfere with ICU standard of care procedures (i.e., mechanical ventilation, prone rotation). Conclusion: This study supports the safety and efficacy of early E-Stim therapy to potentially prevent deterioration of lower-extremity muscle conditions in critically ill COVID-19 patients recently admitted to the ICU. If confirmed in a larger sample, E-Stim may be used as a practical adjunctive therapy. Clinical trial registration: [https://clinicaltrials.gov/], identifier [NCT04685213].

Palliative Care Impact on COVID-19 Patients Requiring Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

CONTEXT: Patients with severe respiratory failure from COVID-19 refractory to conventional therapies may be treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). ECMO requirement is associated with high mortality and prolonged hospital course. ECMO is a high-resource intervention with significant burdens placed on caregivers and families with limited data on the integration of palliative care consultation (PCC). OBJECTIVES: To explore the role of standard vs. automatic PCC in the management of COVID patients on ECMO. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of all COVID patients on ECMO admitted from March 2020 to May 2021 at a large volume academic medical center with subsequent analysis. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were included in the analysis. Twenty-six (54.2%) received PCC of which 42% of consults were automatically initiated. PCC at any point in admission was associated with longer duration on ECMO (24.5 vs. 37 days; P < 0.05). Automatic PCC resulted in more family meetings than standard PCC (0 vs. 3; P < 0.05) and appears to trend with reduced time on ECMO, shorter length of stay, and higher DNAR rates at death, though results were not significant. Decedents not receiving PCC had higher rates of no de-escalation of interventions at time of death (31% vs. 11%), indicating full intensive care measures continued through death. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with COVID-19 receiving ECMO, PCC may be associated with a shift to DNAR status particularly with automatic PCC. There may be a further impact on length of stay, duration of time on ECMO and care plan at end of life.

Continuous Cloud-Based Early Warning Score Surveillance to Improve the Safety of Acutely Ill Hospitalized Patients.

INTRODUCTION: This study sought to evaluate the impact of changes made to the process of continually screening hospitalized patients for decompensation. METHODS: Patients admitted to hospital wards were screened using a cloud-based early warning score (modified National Early Warning Score [mNEWS]). Patient with mNEWS ≥7 triggered a structured response. Outcomes of this quality improvement study during the intervention period from February through August 2018 (1741 patients) were compared with a control population (1,610 patients) during the same months of 2017. RESULTS: The intervention group improved the time to the first lactate order within 24 hours of mNEWS ≥7 (p < .001), the primary outcome, compared with the control group. There was no significant improvement in time to intensive care unit (ICU) transfer, ICU length of stay (LOS), or hospital mortality. Among patients with a lactate ordered within 24 hours, there was a 47% reduction of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.3-0.89, p = .02) and a 4.7 day reduction in hospital LOS (p < .001) for intervention versus control cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Cloud-based electronic surveillance can result in earlier detection of clinical decompensation. This intervention resulted in lower hospital LOS and mortality among patients with early detection of and intervention for clinical decompensation.

Reduction of in-hospital cardiac arrest with sequential deployment of rapid response team and medical emergency team to the emergency department and acute care wards.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine if sequential deployment of a nurse-led Rapid Response Team (RRT) and an intensivist-led Medical Emergency Team (MET) for critically ill patients in the Emergency Department (ED) and acute care wards improved hospital-wide cardiac arrest rates. METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective observational cohort study, we compared the cardiac arrest rates per 1000 patient-days during two time periods. Our hospital instituted a nurse-led RRT in 2012 and added an intensivist-led MET in 2014. We compared the cardiac arrest rates during the nurse-led RRT period and the combined RRT-MET period. With the sequential approach, nurse-led RRT evaluated and managed rapid response calls in acute care wards and if required escalated care and co-managed with an intensivist-led MET. We specifically compared the rates of pulseless electrical activity (PEA) in the two periods. We also looked at the cardiac arrest rates in the ED as RRT-MET co-managed patients with the ED team. RESULTS: Hospital-wide cardiac arrests decreased from 2.2 events per 1000 patient-days in the nurse-led RRT period to 0.8 events per 1000 patient-days in the combined RRT and MET period (p-value = 0.001). Hospital-wide PEA arrests and shockable rhythms both decreased significantly. PEA rhythms significantly decreased in acute care wards and the ED. CONCLUSION: Implementing an intensivist-led MET-RRT significantly decreased the overall cardiac arrest rate relative to the rate under a nurse-led RRT model. Additional MET capabilities and early initiation of advanced, time-sensitive therapies likely had the most impact.

Helmet CPAP revisited in COVID-19 pneumonia: A case series.

INTRODUCTION: Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) plays an important role in the management of respiratory failure. However, since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, utilization of traditional face mask NIPPV has been curtailed in part due to risk of aerosolization of respiratory particles and subsequent health care worker exposure. A randomized clinical trial in 2016 reported that an alternative interface, helmet NIPPV, may be more effective than traditional NIPPV at preventing intubation and improving mortality. The helmet NIPPV interface provides positive airway pressure, while also theoretically minimizing aerosolization, making it a feasible modality in management of respiratory failure in COVID-19 patients. CASE AND OUTCOMES: This report describes a single-center experience of a series of three COVID-19 patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure managed with helmet NIPPV. One patient was able to avoid intubation while a second patient was successfully extubated to NIPPV. Ultimately, the third patient was unable to avoid intubation with helmet NIPPV, although the application of the device was late in the progression of the disease. DISCUSSION: NIPPV is an important modality in the management of respiratory failure and has been shown to reduce the need for immediate endotracheal intubation in select populations. For patients unable to tolerate facemask NIPPV, the helmet provides an alternate interface. In COVID-19 patients, the helmet interface may reduce the risk of virus exposure to health care workers from aerosolization. Based on this experience, we recommend that helmet NIPPV can be considered as a feasible option for the management of patients with COVID-19, whether the goal is to prevent immediate intubation or avoid post-extubation respiratory failure. Randomized studies are needed to definitively validate the use of helmet NIPPV in this population. CONCLUSION: Helmet NIPPV is a feasible therapy to manage COVID-19 patients.