Society of Critical Care Medicine and the Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines for Evaluating New Fever in Adult Patients in the ICU.

RATIONALE: Fever is frequently an early indicator of infection and often requires rigorous diagnostic evaluation. OBJECTIVES: This is an update of the 2008 Infectious Diseases Society of America and Society (IDSA) and Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) guideline for the evaluation of new-onset fever in adult ICU patients without severe immunocompromise, now using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. PANEL DESIGN: The SCCM and IDSA convened a taskforce to update the 2008 version of the guideline for the evaluation of new fever in critically ill adult patients, which included expert clinicians as well as methodologists from the Guidelines in Intensive Care, Development and Evaluation Group. The guidelines committee consisted of 12 experts in critical care, infectious diseases, clinical microbiology, organ transplantation, public health, clinical research, and health policy and administration. All task force members followed all conflict-of-interest procedures as documented in the American College of Critical Care Medicine/SCCM Standard Operating Procedures Manual and the IDSA. There was no industry input or funding to produce this guideline. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review for each population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak or as best-practice statements. RESULTS: The panel issued 12 recommendations and 9 best practice statements. The panel recommended using central temperature monitoring methods, including thermistors for pulmonary artery catheters, bladder catheters, or esophageal balloon thermistors when these devices are in place or accurate temperature measurements are critical for diagnosis and management. For patients without these devices in place, oral or rectal temperatures over other temperature measurement methods that are less reliable such as axillary or tympanic membrane temperatures, noninvasive temporal artery thermometers, or chemical dot thermometers were recommended. Imaging studies including ultrasonography were recommended in addition to microbiological evaluation using rapid diagnostic testing strategies. Biomarkers were recommended to assist in guiding the discontinuation of antimicrobial therapy. All recommendations issued were weak based on the quality of data. CONCLUSIONS: The guidelines panel was able to formulate several recommendations for the evaluation of new fever in a critically ill adult patient, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on weak evidence. This highlights the need for the rapid advancement of research in all aspects of this issue-including better noninvasive methods to measure core body temperature, the use of diagnostic imaging, advances in microbiology including molecular testing, and the use of biomarkers.

In adults receiving mechanical ventilation, selective decontamination of the digestive tract reduces hospital mortality.

SOURCE CITATION: Hammond NE, Myburgh J, Seppelt I, et al. Association between selective decontamination of the digestive tract and in-hospital mortality in intensive care unit patients receiving mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2022;328:1922-34. 36286098.

Cytokine Release Syndrome and Sepsis: Analogous Clinical Syndromes with Distinct Causes and Challenges in Management.

Both cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and sepsis are clinical syndromes rather than distinct diseases and share considerable overlap. It can often be challenging to distinguish between the two, but it is important given the availability of targeted treatment options. In addition, several other clinical syndromes overlap with CRS and sepsis, further making it difficult to differentiate them. This has particularly been highlighted in the recent coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic. As we start to understand the differences in the inflammatory markers and presentations in these syndromes, hopefully we will be able to enhance treatment and improve outcomes.

Controversies in Perioperative Antimicrobial Prophylaxis.

Although clinical guidelines for antibiotic prophylaxis across a wide array of surgical procedures have been proposed by multidisciplinary groups of physicians and pharmacists, clinicians often deviate from recommendations. This is particularly true when recommendations are based on weak data or expert opinion. The goal of this review is to highlight certain common but controversial topics in perioperative prophylaxis and to focus on the data that does exist for the recommendations being made.

Dwindling Utilization of Central Venous Catheter Tip Cultures: An Analysis of Sampling Trends and Clinical Utility at 128 US Hospitals, 2009-2014.

At 128 US hospitals, from 2009-2014, a 17% decline occurred annually in central venous catheter tips sent for culture: a 6-fold decrease from blood culture sampling trends. The positive predictive value was low (23%). Tip culture use often does not conform to recommendations and offers limited independent treatment opportunities.

Prevention of Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections.

Central venous catheters (CVCs) are commonly used in critically ill patients and offer several advantages to peripheral intravenous access. However, indwelling CVCs have the potential to lead to bloodstream infections, with the risk increasing with an array of characteristics, such as catheter choice, catheter location, insertion technique, and catheter maintenance. Evidence-based guidelines have led to a significant reduction in the incidence of bloodstream infections associated with CVCs. The combination of guideline implementation and newer technologies has the potential to further reduce morbidity and mortality from infections related to CVCs.

Executive Summary: Management of Adults With Hospital-acquired and Ventilator-associated Pneumonia: 2016 Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Thoracic Society.

It is important to realize that guidelines cannot always account for individual variation among patients. They are not intended to supplant physician judgment with respect to particular patients or special clinical situations. IDSA considers adherence to these guidelines to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the physician in the light of each patient's individual circumstances.These guidelines are intended for use by healthcare professionals who care for patients at risk for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), including specialists in infectious diseases, pulmonary diseases, critical care, and surgeons, anesthesiologists, hospitalists, and any clinicians and healthcare providers caring for hospitalized patients with nosocomial pneumonia. The panel's recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of HAP and VAP are based upon evidence derived from topic-specific systematic literature reviews.

Management of Adults With Hospital-acquired and Ventilator-associated Pneumonia: 2016 Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Thoracic Society.

It is important to realize that guidelines cannot always account for individual variation among patients. They are not intended to supplant physician judgment with respect to particular patients or special clinical situations. IDSA considers adherence to these guidelines to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the physician in the light of each patient's individual circumstances.These guidelines are intended for use by healthcare professionals who care for patients at risk for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), including specialists in infectious diseases, pulmonary diseases, critical care, and surgeons, anesthesiologists, hospitalists, and any clinicians and healthcare providers caring for hospitalized patients with nosocomial pneumonia. The panel's recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of HAP and VAP are based upon evidence derived from topic-specific systematic literature reviews.

Synergy, Salary, and Satisfaction: Benefits of Training in Critical Care Medicine and Infectious Diseases Gleaned From a National Pilot Survey of Dually Trained Physicians.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of physicians are seeking dual training in critical care medicine (CCM) and infectious diseases (ID). Understanding experiences and perceptions of CCM-ID physicians could inform career choices and programmatic innovation. METHODS: All physicians trained and/or certified in both CCM and ID to date in the United States were sent a Web-based questionnaire in 2015. Responses enabled a cross-sectional analysis of physician demographics and training and practice characteristics and satisfaction. RESULTS: Of 202 CCM-ID physicians, 196 were alive and reachable. The response rate was 79%. Forty-six percent trained and 34% practice in the northeastern United States. Only 40% received dual training at the same institution. Eighty-three percent identified as either an intensivist with ID expertise (44%) or as equally an intensivist and ID physician (38%). Median salary was $265 000 (interquartile range [IQR], $215 000-$350 000). Practice settings were split between academic (45%) and community settings (42%). Two-thirds are clinicians but 62% conduct some research and 26% practice outpatient ID. Top reasons to dually specialize included clinical synergy (70%), procedural activity (50%), and less interest in pulmonology (49%). Although 38% cited less proficiency with bronchoscopy as a disadvantage, 87% seldom need pulmonary consultation in the intensive care unit. Median career satisfaction was 4 (IQR, 4-5) out of 5, and 76% would dually train again. CONCLUSIONS: CCM-ID graduates prefer the acute care setting, predominantly CCM or a combination of CCM and ID. They find combination training and practice to be synergistic and satisfying, but most have had to seek CCM and ID training independently at separate institutions. Given these findings, avenues for combined training in CCM-ID should be considered.