Predictors and outcomes of withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments in intensive care units in Singapore: a multicentre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines on limitation of life-sustaining treatments (LST) in the intensive care unit (ICU), in the form of withholding or withdrawal of LST, state that there is no ethical difference between the two. Such statements are not uniformly accepted worldwide, and there are few studies on LST limitation in Asia. This study aimed to evaluate the predictors and outcomes of withholding and withdrawal of LST in Singapore, focusing on the similarities and differences between the two approaches. METHODS: This was a multicentre observational study of patients admitted to 21 adult ICUs across 9 public hospitals in Singapore over an average of three months per year from 2014 to 2019. The primary outcome measures were withholding and withdrawal of LST (cardiopulmonary resuscitation, invasive mechanical ventilation, and vasopressors/inotropes). The secondary outcome measure was hospital mortality. Multivariable generalised mixed model analysis was used to identify independent predictors for withdrawal and withholding of LST and if LST limitation predicts hospital mortality. RESULTS: There were 8907 patients and 9723 admissions. Of the former, 80.8% had no limitation of LST, 13.0% had LST withheld, and 6.2% had LST withdrawn. Common independent predictors for withholding and withdrawal were increasing age, absence of chronic kidney dialysis, greater dependence in activities of daily living, cardiopulmonary resuscitation before ICU admission, higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, and higher level of care in the first 24 h of ICU admission. Additional predictors for withholding included being of Chinese race, the religions of Hinduism and Islam, malignancy, and chronic liver failure. The additional predictor for withdrawal was lower hospital paying class (with greater government subsidy for hospital bills). Hospital mortality in patients without LST limitation, with LST withholding, and with LST withdrawal was 10.6%, 82.1%, and 91.8%, respectively (p < 0.001). Withholding (odds ratio 13.822, 95% confidence interval 9.987-19.132) and withdrawal (odds ratio 38.319, 95% confidence interval 24.351-60.298) were both found to be independent predictors of hospital mortality on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the independent predictors of withholding and withdrawal of LST exist. Even after accounting for baseline characteristics, both withholding and withdrawal of LST independently predict hospital mortality. Later mortality in patients who had LST withdrawn compared to withholding suggests that the decision to withdraw may be at the point when medical futility is recognised.

Assessing caregiver burden in advanced kidney disease: protocol for a systematic review of the measurement properties of instruments and tools.

INTRODUCTION: Caregiver burden is a significant issue in the care of patients with advanced kidney disease. Its assessment is crucial for evaluating the needs of caregivers and for the development of interventions to support them. Several instruments have been developed to measure caregiver burden in these patients. However, the measurement properties of these instruments have not been systematically reviewed. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will include a comprehensive search of databases including PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, SCOPUS and Web of Science by using keywords and MeSH terms to identify relevant studies starting from each database inception to 1 January 2024 and covering papers in English. The search strategy will combine relevant keywords and database-specific subject headings related to the following concepts: (1) caregivers, (2) burden, stress, distress, (3) chronic kidney disease, end-stage kidney disease, dialysis. Reference lists of eligible articles will also be hand searched. We will include quantitative and qualitative studies evaluating measurement properties of instruments assessing caregiver burden in caregivers of adult patients (aged ≥18 years). Data will be extracted from the selected studies and analysed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist as the study quality assessment tool. Subsequently, the van der Vleuten utility index will be used to critique and categorise the instruments. A narrative that synthesises the utility of all instruments will be presented along with recommendations for the selection of instruments depending on specific clinical contexts. This systematic review will provide an overview of the measurement properties of available instruments, including discussion on reliability, validity and responsiveness. Results from the review may give rise to the subsequent development of most appropriate instrument that could be applied to the assessment of caregiver burden in advanced kidney disease. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as this study will merely synthesise data from published studies. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications as well as conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023433906.

Prognostic evaluation of quick sequential organ failure assessment score in ICU patients with sepsis across different income settings.

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence on association between quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and sepsis mortality in ICU patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the association between qSOFA and 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. Association of qSOFA with early (3-day), medium (28-day), late (90-day) mortality was assessed in low and lower middle income (LLMIC), upper middle income (UMIC) and high income (HIC) countries/regions. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the MOSAICS II study, an international prospective observational study on sepsis epidemiology in Asian ICUs. Associations between qSOFA at ICU admission and mortality were separately assessed in LLMIC, UMIC and HIC countries/regions. Modified Poisson regression was used to determine the adjusted relative risk (RR) of qSOFA score on mortality at 28 days with adjustments for confounders identified in the MOSAICS II study. RESULTS: Among the MOSAICS II study cohort of 4980 patients, 4826 patients from 343 ICUs and 22 countries were included in this secondary analysis. Higher qSOFA was associated with increasing 28-day mortality, but this was only observed in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) and not HIC (p = 0.220) countries/regions. Similarly, higher 90-day mortality was associated with increased qSOFA in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) only. In contrast, higher 3-day mortality with increasing qSOFA score was observed across all income countries/regions (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that qSOFA remained associated with 28-day mortality (adjusted RR 1.09 (1.00-1.18), p = 0.038) even after adjustments for covariates including APACHE II, SOFA, income country/region and administration of antibiotics within 3 h. CONCLUSIONS: qSOFA was independently associated with 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. In LLMIC and UMIC countries/regions, qSOFA was associated with early to late mortality but only early mortality in HIC countries/regions.

Mechanical ventilation practices in Asian intensive care units: A multicenter cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: This study investigated current practices of mechanical ventilation in Asian intensive care units, focusing on tidal volume, plateau pressure, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multicenter cross-sectional study, data on mechanical ventilation and clinical outcomes were collected. Predictors of mortality were analyzed by univariate and multivariable logistic regression. A scoring system was generated to predict 28-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1408 patients were enrolled. In 138 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), 65.9% were on a tidal volume ≤ 8 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW), and 71.3% were on sufficient PEEP. In 1270 patients without ARDS, 88.8% were on a tidal volume ≤ 10 ml/kg PBW. A plateau pressure < 30 cmH2O was measured in 92.2% of patients. Mortality rates increased from 13% to 74% as the generated predictive score increased from 5 to ≥8.5. Income classification, age, SOFA score, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, plateau pressure, number of vasopressors, and steroid use were associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In Asia, low tidal volume ventilation and sufficient PEEP were underused in patients with ARDS. The majority of patients without ARDS were on intermediate tidal volumes. Country income, age, and severity of illness were associated with mortality.

Critical care bed capacity in Asian countries and regions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the importance of critical care. The aim of the current study was to compare the number of adult critical care beds in relation to population size in Asian countries and regions before (2017) and during (2022) the pandemic. Methods: This observational study collected data closest to 2022 on critical care beds (intensive care units and intermediate care units) in 12 middle-income and 7 high-income economies (using the 2022-2023 World Bank classification), through a mix of methods including government sources, national critical care societies, personal contacts, and data extrapolation. Data were compared with a prior study from 2017 of the same countries and regions. Findings: The cumulative number of critical care beds per 100,000 population increased from 3.0 in 2017 to 9.4 in 2022 (p = 0.003). The median figure for middle-income economies increased from 2.6 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.7-7.8) to 6.6 (IQR 2.2-13.3), and that for high-income economies increased from 11.4 (IQR 7.3-22.8) to 13.9 (IQR 10.7-21.7). Only 3 countries did not see a rise in bed capacity. Where data were available in 2022, 10.9% of critical care beds were in single rooms (median 5.0% in middle-income and 20.3% in high-income economies), and 5.3% had negative pressure (median 0.7% in middle-income and 18.5% in high-income economies). Interpretation: Critical care bed capacity in the studied Asian countries and regions increased close to three-fold from 2017 to 2022. Much of this increase was attributed to middle-income economies, but substantial heterogeneity exists. Funding: None.

Feasibility analysis of a novel non-invasive ultrasonographic method for the measurement of intra-abdominal pressure in the intensive care unit.

Increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is an important vital sign in critically ill patients and has a negative impact on morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to validate a novel non-invasive ultrasonographic approach to IAP measurement against the gold standard intra-bladder pressure (IBP) method. We conducted a prospective observational study in an adult medical ICU of a university hospital. IAP measurements using ultrasonography by two independent operators, with different experience levels (experienced, IAPUS1; inexperienced, IAPUS2), were compared with the gold standard IBP method performed by a third blinded operator. For the ultrasonographic method, decremental external pressure was applied on the anterior abdominal wall using a bottle filled with decreasing volumes of water. Ultrasonography looked at peritoneal rebound upon brisk withdrawal of the external pressure. The loss of peritoneal rebound was identified as the point where IAP was equal to or above the applied external pressure. Twenty-one patients underwent 74 IAP readings (range 2-15 mmHg). The number of readings per patient was 3.5 ± 2.5, and the abdominal wall thickness was 24.6 ± 13.1 mm. Bland and Altman's analysis showed a bias (0.39 and 0.61 mmHg) and precision (1.38 and 1.51 mmHg) for the comparison of IAPUS1 and IAPUS2 and vs. IBP, respectively with small limits of agreement that were in line with the research guidelines of the Abdominal Compartment Society (WSACS). Our novel ultrasound-based IAP method displayed good correlation and agreement between IAP and IBP at levels up to 15 mmHg and is an excellent solution for quick decision-making in critically ill patients.

Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) Score for predicting mortality in patients with sepsis in Vietnamese intensive care units: a multicentre, cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) Scores in predicting mortality among intensive care unit (ICU) patients with sepsis in a low-income and middle-income country. DESIGN: A multicentre, cross-sectional study. SETTING: A total of 15 adult ICUs throughout Vietnam. PARTICIPANTS: We included all patients aged ≥18 years who were admitted to ICUs for sepsis and who were still in ICUs from 00:00 to 23:59 of the specified study days (ie, 9 January, 3 April, 3 July and 9 October of the year 2019). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was hospital all-cause mortality (hospital mortality). We also defined the secondary outcome as all-cause deaths in the ICU (ICU mortality). RESULTS: Of 252 patients, 40.1% died in hospitals, and 33.3% died in ICUs. SOFA Score (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC): 0.688 (95% CI 0.618 to 0.758); cut-off value≥7.5; PAUROC<0.001) and APACHE II Score (AUROC: 0.689 (95% CI 0.622 to 0.756); cut-off value ≥20.5; PAUROC<0.001) both had a poor discriminatory ability for predicting hospital mortality. However, the discriminatory ability for predicting ICU mortality of SOFA (AUROC: 0.713 (95% CI 0.643 to 0.783); cut-off value≥9.5; PAUROC<0.001) was fair and was better than that of APACHE II Score (AUROC: 0.672 (95% CI 0.603 to 0.742); cut-off value≥18.5; PAUROC<0.001). A SOFA Score≥8 (adjusted OR (AOR): 2.717; 95% CI 1.371 to 5.382) and an APACHE II Score≥21 (AOR: 2.668; 95% CI 1.338 to 5.321) were independently associated with an increased risk of hospital mortality. Additionally, a SOFA Score≥10 (AOR: 2.194; 95% CI 1.017 to 4.735) was an independent predictor of ICU mortality, in contrast to an APACHE II Score≥19, for which this role did not. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, SOFA and APACHE II Scores were worthwhile in predicting mortality among ICU patients with sepsis. However, due to better discrimination for predicting ICU mortality, the SOFA Score was preferable to the APACHE II Score in predicting mortality.Clinical trials registry - India: CTRI/2019/01/016898.

Correction: Expanding the utility of the ROX index among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261234.].

Systematized and efficient: organization of critical care in the future.

Since the advent of critical care in the twentieth century, the core elements that are the foundation for critical care systems, namely to care for critically ill and injured patients and to save lives, have evolved enormously. The past half-century has seen dramatic advancements in diagnostic, organ support, and treatment modalities in critical care, with further improvements now needed to achieve personalized critical care of the highest quality. For critical care to be even higher quality in the future, advancements in the following areas are key: the physical ICU space; the people that care for critically ill patients; the equipment and technologies; the information systems and data; and the research systems that impact critically ill patients and families. With acutely and critically ill patients and their families as the absolute focal point, advancements across these areas will hopefully transform care and outcomes over the coming years.

The research environment of critical care in three Asian countries: A cross-sectional questionnaire survey.

Although inadequate research support for intensivists can be one major reason of the poor research productivity, no study has investigated the current research environment in critical care medicine in Asia. The objective of this study was to describe Asian academia in critical care from the research environment perspective. We conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey targeting all physician members of the Societies of Intensive/Critical Care Medicine in Japan, South Korea, and Singapore. We collected the characteristics of the participants and their affiliated institutions and the research environment. The outcome was the number of peer-reviewed publications. Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined the association between the outcome and the following five research environmental factors (i.e., country of the respondents, availability of secured time for research activities or research supporting staff for the hospital, practice at a university-affiliated hospital, and years of clinical practice of 10 years or longer). Four hundred ninety responded (overall response rate: 5.6%) to the survey between June 2019 and January 2020. Fifty-five percent worked for a university-affiliated hospital, while 35% worked for a community hospital. Twenty-four percent had secured time for research within their full-time work hours. The multivariable logistic model found that a secured time for the research activities [odds ratio (OR): 2.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46-5.24], practicing at a university-affiliated hospital (OR: 2.61; 95% CI, 1.19-5.74), having clinical experience of 10 years or longer (OR:11.2; 95%CI, 1.41-88.5), and working in South Korea (OR: 2.18; 95% CI, 1.09-4.34, Reference: Japan) were significantly associated with higher research productivity. Intensivists in the three countries had limited support for their research work. Dedicated time for research was positively associated with the number of research publications.

Predictive validity of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score for the mortality in patients with sepsis in Vietnamese intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: The simple scoring systems for predicting the outcome of sepsis in intensive care units (ICUs) are few, especially for limited-resource settings. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the quick Sequential (Sepsis-Related) Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score in predicting the mortality of ICU patients with sepsis in Vietnam. METHODS: We did a multicenter cross-sectional study of patients with sepsis (≥18 years old) presenting to 15 adult ICUs throughout Vietnam on the specified days (i.e., 9th January, 3rd April, 3rd July, and 9th October) representing the different seasons of 2019. The primary and secondary outcomes were the hospital and ICU all-cause mortalities, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated to determine the discriminatory ability of the qSOFA score for deaths in the hospital and ICU. The cut-off value of the qSOFA scores was determined by the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Upon ICU admission, factors associated with the hospital and ICU mortalities were assessed in univariable and multivariable logistic models. RESULTS: Of 252 patients, 40.1% died in the hospital, and 33.3% died in the ICU. The qSOFA score had a poor discriminatory ability for both the hospital (AUROC: 0.610 [95% CI: 0.538 to 0.681]; cut-off value: ≥2.5; sensitivity: 34.7%; specificity: 84.1%; PAUROC = 0.003) and ICU (AUROC: 0.619 [95% CI: 0.544 to 0.694]; cutoff value: ≥2.5; sensitivity: 36.9%; specificity: 83.3%; PAUROC = 0.002) mortalities. However, multivariable logistic regression analyses show that the qSOFA score of 3 was independently associated with the increased risk of deaths in both the hospital (adjusted odds ratio, AOR: 3.358; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.756 to 6.422) and the ICU (AOR: 3.060; 95% CI: 1.651 to 5.671). CONCLUSION: In our study, despite having a poor discriminatory value, the qSOFA score seems worthwhile in predicting mortality in ICU patients with sepsis in limited-resource settings. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registry-India: CTRI/2019/01/016898.

Epidemiology, Management, and Outcomes of Sepsis in ICUs among Countries of Differing National Wealth across Asia.

Rationale: Directly comparative data on sepsis epidemiology and sepsis bundle implementation in countries of differing national wealth remain sparse. Objectives: To evaluate across countries/regions of differing income status in Asia 1) the prevalence, causes, and outcomes of sepsis as a reason for ICU admission and 2) sepsis bundle (antibiotic administration, blood culture, and lactate measurement) compliance and its association with hospital mortality. Methods: A prospective point prevalence study was conducted among 386 adult ICUs from 22 Asian countries/regions. Adult ICU participants admitted for sepsis on four separate days (representing the seasons of 2019) were recruited. Measurements and Main Results: The overall prevalence of sepsis in ICUs was 22.4% (20.9%, 24.5%, and 21.3% in low-income countries/regions [LICs]/lower middle-income countries/regions [LMICs], upper middle-income countries/regions, and high-income countries/regions [HICs], respectively; P < 0.001). Patients were younger and had lower severity of illness in LICs/LMICs. Hospital mortality was 32.6% and marginally significantly higher in LICs/LMICs than HICs on multivariable generalized mixed model analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-3.37; P = 0.049). Sepsis bundle compliance was 21.5% at 1 hour (26.0%, 22.1%, and 16.2% in LICs/LMICs, upper middle-income countries/regions, and HICs, respectively; P < 0.001) and 36.6% at 3 hours (39.3%, 32.8%, and 38.5%, respectively; P = 0.001). Delaying antibiotic administration beyond 3 hours was the only element independently associated with increased mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 2.53; 95% confidence interval, 2.07-3.08; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Sepsis is a common cause of admission to Asian ICUs. Mortality remains high and is higher in LICs/LMICs after controlling for confounders. Sepsis bundle compliance remains low. Delaying antibiotic administration beyond 3 hours from diagnosis is associated with increased mortality. Clinical trial registered with www.ctri.nic.in (CTRI/2019/01/016898).

Expanding the utility of the ROX index among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: Delaying intubation in patients who fail high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) may result in increased mortality. The ROX index has been validated to predict HFNC failure among pneumonia patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF), but little information is available for non-pneumonia causes. In this study, we validate the ROX index among AHRF patients due to both pneumonia or non-pneumonia causes, focusing on early prediction. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study in eight Singapore intensive care units from 1 January 2015 to 30 September 2017. All patients >18 years who were treated with HFNC for AHRF were eligible and recruited. Clinical parameters and arterial blood gas values at HFNC initiation and one hour were recorded. HFNC failure was defined as requiring intubation post-HFNC initiation. RESULTS: HFNC was used in 483 patients with 185 (38.3%) failing HFNC. Among pneumonia patients, the ROX index was most discriminatory in pneumonia patients one hour after HFNC initiation [AUC 0.71 (95% CI 0.64-0.79)], with a threshold value of <6.06 at one hour predicting HFNC failure (sensitivity 51%, specificity 80%, positive predictive value 61%, negative predictive value 73%). The discriminatory power remained moderate among pneumonia patients upon HFNC initiation [AUC 0.65 (95% CI 0.57-0.72)], non-pneumonia patients at HFNC initiation [AUC 0.62 (95% CI 0.55-0.69)] and one hour later [AUC 0.63 (95% CI 0.56-0.70)]. CONCLUSION: The ROX index demonstrated moderate discriminatory power among patients with either pneumonia or non-pneumonia-related AHRF at HFNC initiation and one hour later.

One-Bed-One-Team-Does an Integrated General Hospital Inpatient Model Improve Care Outcomes and Productivity: An Observational Study.

Introduction: With the increasing complexity of healthcare problems worldwide, the demand for better-coordinated care delivery is on the rise. However, current hospital-based practices remain largely disease-centric and specialist-driven, resulting in fragmented care. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of an integrated general hospital (IGH) inpatient care model. Methods: Retrospective analysis of medical records between June 2018 and August 2019 compared patients admitted under the IGH model and patients receiving usual care in public hospitals. The IGH model managed patients from one location with a multidisciplinary team, performing needs-based care transition utilizing acuity tagging to match the intensity of care to illness acuity. Results: 5,000 episodes of IGH care entered analysis. In the absence of care transition in intervention and control, IGH average length of stay (ALOS) was 0.7 days shorter than control. In the group with care transition in intervention but not in control, IGH acute ALOS was 2 days shorter, whereas subacute ALOS was 4.8 days longer. In the presence of care transition in intervention and control, IGH acute ALOS was 6.4 and 10.2 days shorter and subacute ALOS was 15.8 and 26.9 days shorter compared with patients under usual care at acute hospitals with and without co-located community hospitals, respectively. The 30- and 60-days readmission rates of IGH patients were marginally higher than usual care, though not clinically significant. Discussions: The IGH care model maybe associated with shorter ALOS of inpatients and optimize resource allocation and service utilization. Patients with dynamic acuity transition benefited from a seamless care transition process.

Infection control in the intensive care unit: expert consensus statements for SARS-CoV-2 using a Delphi method.

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers and uninfected patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 as a result of transmission from infected patients and health-care workers. In the absence of high-quality evidence on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, clinical practice of infection control and prevention in ICUs varies widely. Using a Delphi process, international experts in intensive care, infectious diseases, and infection control developed consensus statements on infection control for SARS-CoV-2 in an ICU. Consensus was achieved for 31 (94%) of 33 statements, from which 25 clinical practice statements were issued. These statements include guidance on ICU design and engineering, health-care worker safety, visiting policy, personal protective equipment, patients and procedures, disinfection, and sterilisation. Consensus was not reached on optimal return to work criteria for health-care workers who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or the acceptable disinfection strategy for heat-sensitive instruments used for airway management of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Well designed studies are needed to assess the effects of these practice statements and address the remaining uncertainties.

High-flow nasal cannula therapy: A multicentred survey of the practices among physicians and respiratory therapists in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has become a regular intervention in the intensive care units especially in patients coming in with hypoxaemic respiratory failure. Clinical practices may differ from published literature. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the clinical practices of physicians and respiratory therapists (RTs) on the use of HFNC. METHODS: A retrospective observational study looking at medical records on HFNC usage from January 2015 to September 2017 was performed and was followed by a series of questions related to HFNC practices. The survey involved physicians and RTs in intensive care units from multiple centres in Singapore from January to April 2018. Indications and thresholds for HFNC usage with titration and weaning practices were compared with the retrospective observational study data. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three recipients (69.9%) responded to the survey and reported postextubation (87.8%), pneumonia in nonimmunocompromised (65.9%), and pneumonia in immunocompromised (61.8%) patients as the top three indications for HFNC. Of all, 39.8% of respondents wanted to use HFNC for palliative intent. Similar practices were observed in the retrospective study with the large cohort of 63% patients (483 of the total 768 patients) where HFNC was used for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure and 274 (35.7%) patients to facilitate extubation. The survey suggested that respondents would initiate HFNC at a lower fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), higher partial pressure of oxygen to FiO2 ratio, and higher oxygen saturation to FiO2 ratio for nonpneumonia patients than patients with pneumonia. RTs were less likely to start HFNC for patients suffering from pneumonia and interstitial lung disease than physicians. RTs also preferred adjustment of FiO2 to improve oxygen saturations and noninvasive ventilation for rescue. CONCLUSIONS: Among the different intensive care units surveyed, the indications and thresholds for the initiation of HFNC differed in the clinical practices of physicians and RTs.

The story of critical care in Asia: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Asia has more critically ill people than any other part of our planet. The aim of this article is to review the development of critical care as a specialty, critical care societies and education and research, the epidemiology of critical illness as well as epidemics and pandemics, accessibility and cost and quality of critical care, culture and end-of-life care, and future directions for critical care in Asia. MAIN BODY: Although the first Asian intensive care units (ICUs) surfaced in the 1960s and the 1970s and specialisation started in the 1990s, multiple challenges still exist, including the lack of intensivists, critical care nurses, and respiratory therapists in many countries. This is aggravated by the brain drain of skilled ICU staff to high-income countries. Critical care societies have been integral to the development of the discipline and have increasingly contributed to critical care education, although critical care research is only just starting to take off through collaboration across groups. Sepsis, increasingly aggravated by multidrug resistance, contributes to a significant burden of critical illness, while epidemics and pandemics continue to haunt the continent intermittently. In particular, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has highlighted the central role of critical care in pandemic response. Accessibility to critical care is affected by lack of ICU beds and high costs, and quality of critical care is affected by limited capability for investigations and treatment in low- and middle-income countries. Meanwhile, there are clear cultural differences across countries, with considerable variations in end-of-life care. Demand for critical care will rise across the continent due to ageing populations and rising comorbidity burdens. Even as countries respond by increasing critical care capacity, the critical care community must continue to focus on training for ICU healthcare workers, processes anchored on evidence-based medicine, technology guided by feasibility and impact, research applicable to Asian and local settings, and rallying of governments for support for the specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Critical care in Asia has progressed through the years, but multiple challenges remain. These challenges should be addressed through a collaborative approach across disciplines, ICUs, hospitals, societies, governments, and countries.