HELLO: a protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial to enhance interpersonal relationships and team cohesion among ICU healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Mental health symptoms among healthcare professionals (HCP) in intensive care units (ICUs) are a significant concern affecting both HCP well-being and patient care outcomes. Cross-sectional studies among members of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) report up to 50% burnout rates. Determinants of burnout include communication, team cohesion, psychological support, and well-being promotion. We designed the 'Hello Bundle' intervention to mitigate burnout among ICU-HCPs by fostering positive social interactions and a supportive work environment. This justification synthesizes evidence from social psychology, positive psychology, and healthcare communication research to support the intervention. The 'Hello Bundle' aims to enhance interpersonal relationships, improve team cohesion, and reduce burnout rates. The six components include: Hello campaign posters, email reminders, integrating greetings in morning huddles, hello jars, lead-by-example initiatives, and a daily updated hello board in each ICU. This protocol describes a cluster randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention. METHODS: This protocol describes a cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted among ESICM-affiliated ICUs, consisting of at least 73 clusters with in average of 50 respondents per cluster, totaling approximately 7300 participants. Intervention clusters will implement the 6-component Hello Bundle between October 14 and November 10, 2024, while control clusters will be wait-listed to receive the intervention in January 2025 after the RCT concludes. Clusters will be matched based on ICU size (fewer or more than 20 beds), region, and average 2023 mortality. The primary outcome is the proportion of HCPs with burnout between intervention and control clusters at the end of the intervention. Secondary outcomes include comparing the following between clusters: (1) number of HCPs with high emotional exhaustion; (2) number with high depersonalization; (3) number with loss of accomplishment; (4) perception of ethical climate (5) satisfaction at work (VAS); (6) professional conflicts; (7) intention to leave the ICU (VAS); (8) patient-centered care rating; (9) family-centered care rating. The last secondary outcome is the comparison of burnout rates before and after the intervention in the intervention cluster. Outcomes will be based on HCP reports collected within four weeks before and after the intervention. DISCUSSION: This is the first large trial of healthcare communication, social, and positive psychology intervention among ICU-HCPs. It holds the potential to provide valuable insights into effective strategies for addressing burnout in ICU settings, ultimately benefiting both HCPs and patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.Gov on June 18, 2024. REGISTRATION: NCT06453616.

Epidemiology and risk factors for mortality in critically ill patients with pancreatic infection.

Background: The AbSeS-classification defines specific phenotypes of patients with intra-abdominal infection based on the (1) setting of infection onset (community-acquired, early onset, or late-onset hospital-acquired), (2) presence or absence of either localized or diffuse peritonitis, and (3) severity of disease expression (infection, sepsis, or septic shock). This classification system demonstrated reliable risk stratification in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with intra-abdominal infection. This study aimed to describe the epidemiology of ICU patients with pancreatic infection and assess the relationship between the components of the AbSeS-classification and mortality. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of an international observational study ("AbSeS") investigating ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection. Only patients with pancreatic infection were included in this analysis (n=165). Mortality was defined as ICU mortality within 28 days of observation for patients discharged earlier from the ICU. Relationships with mortality were assessed using logistic regression analysis and reported as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The overall mortality was 35.2% (n=58). The independent risk factors for mortality included older age (OR=1.03, 95% CI: 1.0 to 1.1 P=0.023), localized peritonitis (OR=4.4, 95% CI: 1.4 to 13.9 P=0.011), and persistent signs of inflammation at day 7 (OR=9.5, 95% CI: 3.8 to 23.9, P<0.001) or after the implementation of additional source control interventions within the first week (OR=4.0, 95% CI: 1.3 to 12.2, P=0.013). Gram-negative bacteria were most frequently isolated (n=58, 49.2%) without clinically relevant differences in microbial etiology between survivors and non-survivors. Conclusions: In pancreatic infection, a challenging source/damage control and ongoing pancreatic inflammation appear to be the strongest contributors to an unfavorable short-term outcome. In this limited series, essentials of the AbSeS-classification, such as the setting of infection onset, diffuse peritonitis, and severity of disease expression, were not associated with an increased mortality risk.ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03270345.

Poor timing and failure of source control are risk factors for mortality in critically ill patients with secondary peritonitis.

PURPOSE: To describe data on epidemiology, microbiology, clinical characteristics and outcome of adult patients admitted in the intensive care unit (ICU) with secondary peritonitis, with special emphasis on antimicrobial therapy and source control. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a multicenter observational study (Abdominal Sepsis Study, AbSeS) including 2621 adult ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection in 306 ICUs from 42 countries. Time-till-source control intervention was calculated as from time of diagnosis and classified into 'emergency' (< 2 h), 'urgent' (2-6 h), and 'delayed' (> 6 h). Relationships were assessed by logistic regression analysis and reported as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The cohort included 1077 cases of microbiologically confirmed secondary peritonitis. Mortality was 29.7%. The rate of appropriate empiric therapy showed no difference between survivors and non-survivors (66.4% vs. 61.3%, p = 0.1). A stepwise increase in mortality was observed with increasing Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores (19.6% for a value ≤ 4-55.4% for a value > 12, p < 0.001). The highest odds of death were associated with septic shock (OR 3.08 [1.42-7.00]), late-onset hospital-acquired peritonitis (OR 1.71 [1.16-2.52]) and failed source control evidenced by persistent inflammation at day 7 (OR 5.71 [3.99-8.18]). Compared with 'emergency' source control intervention (< 2 h of diagnosis), 'urgent' source control was the only modifiable covariate associated with lower odds of mortality (OR 0.50 [0.34-0.73]). CONCLUSION: 'Urgent' and successful source control was associated with improved odds of survival. Appropriateness of empirical antimicrobial treatment did not significantly affect survival suggesting that source control is more determinative for outcome.

Variation in communication and family visiting policies in intensive care within and between countries during the Covid-19 pandemic: The COVISIT international survey.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, intensive care units (ICU) introduced restrictions to in-person family visiting to safeguard patients, healthcare personnel, and visitors. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey (March-July 2021) investigating ICU visiting practices before the pandemic, at peak COVID-19 ICU admissions, and at the time of survey response. We sought data on visiting policies and communication modes including use of virtual visiting (videoconferencing). RESULTS: We obtained 667 valid responses representing ICUs in all continents. Before the pandemic, 20% (106/525) had unrestricted visiting hours; 6% (30/525) did not allow in-person visiting. At peak, 84% (558/667) did not allow in-person visiting for patients with COVID-19; 66% for patients without COVID-19. This proportion had decreased to 55% (369/667) at time of survey reporting. A government mandate to restrict hospital visiting was reported by 53% (354/646). Most ICUs (55%, 353/615) used regular telephone updates; 50% (306/667) used telephone for formal meetings and discussions regarding prognosis or end-of-life. Virtual visiting was available in 63% (418/667) at time of survey. CONCLUSIONS: Highly restrictive visiting policies were introduced at the initial pandemic peaks, were subsequently liberalized, but without returning to pre-pandemic practices. Telephone became the primary communication mode in most ICUs, supplemented with virtual visits.

Epidemiology and age-related mortality in critically ill patients with intra-abdominal infection or sepsis: an international cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe epidemiology and age-related mortality in critically ill older adults with intra-abdominal infection. METHODS: A secondary analysis was undertaken of a prospective, multi-national, observational study (Abdominal Sepsis Study, ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT03270345) including patients with intra-abdominal infection from 309 intensive care units (ICUs) in 42 countries between January and December 2016. Mortality was considered as ICU mortality, with a minimum of 28 days of observation when patients were discharged earlier. Relationships with mortality were assessed by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The cohort included 2337 patients. Four age groups were defined: middle-aged patients [reference category; 40-59 years; n=659 (28.2%)], young-old patients [60-69 years; n=622 (26.6%)], middle-old patients [70-79 years; n=667 (28.5%)] and very old patients [≥80 years; n=389 (16.6%)]. Secondary peritonitis was the predominant infection (68.7%) and was equally prevalent across age groups. Mortality increased with age: 20.9% in middle-aged patients, 30.5% in young-old patients, 31.2% in middle-old patients, and 44.7% in very old patients (P<0.001). Compared with middle-aged patients, young-old age [odds ratio (OR) 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-2.17], middle-old age (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.35-2.41) and very old age (OR 3.69, 95% CI 2.66-5.12) were independently associated with mortality. Other independent risk factors for mortality included late-onset hospital-acquired intra-abdominal infection, diffuse peritonitis, sepsis/septic shock, source control failure, liver disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes and malnutrition. CONCLUSIONS: For ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection, age >60 years was associated with mortality; patients aged ≥80 years had the worst prognosis. Comorbidities and overall disease severity further compromised survival. As all of these factors are non-modifiable, it remains unclear how to improve outcomes.

Development of competencies for advanced nursing practice in intensive care units across Europe: A modified e-Delphi study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify and define core competencies for advanced nursing roles in adult intensive care units across Europe. METHODS: Three round electronic Delphi conducted between September 2018 and November 2019, with an expert panel of 184 nurses from 20 countries, supplemented by consensus meetings with 16 participants from 10 countries before each round. RESULTS: In Round 1, participants generated 275 statements across 4 domains (knowledge skills and clinical performance; clinical leadership, teaching and supervision; personal effectiveness; safety and systems management). These were re-worded as competency statements and refined at a consensus meeting resulting in 230 statements in 30 sub-domains. The expert panel rated the 'importance' of each statement in Round 2; further refinement at the consensus meeting and the addition of descriptors for sub-domains resulted in 95 competency statements presented to the panel in Round 3. These were all retained in the final set of competency statements. CONCLUSION: We have used consensus techniques to generate competencies for advanced practice in intensive care nursing that are relevant across European countries and available in eight languages. These have provided the basis for an outline curriculum from which education programmes can be developed within countries.

Epidemiology and outcome of pressure injuries in critically ill patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A propensity score adjusted analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injuries are a frequent complication in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, especially in those with comorbid conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Yet no epidemiological data on pressure injuries in critically ill COPD patients are available. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of ICU-acquired pressure injuries in critically ill COPD patients and to investigate associations between COPD status, presence of ICU-acquired pressure injury, and mortality. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from DecubICUs, a multinational one-day point-prevalence study of pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. We generated a propensity score summarizing risk for COPD and ICU-acquired pressure injury. The propensity score was used as matching criterion (1:1-ratio) to assess the proportion of ICU-acquired pressure injury attributable to COPD. The propensity score was then used in regression modeling assessing the association of COPD with risk of ICU-acquired pressure injury, and examining variables associated with mortality (Cox proportional-hazard regression). RESULTS: Of the 13,254 patients recruited to DecubICUs, 1663 (12.5%) had documented COPD. ICU-acquired pressure injury prevalence was higher in COPD patients: 22.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.2 to 24.2) vs. 15.3% (95% CI 14.7 to 16.0). COPD was independently associated with developing ICU-acquired pressure injury (odds ratio 1.40, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.61); the proportion attributable to COPD was 6.4% (95% CI 5.2 to 7.6). Compared with non-COPD patients without pressure injury, mortality was no different among patients without COPD but with pressure injury (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.17) or COPD patients without pressure injury (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.27). Mortality was higher among COPD patients with pressure injury (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.58). CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Critically ill COPD patients have a statistically significant higher risk of pressure injury. Moreover, those that develop pressure injury are at higher risk of mortality. As such, pressure injury may serve as a surrogate for poor prognostic status to help clinicians identify patients at high risk of death. Also, delivery of interventions to prevent pressure injury are paramount in critically ill COPD patients. Further studies should determine if early intervention in critically ill COPD patients can modify development of pressure injury and improve prognosis.

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study.

PURPOSE: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. METHODS: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. RESULTS: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9-27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6-16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score < 19, ICU stay > 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2-1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4-1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3-3.3). CONCLUSION: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat.

Personal protective equipment and intensive care unit healthcare worker safety in the COVID-19 era (PPE-SAFE): An international survey.

PURPOSE: To survey healthcare workers (HCW) on availability and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) caring for COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHOD: A web-based survey distributed worldwide in April 2020. RESULTS: We received 2711 responses from 1797 (67%) physicians, 744 (27%) nurses, and 170 (6%) Allied HCW. For routine care, most (1557, 58%) reportedly used FFP2/N95 masks, waterproof long sleeve gowns (1623; 67%), and face shields/visors (1574; 62%). Powered Air-Purifying Respirators were used routinely and for intubation only by 184 (7%) and 254 (13%) respondents, respectively. Surgical masks were used for routine care by 289 (15%) and 47 (2%) for intubations. At least one piece of standard PPE was unavailable for 1402 (52%), and 817 (30%) reported reusing single-use PPE. PPE was worn for a median of 4 h (IQR 2, 5). Adverse effects of PPE were associated with longer shift durations and included heat (1266, 51%), thirst (1174, 47%), pressure areas (1088, 44%), headaches (696, 28%), Inability to use the bathroom (661, 27%) and extreme exhaustion (492, 20%). CONCLUSIONS: HCWs reported widespread shortages, frequent reuse of, and adverse effects related to PPE. Urgent action by healthcare administrators, policymakers, governments and industry is warranted.

Epidemiology of intra-abdominal infection and sepsis in critically ill patients: "AbSeS", a multinational observational cohort study and ESICM Trials Group Project.

PURPOSE: To describe the epidemiology of intra-abdominal infection in an international cohort of ICU patients according to a new system that classifies cases according to setting of infection acquisition (community-acquired, early onset hospital-acquired, and late-onset hospital-acquired), anatomical disruption (absent or present with localized or diffuse peritonitis), and severity of disease expression (infection, sepsis, and septic shock). METHODS: We performed a multicenter (n = 309), observational, epidemiological study including adult ICU patients diagnosed with intra-abdominal infection. Risk factors for mortality were assessed by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The cohort included 2621 patients. Setting of infection acquisition was community-acquired in 31.6%, early onset hospital-acquired in 25%, and late-onset hospital-acquired in 43.4% of patients. Overall prevalence of antimicrobial resistance was 26.3% and difficult-to-treat resistant Gram-negative bacteria 4.3%, with great variation according to geographic region. No difference in prevalence of antimicrobial resistance was observed according to setting of infection acquisition. Overall mortality was 29.1%. Independent risk factors for mortality included late-onset hospital-acquired infection, diffuse peritonitis, sepsis, septic shock, older age, malnutrition, liver failure, congestive heart failure, antimicrobial resistance (either methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacteria, or carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria) and source control failure evidenced by either the need for surgical revision or persistent inflammation. CONCLUSION: This multinational, heterogeneous cohort of ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection revealed that setting of infection acquisition, anatomical disruption, and severity of disease expression are disease-specific phenotypic characteristics associated with outcome, irrespective of the type of infection. Antimicrobial resistance is equally common in community-acquired as in hospital-acquired infection.

Patterns of care study for brachytherapy: results of the questionnaire for the years 2002 and 2007 in The Netherlands.

PURPOSE: The goal of the ESTRO Patterns of Care study for Brachytherapy in Europe (PCBE) 2002 was to develop an aid to analyse brachytherapy practices. A 2nd version of the PCB questionnaire was created for 2007. Data over 2007 were collected at the radiotherapy institutions in The Netherlands and compared with those from 2002. The aim of this study is to describe national brachytherapy practices, to demonstrate trends, and to provide data for rational health care planning. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were collected using a web-based questionnaire. For each centre, a local coordinator, responsible for coordinating the questionnaires and support of the further analysis was assigned. Data from the national cancer incidence registry was used for comparison with the data from the 21 Dutch departments. RESULTS: There was a decrease in low-dose rate equipment in parallel to an increase in both pulsed-dose rate and high-dose rate equipment. The use of 3D CT and MR based imaging techniques showed a slow rise. The most common clinical procedures were for prostate, gynaecological, and oesophageal tumours. A large increase (146%) in permanent implant prostate applications using 125I seeds was observed. The numbers of oesophageal and gynaecological treatments remained stable. There is concern on the low numbers of cases treated in some institutions for a few complex treatment sites. For head and neck, anal canal, paediatrics, bladder and eye interventions it ranged from 3-20 patients per year per institution. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in number of patient treated with brachytherapy is in accordance with the increases in cancer incidence. The percentage of all radiotherapy patients treated with brachytherapy (approximately 5%) remained stable. The survey identified certain trends in resources and techniques, as well as areas of expected improvement and possible gain in clinical outcome. Data reported from this survey can be used for further planning of resources, facilities and concentration of a low-volume specialised and complex treatments.

Overview of brachytherapy resources in Europe: a survey of patterns of care study for brachytherapy in Europe.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Patterns of Care for Brachytherapy in Europe (PCBE) study is aimed at establishing a detailed information system on brachytherapy throughout Europe. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The questionnaire was web-based and the analysis used data from each radiotherapy department with brachytherapy. There were three groups: Group I with 19 countries (15 initial European Community (EC) countries plus Iceland, Monaco, Norway and Switzerland -EC+4-), Group II with 10 countries (New European Community countries -NEC-) and Group III with 14 countries (Other European Countries -OEC-). RESULTS: In the European area there are 36 of 43 countries (85%) which achieved data collection from at least 50% of centres, and were included in the analysis. The tumour site that had the largest number of treated patients was gynaecological tumours. Several variations have been found in the mean number of patients treated per consultant radiation oncologist and physicist; and in the proportion of brachytherapy patients with gynaecology, prostate and breast tumours, by country and by European area. The provided data showed that the average number of brachytherapy patients per centre increased by 10% between 1997 and 2002. CONCLUSIONS: A European wide evaluation of brachytherapy practice using a web-based questionnaire is feasible and that there is considerable variation in both patterns of practice and available resources.

Light ion facility projects in Europe: methodological aspects for the calculation of the treatment cost per protocol.

In the framework of the European Network for Research in Light Ion Hadron Therapy (ENLIGHT), the health economics group develops a methodology for assessing important investment and operating costs of this innovative treatment against its expected benefits. The main task is to estimate the cost per treated patient. The cost analysis is restricted to the therapeutic phase from the hospital point of view. An original methodology for cost assessment per treatment protocol is developed based on standard costs. Costs related to direct medical activity are based on the production process analysis, whereas indirect and non direct medical costs are allocated to each protocol using relevant cost-drivers. The resulting cost model will take into account the specificities of each therapeutic protocol as well as the particularities of each of the European projects.