Enhancing European Management of Analgesia, Sedation, and Delirium: A Multinational, Prospective, Interventional Before-After Trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of a structured educational intervention on the implementation of guideline-recommended pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) assessment. METHODS: This was a prospective, multinational, interventional before-after trial conducted at 12 intensive care units from 10 centers in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and the UK. Intensive care units underwent a 6-week structured educational program, comprising online lectures, instructional videos, educational handouts, and bedside teaching. Patient-level PAD assessment data were collected in three 1-day point-prevalence assessments before (T1), 6 weeks after (T2), and 1 year after (T3) the educational program. RESULTS: A total of 430 patients were included. The rate of patients who received all three PAD assessments changed from 55% (107/195) at T1 to 53% (68/129) at T2, but increased to 73% (77/106) at T3 (p = 0.003). The delirium screening rate increased from 64% (124/195) at T1 to 65% (84/129) at T2 and 77% (82/106) at T3 (p = 0.041). The pain assessment rate increased from 87% (170/195) at T1 to 92% (119/129) at T2 and 98% (104/106) at T3 (p = 0.005). The rate of sedation assessment showed no signficiant change. The proportion of patients who received nonpharmacological delirium prevention measures increased from 58% (114/195) at T1 to 80% (103/129) at T2 and 91% (96/106) at T3 (p < 0.001). Multivariable regression revealed that at T3, patients were more likely to receive a delirium assessment (odds ratio [OR] 2.138, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.206-3.790; p = 0.009), sedation assessment (OR 4.131, 95% CI 1.372-12.438; p = 0.012), or all three PAD assessments (OR 2.295, 95% CI 1.349-3.903; p = 0.002) compared with T1. CONCLUSIONS: In routine care, many patients were not assessed for PAD. Assessment rates increased significantly 1 year after the intervention. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03553719.

Effects of Hypothermia vs Normothermia on Societal Participation and Cognitive Function at 6 Months in Survivors After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Predefined Analysis of the TTM2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The Targeted Hypothermia vs Targeted Normothermia After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2) trial reported no difference in mortality or poor functional outcome at 6 months after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). This predefined exploratory analysis provides more detailed estimation of brain dysfunction for the comparison of the 2 intervention regimens. Objectives: To investigate the effects of targeted hypothermia vs targeted normothermia on functional outcome with focus on societal participation and cognitive function in survivors 6 months after OHCA. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study is a predefined analysis of an international multicenter, randomized clinical trial that took place from November 2017 to January 2020 and included participants at 61 hospitals in 14 countries. A structured follow-up for survivors performed at 6 months was by masked outcome assessors. The last follow-up took place in October 2020. Participants included 1861 adult (older than 18 years) patients with OHCA who were comatose at hospital admission. At 6 months, 939 of 1861 were alive and invited to a follow-up, of which 103 of 939 declined or were missing. Interventions: Randomization 1:1 to temperature control with targeted hypothermia at 33 °C or targeted normothermia and early treatment of fever (37.8 °C or higher). Main outcomes and measures: Functional outcome focusing on societal participation assessed by the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended ([GOSE] 1 to 8) and cognitive function assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment ([MoCA] 0 to 30) and the Symbol Digit Modalities Test ([SDMT] z scores). Higher scores represent better outcomes. Results: At 6 months, 836 of 939 survivors with a mean age of 60 (SD, 13) (range, 18 to 88) years (700 of 836 male [84%]) participated in the follow-up. There were no differences between the 2 intervention groups in functional outcome focusing on societal participation (GOSE score, odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.71-1.17; P = .46) or in cognitive function by MoCA (mean difference, 0.36; 95% CI,-0.33 to 1.05; P = .37) and SDMT (mean difference, 0.06; 95% CI,-0.16 to 0.27; P = .62). Limitations in societal participation (GOSE score less than 7) were common regardless of intervention (hypothermia, 178 of 415 [43%]; normothermia, 168 of 419 [40%]). Cognitive impairment was identified in 353 of 599 survivors (59%). Conclusions: In this predefined analysis of comatose patients after OHCA, hypothermia did not lead to better functional outcome assessed with a focus on societal participation and cognitive function than management with normothermia. At 6 months, many survivors had not regained their pre-arrest activities and roles, and mild cognitive dysfunction was common. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02908308.

Dynamics of disease characteristics and clinical management of critically ill COVID-19 patients over the time course of the pandemic: an analysis of the prospective, international, multicentre RISC-19-ICU registry.

BACKGROUND: It remains elusive how the characteristics, the course of disease, the clinical management and the outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) worldwide have changed over the course of the pandemic. METHODS: Prospective, observational registry constituted by 90 ICUs across 22 countries worldwide including patients with a laboratory-confirmed, critical presentation of COVID-19 requiring advanced organ support. Hierarchical, generalized linear mixed-effect models accounting for hospital and country variability were employed to analyse the continuous evolution of the studied variables over the pandemic. RESULTS: Four thousand forty-one patients were included from March 2020 to September 2021. Over this period, the age of the admitted patients (62 [95% CI 60-63] years vs 64 [62-66] years, p < 0.001) and the severity of organ dysfunction at ICU admission decreased (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment 8.2 [7.6-9.0] vs 5.8 [5.3-6.4], p < 0.001) and increased, while more female patients (26 [23-29]% vs 41 [35-48]%, p < 0.001) were admitted. The time span between symptom onset and hospitalization as well as ICU admission became longer later in the pandemic (6.7 [6.2-7.2| days vs 9.7 [8.9-10.5] days, p < 0.001). The PaO2/FiO2 at admission was lower (132 [123-141] mmHg vs 101 [91-113] mmHg, p < 0.001) but showed faster improvements over the initial 5 days of ICU stay in late 2021 compared to early 2020 (34 [20-48] mmHg vs 70 [41-100] mmHg, p = 0.05). The number of patients treated with steroids and tocilizumab increased, while the use of therapeutic anticoagulation presented an inverse U-shaped behaviour over the course of the pandemic. The proportion of patients treated with high-flow oxygen (5 [4-7]% vs 20 [14-29], p < 0.001) and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (14 [11-18]% vs 24 [17-33]%, p < 0.001) throughout the pandemic increased concomitant to a decrease in invasive mechanical ventilation (82 [76-86]% vs 74 [64-82]%, p < 0.001). The ICU mortality (23 [19-26]% vs 17 [12-25]%, p < 0.001) and length of stay (14 [13-16] days vs 11 [10-13] days, p < 0.001) decreased over 19 months of the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Characteristics and disease course of critically ill COVID-19 patients have continuously evolved, concomitant to the clinical management, throughout the pandemic leading to a younger, less severely ill ICU population with distinctly different clinical, pulmonary and inflammatory presentations than at the onset of the pandemic.

Hypothermic versus Normothermic Temperature Control after Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: The evidence for temperature control for comatose survivors of cardiac arrest is inconclusive. Controversy exists as to whether the effects of hypothermia differ per the circumstances of the cardiac arrest or patient characteristics. METHODS: An individual patient data meta-analysis of the Targeted Temperature Management at 33°C versus 36°C after Cardiac Arrest (TTM) and Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest (TTM2) trials was conducted. The intervention was hypothermia at 33°C and the comparator was normothermia. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included poor functional outcome (modified Rankin scale score of 4 to 6) at 6 months. Predefined subgroups based on the design variables in the original trials were tested for interaction with the intervention as follows: age (older or younger than the median), sex (female or male), initial cardiac rhythm (shockable or nonshockable), time to return of spontaneous circulation (above or below the median), and circulatory shock on admission (presence or absence). RESULTS: The primary analyses included 2800 patients, with 1403 assigned to hypothermia and 1397 to normothermia. Death occurred for 691 of 1398 participants (49.4%) in the hypothermia group and 666 of 1391 participants (47.9%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.11; P=0.41). A poor functional outcome occurred for 733 of 1350 participants (54.3%) in the hypothermia group and 718 of 1330 participants (54.0%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.08; P=0.88). Outcomes were consistent in the predefined subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Hypothermia at 33°C did not decrease 6-month mortality compared with normothermia after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. (Funded by Vetenskapsrådet; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers NCT02908308 and NCT01020916.)

Hypothermia versus Normothermia after Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Targeted temperature management is recommended for patients after cardiac arrest, but the supporting evidence is of low certainty. METHODS: In an open-label trial with blinded assessment of outcomes, we randomly assigned 1900 adults with coma who had had an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac or unknown cause to undergo targeted hypothermia at 33°C, followed by controlled rewarming, or targeted normothermia with early treatment of fever (body temperature, ≥37.8°C). The primary outcome was death from any cause at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included functional outcome at 6 months as assessed with the modified Rankin scale. Prespecified subgroups were defined according to sex, age, initial cardiac rhythm, time to return of spontaneous circulation, and presence or absence of shock on admission. Prespecified adverse events were pneumonia, sepsis, bleeding, arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise, and skin complications related to the temperature management device. RESULTS: A total of 1850 patients were evaluated for the primary outcome. At 6 months, 465 of 925 patients (50%) in the hypothermia group had died, as compared with 446 of 925 (48%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94 to 1.14; P = 0.37). Of the 1747 patients in whom the functional outcome was assessed, 488 of 881 (55%) in the hypothermia group had moderately severe disability or worse (modified Rankin scale score ≥4), as compared with 479 of 866 (55%) in the normothermia group (relative risk with hypothermia, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.09). Outcomes were consistent in the prespecified subgroups. Arrhythmia resulting in hemodynamic compromise was more common in the hypothermia group than in the normothermia group (24% vs. 17%, P<0.001). The incidence of other adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with coma after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, targeted hypothermia did not lead to a lower incidence of death by 6 months than targeted normothermia. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; TTM2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02908308.).