[Renal replacement therapy in Intensive Care Units in Catalonia (Spain)]. / Utilización de las terapias de depuración extracorpórea en los Servicios de Medicina Intensiva de Cataluña (España).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the indications, settings and techniques used in renal replacement therapy (RRT) in Intensive Care Units (ICUs). STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, multicenter observational study was carried out. SETTING: Intensive Care Units. PATIENTS: All patients admitted to ICUs during the two-month study period in 2011 who required RRT. INTERVENTIONS: None. VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Patient demographic characteristics, baseline clinical data, RRT technique and materials used. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were analyzed. RRT was started within the first 24hours after ICU admission in 17 of the 33 patients (52%). At the start of RRT, 18% of the patients (n=6) presented grade R on the RIFLE acute kidney injury (AKI) scale. The most common disorder associated with AKI was multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (64%; n=21). At the start of RRT, most patients (76%; n=25) presented hemodynamic instability, while the remaining 24% (n=8) were considered hemodynamically stable. The most common RRT technique in hemodynamically stable patients was continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) (63%; n=5). CRRT was the technique of choice in all 25 of the hemodynamically unstable patients (100%). Anticoagulation was used in 55% (n=18) of the patients. In most cases (61%, n=20), RRT was administered through the right femoral vein. In 84% (n=28) of the patients, the ultrafiltration effluent flow rate was ≤ 35ml/kg/h. CONCLUSIONS: The ICU physicians in this study followed current RRT guidelines. CRRT was preferred over intermittent renal replacement therapy, regardless of patient hemodynamic status.

Incidents related to critical patient safety during in-hospital transfer.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the incidents related to patient safety (IRSP) and their risk factors during in-hospital transfer (IHT) of critical patients after the application of a protocol, and to evaluate safety during transfer using quality indicators. DESIGN: A prospective, observational and non-intervention cohort study was carried out. SETTING: A 10-bed multipurpose Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of a second level university hospital. PATIENTS: All IHTs of critical patients in the ICU for diagnostic tests and to the operating room between March 2011 and March 2017 were included in the study. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Demographic variables, patient severity, transfer priority, moment of the day, reason and type of transfer team. Pre-transport checklist items and IRSP were collected. A biannual analysis was made of quality indicators designed for IHT. RESULTS: A total of 805 transfers were registered, mostly of an urgent nature (53.7%) and for diagnostic tests (77%). In turn, 112 transfers (13.9%) presented some type of IRSP; 54% related to the equipment and 30% related to team and organization. Adverse events occurred in 19 (2.4%) transfers. Risk factors identified in the multivariate analysis were mechanical ventilation and the transport team. The evolution of the indicators related to transport was significantly favorable. CONCLUSIONS: After the application of an IHT protocol, IRSP are low. The main risk factor is invasive mechanical ventilation. The experience of the team performing IHT influences the detection of a greater number of incidents.

Incidents related to critical patient safety during in-hospital transfer. / Incidentes relacionados con la seguridad del paciente crítico durante los traslados intrahospitalarios.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the incidents related to patient safety (IRSP) and their risk factors during in-hospital transfer (IHT) of critical patients after the application of a protocol, and to evaluate safety during transfer using quality indicators. DESIGN: A prospective, observational and non-intervention cohort study was carried out. SETTING: A 10-bed multipurpose Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of a second level university hospital. PATIENTS: All IHTs of critical patients in the ICU for diagnostic tests and to the operating room between March 2011 and March 2017 were included in the study. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Demographic variables, patient severity, transfer priority, moment of the day, reason and type of transfer team. Pre-transport checklist items and IRSP were collected. A biannual analysis was made of quality indicators designed for IHT. RESULTS: A total of 805 transfers were registered, mostly of an urgent nature (53.7%) and for diagnostic tests (77%). In turn, 112 transfers (13.9%) presented some type of IRSP; 54% related to the equipment and 30% related to team and organization. Adverse events occurred in 19 (2.4%) transfers. Risk factors identified in the multivariate analysis were mechanical ventilation and the transport team. The evolution of the indicators related to transport was significantly favorable. CONCLUSIONS: After the application of an IHT protocol, IRSP are low. The main risk factor is invasive mechanical ventilation. The experience of the team performing IHT influences the detection of a greater number of incidents.