ANI and BIS variations in supine and prone position during closed-tracheal suction in sedated and myorelaxed ICU patients with severe COVID-19: A retrospective study.

The purpose of this study was to assess Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI) and bispectral index (BIS) variations in supine and prone position during closed-tracheal suction in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring myorelaxation and prone positioning. We retrospectively reviewed the data of 15 patients hospitalized in ICU for severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring sedation, myorelaxation and prone positioning. The BIS, instant ANI (ANIi), mean ANI (ANIm), heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and SpO2 were retrieved in supine and prone position 1 min before tracheal suction then every minute from the beginning of tracheal suction during 4 min and compared using ANOVA for repeated measures (p < 0.05 considered as statistically significant). Both ANIm and ANIi decreased significantly during tracheal suction with no difference between positions, whereas BIS showed no significant variation within time and between groups. The median [Q1-Q3] ANIm value decreased from 87 [68-98] to 79 [63-09] in supine position and from 79 [63-95] to 78 [66-98] in prone position 2 min after the beginning of tracheal suction. The median [Q1-Q3] ANIi value decreased earlier 1 min after the beginning of tracheal suction from 84 [69-98] to 73 [60-90] in supine position and from 84 [60-99] to 71 [51-88] in prone position. Both HR, SBP and SpO2 varied modestly but significantly during tracheal suction with no difference between positions. Monitoring ANI, but not BIS, may be of interest to detect noxious stimuli such as tracheal suction in ICU myorelaxed patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring prone positioning.

Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in French hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: COVID-19 vaccines have become the new hope for stemming the pandemic. We aimed to assess pre-launch vaccine acceptance among hospital workers in the Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes Administrative Region of France. METHODS: We performed a cross sectional study involving all hospital workers in 11 Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes hospitals in December 2020. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: We analyzed completed questionnaires from 1,964 respondents (78% women, mean age 42 years, 21.5% physicians, 41% private care centers). A total of 1,048 (53%) hospital workers were in favor of COVID-19 vaccination. Vaccine hesitancy was associated with: female gender; young age; paramedical, technical, and administrative professions (i.e., all non-medical professions); no prior flu vaccination; and employment in the private medical care sector (p<0.05). Distrust of health authorities and pharmaceutical lobbying were the main obstacles to vaccination. Inversely, creating herd immunity and protecting patients and household members were the most frequently cited reasons in favor of vaccination. More than two-thirds of participants feared that the clinical and biological research was too rapid and worried about serious adverse effects. Most participants were interested in written information on the available vaccines, but the most vaccine-hesitant categories preferred oral information. Only 35% supported mandatory vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted written and oral information campaigns will be necessary to improve vaccination coverage among hospital workers who show a surprisingly high hesitancy rate. Imposing mandatory vaccination could be counterproductive.

No impact on long-term survival of prolonged ICU stay and re-admission for patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and Hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) are promising new approaches of peritoneal metastases. However these surgical procedures are associated with a high morbidity rate thus intensive care (IC) management following serious complications may be warranted for these patients. The impact of the prolonged IC stay or re-admission on long-term survival remains unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 122 consecutive HIPEC procedures over a one year period (2010-2011) in a single academic hospital. We analysed complications that would lead to prolonged stay or re-admission into ICU and analysed long term follow-up in patients whether they required intensive care (ICU group) or not (Control group). RESULTS: ICU group represented 26.2% of the cohort mainly due to septic or haemorrhagic shock. Among them acute kidney injury and respiratory failure were present in 50% and 47% respectively. Cohort overall mortality rate was of 5.7%. Patients were followed for 4 years and survival analysis was performed adjusting for main confounding factors in a Cox survival model. Survival was not different between groups, with a median survival of 38 months [32; 44] vs. 33 months [26; 39] in the ICU group and Control group respectively. CONCLUSION: Prolonged stay or re-admission into ICU does not seem to statistically impact long term prognosis of patients undergoing CRS with HIPEC.