A Trigger and Response System for Preventing Cardiac Arrest in the ICU.

Although patients in the ICU are closely monitored, some ICU cardiac arrest events may be preventable. In this study, we sought to reduce the rate of cardiac arrests occurring in the ICU through a quality improvement initiative. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: ICUs of a single tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Patients hospitalized in the ICUs between August 2017 and November 2019. INTERVENTIONS: A comprehensive trigger and response tool. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-three patients experienced an ICU cardiac arrest in the preintervention epoch (6.79 arrests per 1,000 discharges), and 59 patients experienced an ICU cardiac arrest in the intervention epoch (7.91 arrests per 1,000 discharges). In the intervention epoch, the clinical trigger and response tool was activated 106 times over a 1-year period, most commonly due to unexpected new/worsening hypotension. There was no step change in arrest rate (2.24 arrests/1,000 patients; 95% CI, -1.82 to 6.28; p = 0.28) or slope change (-0.02 slope of arrest rate; 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.11; p = 0.79) comparing the preintervention and intervention time epochs. Cardiac arrests in the preintervention epoch were more likely to be "potentially preventable" than that in the intervention epoch (25.6% vs 12.3%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.20-0.88; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A novel trigger-and-response tool did not reduce the frequency of ICU cardiac arrest. Additional investigation is needed into the optimal approach for ICU cardiac arrest prevention.

Development, Implementation, and Impact of a Proning Team During the COVID-19 Intensive Care Unit Surge.

BACKGROUND: Prone positioning has been used as an intervention to improve oxygenation in critically ill patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. During the COVID-19 pandemic, resources were even more limited given a surge in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients, which outstripped intensive care unit (ICU) capacity at many institutions. LOCAL PROBLEM: The purpose of this article is to describe the development and implementation of a proning team during the surge in ICU patients with COVID-19 and to measure the impact of the program through surveys of staff involved. METHODS/INTERVENTIONS: A proning protocol and educational plan was developed. A proning team of redeployed staff was created. A survey of ICU registered nurses and proning team members was used to evaluate the benefits and challenges of the proning team. RESULTS: The proning team was successful in safely performing more than 300 proning and supinating maneuvers for critically ill patients. There is overwhelming support within the institution for a proning team for future COVID-19 surges. DISCUSSION: The development and implementation of the proning team happened quickly to assist with the surge of patients and off-load work from ICU registered nurses. Despite the success of the proning team, more clearly defined roles and expectations, as well as additional education, are needed to further enhance teamwork and workflow. CONCLUSIONS: Creation of the proning team was a creative use of resources that helped manage the large and medically complex patient population. This work may serve as a guide to other health care institutions.

Cardiac arrest in the intensive care unit: An assessment of preventability.

AIM: Cardiac arrest in the intensive care unit (ICU-CA) is a common and highly morbid event. We investigated the preventability of ICU-CAs and identified targets for future intervention. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study of ICU-CAs at a tertiary care center in the United States. For each arrest, the clinical team was surveyed regarding arrest preventability. An expert, multi-disciplinary team of physicians and nurses also reviewed each arrest. Arrests were scored 0 (not at all preventable) to 5 (completely preventable). Arrests were considered 'unlikely but potentially preventable' or 'potentially preventable' if at least 50% of reviewers assigned a score of ≥1 or ≥3 respectively. Themes of preventability were assessed for each arrest. RESULTS: 43 patients experienced an ICU-CA and were included. A total of 14 (32.6%) and 13 (30.2%) arrests were identified as unlikely but potentially preventable by the expert panel and survey respondents respectively, and an additional 11 (25.6%) and 10 (23.3%) arrests were identified as potentially preventable. Timing of response to clinical deterioration, missed/incorrect diagnosis, timing of acidemia correction, timing of escalation to a more senior clinician, and timing of intubation were the most commonly cited contributors to potential preventability. Additional themes identified included the administration of anxiolytics/narcotics for agitation later identified to be due to clinical deterioration and misalignment between team and patient/family perceptions of prognosis and goals-of-care. CONCLUSIONS: ICU-CAs may have preventable elements. Themes of preventability were identified and addressing these themes through data-driven quality improvement initiatives could potentially reduce CA incidence in critically-ill patients.