Oxygen-Saturation Targets and Cognitive and Functional Outcomes in Mechanically Ventilated Adults.

Rationale: Among mechanically ventilated critically ill adults, the PILOT (Pragmatic Investigation of Optimal Oxygen Targets) trial demonstrated no difference in ventilator-free days among lower, intermediate, and higher oxygen-saturation targets. The effects on long-term cognition and related outcomes are unknown.Objectives: To compare the effects of lower (90% [range, 88-92%]), intermediate (94% [range, 92-96%]), and higher (98% [range, 96-100%]) oxygen-saturation targets on long-term outcomes.Methods: Twelve months after enrollment in the PILOT trial, blinded neuropsychological raters conducted assessments of cognition, disability, employment status, and quality of life. The primary outcome was global cognition as measured using the Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment. In a subset of patients, an expanded neuropsychological battery measured executive function, attention, immediate and delayed memory, verbal fluency, and abstraction.Measurements and Main Results: A total of 501 patients completed follow-up, including 142 in the lower, 186 in the intermediate, and 173 in the higher oxygen target groups. Median (interquartile range) peripheral oxygen saturation values in the lower, intermediate, and higher target groups were 94% (91-96%), 95% (93-97%), and 97% (95-99%), respectively. Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment score did not differ between lower and intermediate (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.36 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.92-2.00]), intermediate and higher (adjusted OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.62-1.29]), or higher and lower (adjusted OR, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.83-1.79]) target groups. There was also no difference in individual cognitive domains, disability, employment, or quality of life.Conclusions: Among mechanically ventilated critically ill adults who completed follow-up at 12 months, oxygen-saturation targets were not associated with cognition or related outcomes.

Effects of Specialist Palliative Care for Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery for Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Specialist palliative care benefits patients undergoing medical treatment of cancer; however, data are lacking on whether patients undergoing surgery for cancer similarly benefit from specialist palliative care. Objective: To determine the effect of a specialist palliative care intervention on patients undergoing surgery for cure or durable control of cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a single-center randomized clinical trial conducted from March 1, 2018, to October 28, 2021. Patients scheduled for specified intra-abdominal cancer operations were recruited from an academic urban referral center in the Southeastern US. Intervention: Preoperative consultation with palliative care specialists and postoperative inpatient and outpatient palliative care follow-up for 90 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prespecified primary end point was physical and functional quality of life (QoL) at postoperative day (POD) 90, measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) Trial Outcome Index (TOI), which is scored on a range of 0 to 56 with higher scores representing higher physical and functional QoL. Prespecified secondary end points included overall QoL at POD 90 measured by FACT-G, days alive at home until POD 90, and 1-year overall survival. Multivariable proportional odds logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to test the hypothesis that the intervention improved each of these end points relative to usual care in an intention-to-treat analysis. Results: A total of 235 eligible patients (median [IQR] age, 65.0 [56.8-71.1] years; 141 male [60.0%]) were randomly assigned to the intervention or usual care group in a 1:1 ratio. Specialist palliative care was received by 114 patients (97%) in the intervention group and 1 patient (1%) in the usual care group. Adjusted median scores on the FACT-G TOI measure of physical and functional QoL did not differ between groups (intervention score, 46.77; 95% CI, 44.18-49.04; usual care score, 46.23; 95% CI, 43.08-48.14; P = .46). Intervention vs usual care group odds ratio (OR) was 1.17 (95% CI, 0.77-1.80). Palliative care did not improve overall QoL measured by the FACT-G score (intervention vs usual care OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.75-1.58), days alive at home (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.69-1.11), or 1-year overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.50-1.88). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial showed no evidence that early specialist palliative care improves the QoL of patients undergoing nonpalliative cancer operations. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03436290.

Cognitive Outcomes in the Pragmatic Investigation of optimaL Oxygen Targets (CO-PILOT) trial: protocol and statistical analysis plan.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term cognitive impairment is one of the most common complications of critical illness among survivors who receive mechanical ventilation. Recommended oxygen targets during mechanical ventilation vary among international guidelines. Different oxygen targets during mechanical ventilation have the potential to alter long-term cognitive function due to cerebral hypoxemia or hyperoxemia. Whether higher, intermediate or lower SpO2 targets are associated with better cognitive function at 12-month follow-up is unknown. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Pragmatic Investigation of optimaL Oxygen Targets (PILOT) trial is an ongoing pragmatic, cluster-randomised, cluster-crossover trial comparing the effect of a higher SpO2 target (target 98%, goal range 96%-100%), an intermediate SpO2 target (target 94%, goal range 92%-96%) and a lower SpO2 target (target 90%, goal range 88%-92%) on clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit at a single centre in the USA. For this ancillary study of long-term Cognitive Outcomes (CO-PILOT), survivors of critical illness who are in the PILOT trial and who do not meet exclusion criteria for CO-PILOT are approached for consent. The anticipated number of patients for whom assessment of long-term cognition will be performed in CO-PILOT is 612 patients over 36 months of enrolment. Cognitive, functional and quality of life assessments are assessed via telephone interview at approximately 12 months after enrolment in PILOT. The primary outcome of CO-PILOT is the telephone version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. A subset of patients will also complete a comprehensive neuropsychological telephone battery to better characterise the cognitive domains affected. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The CO-PILOT ancillary study was approved by the Vanderbilt Institutional Review Board. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences.

Faster, better, cheaper: lean labs are the key to future survival.

Process improvement techniques have been used in manufacturing for many years to rein in costs and improve quality. Health care is now grappling with similar challenges. The Department of Laboratory Services at Good Samaritan Hospital, a 560-bed facility in Dayton, OH, used the Lean process improvement method in a 12-week project to streamline its core laboratory processes. By analyzing the flow of samples through the system and identifying value-added and non-value-added steps, both in the laboratory and during the collection process, Good Samaritan's project team redesigned systems and reconfigured the core laboratory layout to trim collection-to-results time from 65 minutes to 40 minutes. As a result, virtually all morning results are available to physicians by 7 a.m., critical values are called to nursing units within 30 minutes, and core laboratory services are optimally staffed for maximum cost-effectiveness.