RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite increasing evidence of the potential inaccuracy and unwarranted practice of regular GRV measurement in critically in adults, this practice persists within the United Kingdom. AIM: To explore adult intensive care nurses' decision-making around the practice of GRV measurement to guide enteral feeding. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional 16 item electronic survey in four adult intensive care units (ICUs) in England and Wales. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-three responses were obtained across four ICUs with acceptable response rates for most [Unit 1 74 /127 = 58.2%; Unit 2 87/129 = 67.4%; Unit 3 77/120 = 64.1%; Unit 4 35/168 = 20.8%]. Most (243/273 (89%) reported measuring GRV 4-6 hourly, with most (223/273 82%) reporting that the main reason was to assess feed tolerance or intolerance and 37/273 (13.5%) saying their unit protocol required it. In terms of factors affecting decision-making, volume obtained was the most important factor, followed by the condition of the patient, with aspirate colour and appearance less important. When asked how they would feel about not measuring GRV routinely, the majority (78.2%) of nurses felt worried (140/273 = 51.2%) or very worried (74/273 = 27%). CONCLUSIONS: Factors affecting the nurses' decision-making around GRV were based largely on fear of risk (around vomiting and pulmonary aspiration) and compliance with unit protocols. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Despite increasing evidence suggesting it is unnecessary, nurses' beliefs around the value of this practice persist and it continues to be embedded into unit protocols around feeding.
Asunto(s)
Enfermería de Cuidados Críticos , Nutrición Enteral , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Adulto , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Reino Unido , Femenino , Masculino , Gales , Inglaterra , Toma de Decisiones , Cuidados Críticos , Toma de Decisiones ClínicasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: New onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is the most common arrhythmia affecting critically unwell patients. NOAF can lead to worsening haemodynamic compromise, heart failure, thromboembolic events, and increased mortality. The aim of this systematic review and narrative synthesis is to evaluate the non-pharmacological and pharmacological management strategies for NOAF in critically unwell patients. METHODS: Of 1782 studies, 30 were eligible for inclusion, including 4 RCTs and 26 observational studies. Efficacy of direct current cardioversion, amiodarone, ß-adrenergic receptor antagonists, calcium channel blockers, digoxin, magnesium, and less commonly used agents such as ibutilide are reported. RESULTS: Cardioversion rates of 48% were reported for direct current cardioversion; however, re-initiation of NOAF was as high as 23.4%. Amiodarone was the most commonly reported intervention with cardioversion rates ranging from 18% to 96% followed by ß-antagonists with cardioversion rates from 40% to 92%. Amiodarone was more effective than diltiazem (odds ratio [OR]=1.91, P=0.32) at cardioversion. Short-acting ß-antagonists esmolol and landiolol were more effective compared with diltiazem for cardioversion (OR=3.55, P=0.04) and HR control (OR=3.2, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: There was significant variation between studies with regard to the definition of successful cardioversion and heart rate control, making comparisons between studies and interventions difficult. Future RCTs comparing individual anti-arrhythmic agents, in particular magnesium, amiodarone, and ß-antagonists, and studying the role of anticoagulation in critically unwell patients are required. There is also an urgent need for a core outcome dataset for studies of new onset atrial fibrillation to allow comparisons between different anti-arrhythmic strategies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019121739.
Asunto(s)
Amiodarona , Fibrilación Atrial , Adulto , Amiodarona/uso terapéutico , Antiarrítmicos/uso terapéutico , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Diltiazem , Cardioversión Eléctrica , Humanos , MagnesioRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the current management of new-onset atrial fibrillation and compare differences in practice regionally. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. SUBJECTS: Critical care attending physicians/consultants and fellows. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 386 surveys were included in our analysis. Rate control was the preferred treatment approach for hemodynamically stable patients (69.1%), and amiodarone was the most used antiarrhythmic medication (70.9%). For hemodynamically unstable patients, a strategy of electrolyte supplementation and antiarrhythmic therapy was most common (54.7%). Physicians responding to the survey distributed by the Society of Critical Care Medicine were more likely to prescribe beta-blockers as a first-line antiarrhythmic medication (38.4%), use more transthoracic echocardiography than respondents from other regions (82.4%), and more likely to refer patients who survive their ICU stay for cardiology follow-up if they had new-onset atrial fibrillation (57.2%). The majority of survey respondents (83.0%) were interested in participating in future studies of atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variation exists in the management of new-onset atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients, as well as geographic variation. Further research is necessary to inform guidelines in this population and establish if differences in practice impact long-term outcomes.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: New onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is the most common arrhythmia affecting critically ill patients with sepsis. NOAF is associated with increased intensive care unit mortality, increased hospital mortality, development of heart failure and increased risk of permanent atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic events such as stroke. The pathophysiology of NOAF has been outlined, however, a knowledge gap exists regarding the association between abnormalities in coagulation and immune biomarkers, and the risk of developing NOAF in patients with sepsis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol describes a systematic review and meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guideline (PRISMA-P) and the Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies guideline (MOOSE). We will conduct the literature search in Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Library. We will include studies that report data in adult patients (>18 years) with sepsis that develop NOAF. We will extract data from studies that report at least one coagulation or immune biomarker. Risk of bias will be assessed by using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Risk of Bias 2 tool (RoB2) for non-randomized and randomized trials respectively. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be utilized in assessing the quality of evidence. DISCUSSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis will explore the scientific literature regarding the association between coagulation and immune activation in critically ill patients with sepsis, who develop NOAF. The findings will add to the existing knowledge base of NOAF in sepsis, highlight areas of uncertainty and identify future areas of interest to guide and improve management strategies for NOAF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration details. CRD42022385225 (PROSPERO).
Asunto(s)
Fibrilación Atrial , Trastornos de la Coagulación Sanguínea , Ciervos , Sepsis , Animales , Fibrilación Atrial/complicaciones , Enfermedad Crítica , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Sepsis/complicaciones , Estudios Observacionales como AsuntoRESUMEN
Background: Sepsis is a life-threatening disease commonly complicated by activation of coagulation and immune pathways. Sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC) is associated with micro- and macrothrombosis, but its relation to other cardiovascular complications remains less clear. In this study we explored associations between SIC and the occurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) in sinus rhythm. We also aimed to identify predictive factors for the development of AF in patients with and without SIC. Methods: Data were extracted from the publicly available AmsterdamUMCdb database. Patients with sepsis and documented sinus rhythm on admission to ICU were included. Patients were stratified into those who fulfilled the criteria for SIC and those who did not. Following univariate analysis, logistic regression models were developed to describe the association between routinely documented demographics and blood results and the development of at least one episode of AF. Machine learning methods (gradient boosting machines and random forest) were applied to define the predictive importance of factors contributing to the development of AF. Results: Age was the strongest predictor for the development of AF in patients with and without SIC. Routine coagulation tests activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) and International Normalized Ratio (INR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) as a marker of inflammation were also associated with AF occurrence in SIC-positive and SIC-negative patients. Cardiorespiratory parameters (oxygen requirements and heart rate) showed predictive potential. Conclusion: Higher INR, elevated CRP, increased heart rate and more severe respiratory failure are risk factors for occurrence of AF in critical illness, suggesting an association between cardiac, respiratory and immune and coagulation pathways. However, age was the most dominant factor to predict the first episodes of AF in patients admitted in sinus rhythm with and without SIC.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Psychological distress is common in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors and is anticipated in those who were treated for severe COVID-19 infection. This trainee-led, multicentre, observational, longitudinal study aims to assess the psychological outcomes of ICU survivors treated for COVID-19 infection in the UK at 3, 6 and/or 12 months after ICU discharge and explore whether there are demographic, psychosocial and clinical risk factors for psychological distress. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Questionnaires will be provided to study participants 3, 6 and/or 12 months after discharge from intensive care, assessing for anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress symptoms, health-related quality of life and physical symptoms. Demographic, psychosocial and clinical data will also be collected to explore risk factors for psychological distress using latent growth curve modelling. Study participants will be eligible to complete questionnaires at any of the three time points online, by telephone or by post. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The PIM-COVID study was approved by the Health Research Authority (East Midlands - Derby Research and Ethics Committee, reference: 20/EM/0247). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05092529.
RESUMEN
Sepsis is a heterogeneous syndrome characterized by a variety of clinical features. Analysis of large clinical datasets may serve to define groups of sepsis with different risks of adverse outcomes. Clinical experience supports the concept that prognosis, treatment, severity, and time course of sepsis vary depending on the source of infection. We analyzed a large publicly available database to test this hypothesis. In addition, we developed prognostic models for the three main types of sepsis: pulmonary, urinary, and abdominal sepsis. We used logistic regression using routinely available clinical data for mortality prediction in each of these groups. The data was extracted from the eICU collaborative research database, a multi-center intensive care unit with over 200,000 admissions. Sepsis cohorts were defined using admission diagnosis codes. We used univariate and multivariate analyses to establish factors relevant for outcome prediction in all three cohorts of sepsis (pulmonary, urinary and abdominal). For logistic regression, input variables were automatically selected using a sequential forward search algorithm over 10 dataset instances. Receiver operator characteristics were generated for each model and compared with established prognostication tools (APACHE IV and SOFA). A total of 3,958 sepsis admissions were included in the analysis. Sepsis in-hospital mortality differed depending on the cause of infection: abdominal 18.93%, pulmonary 19.27%, and renal 12.81%. Higher average heart rate was associated with increased mortality risk. Increased average Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) showed a reduced mortality risk across all sepsis groups. Results from the LR models found significant factors that were relevant for specific sepsis groups. Our models outperformed APACHE IV and SOFA scores with AUC between 0.63 and 0.74. Predictive power decreased over time, with the best results achieved for data extracted for the first 24 h of admission. Mortality varied significantly between the three sepsis groups. We also demonstrate that factors of importance show considerable heterogeneity depending on the source of infection. The factors influencing in-hospital mortality vary depending on the source of sepsis which may explain why most sepsis trials have failed to identify an effective treatment. The source of infection should be considered when considering mortality risk. Planning of sepsis treatment trials may benefit from risk stratification based on the source of infection.
RESUMEN
The occurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) represents clinical deterioration in acutely unwell patients and leads to increased morbidity and mortality. Prediction of the development of AF allows early intervention. Using the AmsterdamUMCdb, clinically relevant variables from patients admitted in sinus rhythm were extracted over the full duration of the ICU stay or until the first recorded AF episode occurred. Multiple logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for AF. Input variables were automatically selected by a sequential forward search algorithm using cross-validation. We developed three different models: For the overall cohort, for ventilated patients and non-ventilated patients. 16,144 out of 23,106 admissions met the inclusion criteria. 2,374 (12.8%) patients had at least one AF episode during their ICU stay. Univariate analysis revealed that a higher percentage of AF patients were older than 70 years (60% versus 32%) and died in ICU (23.1% versus 7.1%) compared to non-AF patients. Multivariate analysis revealed age to be the dominant risk factor for developing AF with doubling of age leading to a 10-fold increased risk. Our logistic regression models showed excellent performance with AUC.ROC > 0.82 and > 0.91 in ventilated and non-ventilated cohorts, respectively. Increasing age was the dominant risk factor for the development of AF in both ventilated and non-ventilated critically ill patients. In non-ventilated patients, risk for development of AF was significantly higher than in ventilated patients. Further research is warranted to identify the role of ventilatory settings on risk for AF in critical illness and to optimise predictive models.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Augmented renal clearance (ARC) is associated with sub-therapeutic antibiotic, anti-epileptic, and anticoagulant serum concentrations leading to adverse patient outcomes. We aimed to describe the prevalence and associated risk factors for ARC development in a large, single-centre cohort in the United Kingdom. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study of critically unwell patients admitted to intensive care between 2014 and 2016. Urinary creatinine clearance was used to determine the ARC prevalence during the first 7 days of admission. Repeated measures logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for ARC development. RESULTS: The ARC prevalence was 47.0% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 44.3%-49.7%). Age, sex, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, and sepsis diagnosis were significantly associated with ARC. ARC was more prevalent in younger vs. older (odds ratio [OR] 0.95 [95%CI: 0.94-0.96]), male vs. female (OR 0.32 [95%CI: 0.26-0.40]) patients with lower vs. higher APACHE II scores (OR 0.94 [95%CI: 0.92-0.96]). CONCLUSIONS: This patient group probably remains unknown to many clinicians because measuring urinary creatinine clearance is not usually indicated in this group. Clinicians should be aware of the ARC risk in this group and consider measurement of urinary creatinine clearance.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos , Enfermedad Crítica , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Estudios de Cohortes , Creatinina , Femenino , Humanos , Pruebas de Función Renal , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in critically ill patients. There is a paucity of data assessing the impact of anticoagulation strategies on clinical outcomes for general critical care patients with AF. Our aim was to assess the existing literature to evaluate the effectiveness of anticoagulation strategies used in critical care for AF. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PubMed databases. Studies reporting anticoagulation strategies for AF in adults admitted to a general critical care setting were assessed for inclusion. RESULTS: Four studies were selected for data extraction. A total of 44,087 patients were identified with AF, of which 17.8 to 49.4% received anticoagulation. The reported incidence of thromboembolic events was 0 to 1.4% for anticoagulated patients, and 0 to 1.3% in nonanticoagulated patients. Major bleeding events were reported in three studies and occurred in 7.2 to 8.6% of the anticoagulated patients and in up to 7.1% of the nonanticoagulated patients. CONCLUSION: There was an increased incidence of major bleeding events in anticoagulated patients with AF in critical care compared with nonanticoagulated patients. There was no significant difference in the incidence of reported thromboembolic events within studies between patients who did and did not receive anticoagulation. However, the outcomes reported within studies were not standardized, therefore, the generalizability of our results to the general critical care population remains unclear. Further data are required to facilitate an evidence-based assessment of the risks and benefits of anticoagulation for critically ill patients with AF.
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Coagulación Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Fibrilación Atrial/sangre , Fibrilación Atrial/diagnóstico , Fibrilación Atrial/mortalidad , Cuidados Críticos , Enfermedad Crítica , Femenino , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/sangre , Accidente Cerebrovascular/diagnóstico , Accidente Cerebrovascular/mortalidad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Variation in the time interval between consecutive R wave peaks of the QRS complex has long been recognised. Measurement of this RR interval is used to derive heart rate variability. Heart rate variability is thought to reflect modulation of automaticity of the sinus node by the sympathetic and parasympathetic components of the autonomic nervous system. The clinical application of heart rate variability in determining prognosis post myocardial infarction and the risk of sudden cardiac death is well recognised. More recently, analysis of heart rate variability has found utility in predicting foetal deterioration, deterioration due to sepsis and impending multiorgan dysfunction syndrome in critically unwell adults. Moreover, reductions in heart rate variability have been associated with increased mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit. It is hypothesised that heart rate variability reflects and quantifies the neural regulation of organ systems such as the cardiovascular and respiratory systems. In disease states, it is thought that there is an 'uncoupling' of organ systems, leading to alterations in 'inter-organ communication' and a clinically detectable reduction in heart rate variability. Despite the increasing evidence of the utility of measuring heart rate variability, there remains debate as to the methodology that best represents clinically relevant outcomes. With continuing advances in technology, our understanding of the physiology responsible for heart rate variability evolves. In this article, we review the current understanding of the physiological basis of heart rate variability and the methods available for its measurement. Finally, we review the emerging use of heart rate variability analysis in intensive care medicine and conditions in which heart rate variability has shown promise as a potential physiomarker of disease.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: New onset atrial fibrillation is the most commonly encountered arrhythmia in critically unwell patients with a reported incidence of 4% to 29%. The occurrence of new onset atrial fibrillation may precipitate acute heart failure and lead to thromboembolic complications as well as being associated with increased in-hospital and in intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Despite being common, much of our current knowledge regarding the treatment of new onset atrial fibrillation comes from patients with chronic atrial fibrillation or post cardiac surgery. It is unclear if management strategies in these patient cohorts can be applied to new onset atrial fibrillation in the general ICU. This protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to address this uncertainty and define what is the most effective management strategy for the treatment of new onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in acutely unwell adult patients. METHODS: In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we plan to search electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL], MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded on Web of Science and relevant trial registries) for relevant randomised and non-randomised trials. Citations will be reviewed by title, abstract and full text by two independent reviewers and disagreement resolved by discussion and a third independent reviewer, if necessary. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool will be used to assess risk of bias in randomised trials and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool will be used for non-randomised studies. Statistical analysis will be carried out using R package meta and netmeta. We will first conduct a pairwise meta-analysis. If conditions for indirect comparison are satisfied and suitable data are available, we will conduct network meta-analysis using frequentist methodology. Treatments will be ranked according to efficacy with associated P-scores. We will assess the quality of the evidence in the pairwise using GRADE methodology and network meta-analysis comparisons in the CINeMA module in R package meta. DISCUSSION: Our review will be the first to assess direct and indirect evidence to assess the efficacy and rank the treatments available for new onset atrial fibrillation in critically unwell patients. Our review findings will be applicable to the care of people in a range of acute settings including, ICU, the emergency department and acute medical units. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registry number: CRD42019121739.