Lung Protective Ventilation Adherence and Outcomes for Patients With COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Treated in an Intermediate Care Unit Repurposed to ICU Level of Care.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, some centers converted intermediate care units (IMCUs) to COVID-19 ICUs (IMCU/ICUs). In this study, we compared adherence to lung protective ventilation (LPV) and outcomes for patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) treated in an IMCU/ICU versus preexisting medical ICUs (MICUs). DESIGN: Retrospective observational study using electronic medical record data. SETTING: Two academic medical centers from March 2020 to September 2020 (period 1) and October 2020 to May 2021 (period 2), which capture the first two COVID-19 surges in this health system. PATIENTS: Adults with COVID-19 receiving invasive mechanical ventilation who met ARDS oxygenation criteria (Pao2/Fio2 ≤ 300 mm Hg or Spo2/Fio2 ≤ 315). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We defined LPV adherence as the percent of the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation that met a restrictive definition of LPV of, tidal volume/predicted body weight (Vt/PBW) less than or equal to 6.5 mL/kg and plateau pressure (Pplat) less than or equal to 30 cm H2o. In an expanded definition, we added that if Pplat is greater than 30 cm H2o, Vt/PBW had to be less than 6.0 mL/kg. Using the restricted definition, period 1 adherence was lower among 133 IMCU/ICU versus 199 MICU patients (92% [95% CI, 50-100] vs. 100% [86-100], p = 0.05). Period 2 adherence was similar between groups (100% [75-100] vs. 95% CI [65-100], p = 0.68). A similar pattern was observed using the expanded definition. For the full study period, the adjusted hazard of death at 90 days was lower in IMCU/ICU versus MICU patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.99]), whereas ventilator liberation by day 28 was similar between groups (adjusted subdistribution HR 1.09 [95% CI, 0.85-1.39]). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COVID-19 ARDS treated in an IMCU/ICU, LPV adherence was similar to, and observed survival better than those treated in preexisting MICUs. With adequate resources, protocols, and staffing, IMCUs provide an effective source of additional ICU capacity for patients with acute respiratory failure.

Complications and Practice Variation in the Use of Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters in People With Cystic Fibrosis: The Prospective Study of Peripherally Inserted Venous Catheters in People With Cystic Fibrosis Study.

BACKGROUND: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are used commonly to administer antibiotics to people with cystic fibrosis (CF), but their use can be complicated by venous thrombosis and catheter occlusion. RESEARCH QUESTION: Which participant-, catheter-, and catheter management-level attributes are associated with increased risk of complications of PICCs among people with CF? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of adults and children with CF who received PICCs at 10 CF care centers in the United States. The primary end point was defined as occlusion of the catheter resulting in unplanned removal, symptomatic venous thrombosis in the extremity containing the catheter, or both. Three categories of composite secondary outcomes were identified: difficult line placement, local soft tissue or skin reactions, and catheter malfunction. Data specific to the participant, catheter placement, and catheter management were collected in a centralized database. Risk factors for primary and secondary outcomes were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Between June 2018 and July 2021, 157 adults and 103 children older than 6 years with CF had 375 PICCs placed. Patients underwent 4,828 catheter-days of observation. Of the 375 PICCs, 334 (89%) were ≤ 4.5 F, 342 (91%) were single lumen, and 366 (98%) were placed using ultrasound guidance. The primary outcome occurred in 15 PICCs for an event rate of 3.11 per 1,000 catheter-days. No cases of catheter-related bloodstream infection occurred. Other secondary outcomes developed in 147 of 375 catheters (39%). Despite evidence of practice variation, no risk factors for the primary outcome and few risk factors for secondary outcomes were identified. INTERPRETATION: This study affirmed the safety of contemporary approaches to inserting and using PICCs in people with CF. Given the low rate of complications in this study, observations may reflect a widespread shift to selecting smaller-diameter PICCs and using ultrasound to guide their placement.

Sex differences in treatment patterns in cystic fibrosis pulmonary exacerbations.

BACKGROUND: Females with cystic fibrosis (CF) have been shown to have worse pulmonary exacerbation (PEx) related outcomes compared to males. However, it is unknown if sex differences in treatment patterns are contributing to these outcomes. Thus, we sought to explore sex differences in treatment patterns in the Standardized Treatment of Pulmonary Exacerbations (STOP) cohort. METHODS: Data for 220 participants from the STOP cohort were analyzed. Multivariable regression models were used to assess if female sex was associated with duration of treatment with IV antibiotics and inpatient length of stay. Secondary outcomes included antibiotic selection, adjunctive therapies, mean FEV1pp and CFRSD-CRISS respiratory symptom scores at the four study assessments. RESULTS: In our adjusted model, the average number of IV antibiotic treatment days was 13% higher in females compared to males (IRR 1.13, 95% CI=1.02,1.25; p=0.02). We found no sex differences in inpatient length of stay, number of IV antibiotics, antibiotic selection or initiation of adjunctive therapies. Overall, females had higher CFRSD-CRISS scores at the end of IV therapy indicating worse symptom severity (23.6 for females vs. 18.5 for males, p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Despite females having a longer treatment duration, our findings demonstrate that males and females are receiving similar treatments which suggest that the outcome disparities in females with CF may not be due to failure to provide the same level of care. Further research dedicated to sex differences in CF is necessary to understand why clinical outcomes differ between males and females.