RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Critical care pharmacists improve the quality and efficiency of medication therapy whilst reducing treatment costs where they are available. UK critical care pharmacist deployment was described in 2015, highlighting a deficit in numbers, experience level, and critical care access to pharmacy services over the 7-day week. Since then, national workforce standards have been emphasised, quality indicators published, and service commissioning documents produced, reinforced by care quality assessments. Whether these initiatives have resulted in further development of the UK critical care pharmacy workforce is unknown. This evaluation provides a 2020 status update. METHODS: The 2015 electronic data entry tool was updated and circulated for completion by UK critical care pharmacists. The tool captured workforce data disposition as it was just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, at critical care unit level. MAIN FINDINGS: Data were received for 334 critical care units from 203 organisations (96% of UK critical care units). Overall, 98.2% of UK critical care units had specific clinical pharmacist time dedicated to the unit. The median weekday pharmacist input to each level 3 equivalent bed was 0.066 (0.043-0.088) whole time equivalents, a significant increase from the median position in 2015 (+ 0.021, p < 0.0001). Despite this progress, pharmacist availability remains below national minimum standards (0.1/level 3 equivalent bed). Most units (71.9%) had access to prescribing pharmacists. Geographical variation in pharmacist staffing levels were evident, and weekend services remain extremely limited. CONCLUSIONS: Availability of clinical pharmacists in UK adult critical care units is improving. However, national standards are not routinely met despite widely publicised quality indicators, commissioning specifications, and assessments. Additional measures are needed to address persistent deficits and realise gains in organisational and patient-level outcomes. These measures must include promotion of cross-professional collaborative working, adjusted funding models, and a nationally recognised training pathway for critical care pharmacists.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Serviço de Farmácia Hospitalar , Farmácia , Adulto , Humanos , Pandemias , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Farmacêuticos , Recursos Humanos , Reino UnidoRESUMO
PURPOSE: Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common cause of admission to intensive care units (ICUs). Mucoactive agents are medications that promote mucus clearance and are frequently administered in patients with ARF, despite a lack of evidence to underpin clinical decision making. The aim of this systematic review was to determine if the use of mucoactive agents in patients with ARF improves clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched electronic and grey literature (January 2020). Two reviewers independently screened, selected, extracted data and quality assessed studies. We included trials of adults receiving ventilatory support for ARF and involving at least one mucoactive agent compared with placebo or standard care. Outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation. Meta-analysis was undertaken using random-effects modelling and certainty of the evidence was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. RESULTS: Thirteen randomised controlled trials were included (1712 patients), investigating four different mucoactive agents. Mucoactive agents showed no effect on duration of mechanical ventilation (seven trials, mean difference (MD) -1.34, 95% CI -2.97 to 0.29, I2=82%, very low certainty) or mortality, hospital stay and ventilator-free days. There was an effect on reducing ICU length of stay in the mucoactive agent groups (10 trials, MD -3.22, 95% CI -5.49 to -0.96, I2=89%, very low certainty). CONCLUSION: Our findings do not support the use of mucoactive agents in critically ill patients with ARF. The existing evidence is of low quality. High-quality randomised controlled trials are needed to determine the role of specific mucoactive agents in critically ill patients with ARF. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018095408.
Assuntos
Cuidados Críticos , Expectorantes/uso terapêutico , Respiração Artificial , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Doença Aguda , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) affects a large proportion of the critically ill and is associated with worse patient outcomes. Early identification of AKI can lead to earlier initiation of supportive therapy and better management. In this study, we evaluate the impact of computerized AKI decision support tool integrated with the critical care clinical information system (CCIS) on patient outcomes. Specifically, we hypothesize that integration of AKI guidelines into CCIS will decrease the proportion of patients with Stage 1 AKI deteriorating into higher stages of AKI. METHODS: The study was conducted in two intensive care units (ICUs) at University Hospitals Bristol, UK, in a before (control) and after (intervention) format. The intervention consisted of the AKIN guidelines and AKI care bundle which included guidance for medication usage, AKI advisory and dashboard with AKI score. Clinical data and patient outcomes were collected from all patients admitted to the units. AKI stage was calculated using the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) guidelines. Maximum AKI stage per admission, change in AKI stage and other metrics were calculated for the cohort. Adherence to eGFR-based enoxaparin dosing guidelines was evaluated as a proxy for clinician awareness of AKI. RESULTS: Each phase of the study lasted a year, and a total of 5044 admissions were included for analysis with equal numbers of patients for the control and intervention stages. The proportion of patients worsening from Stage 1 AKI decreased from 42% (control) to 33.5% (intervention), p = 0.002. The proportion of incorrect enoxaparin doses decreased from 1.72% (control) to 0.6% (intervention), p < 0.001. The prevalence of any AKI decreased from 43.1% (control) to 37.5% (intervention), p < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study demonstrated a significant reduction in AKI progression from Stage 1 and a reduction in overall development of AKI. In addition, a reduction in incorrect enoxaparin dosing was also observed, indicating increased clinical awareness. This study demonstrates that AKI guidelines coupled with a newly designed AKI care bundle integrated into CCIS can impact patient outcomes positively.
Assuntos
Injúria Renal Aguda/terapia , Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas/normas , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/normas , Injúria Renal Aguda/epidemiologia , Injúria Renal Aguda/fisiopatologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Coortes , Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas/instrumentação , Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas/estatística & dados numéricos , Progressão da Doença , Feminino , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/organização & administração , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Informática Médica/instrumentação , Informática Médica/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prevalência , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Reino Unido/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure is one of the most common indications for admission to intensive care units (ICUs). Airway mucus clearance is impaired in these patients medication, impaired mucociliary motility, increased mucus production etc. and mucoactive agents have the potential to improve outcomes. However, studies to date have provided inconclusive results. Despite this uncertainty, mucoactives are used in adult ICUs, although the extent of use and perceptions about place in therapy are not known. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: We aim to describe the use of mucoactive agents in mechanically ventilated patients in UK adult critical care units. Specifically, our objectives are to describe clinicians perceptions about the use of mucoactive agents, understand the indications and anticipated benefits, and describe the prevalence and type of mucoactive agents in use. METHODS: We conducted three surveys. Firstly, a practitioner-level survey aimed at nurses, physiotherapists and doctors to elucidate individual practitioners perceptions about the use of mucoactive agents. Secondly, a critical care unit-level survey aimed at pharmacists to understand how these perceptions translate into practice. Thirdly, a point prevalence survey to describe the extent of prescribing and range of products in use. The practitioner-level survey was disseminated through the UK Intensive Care Society for completion by a multi-professional membership. The unit-level and point prevalence surveys were disseminated cthrough the UK Clinical Pharmacy Association for completion by pharmacists. RESULTS: The individual practitioners survey ranked 'thick secretions' as the main reason for commencing mucoactive agents determined using clinical assessment. The highest ranked perceived benefit for patient centred outcomes was the duration of ventilation. Of these respondents, 79% stated that further research was important and 87% expressed support for a clinical trial. The unit-level survey found that mucoactive agents were used in 83% of units. The most highly ranked indication was again 'thick secretions' and the most highly ranked expected patient centred clinical benefit being improved gas exchange and reduced ventilation time. Only five critical care units provided guidelines to direct the use of mucoactive agents (4%). In the point prevalence survey, 411/993 (41%) of mechanically ventilated patients received at least one mucoactive agent. The most commonly administered mucoactives were inhaled sodium chloride 0.9% (235/993, 24%), systemic carbocisteine (161/993, 16%) and inhaled hypertonic sodium cloride (127/993, 13%). CONCLUSIONS: Mucoactive agents are used extensively in mechanically ventilated adult patients in UK ICUs to manage 'thick secretions', with a key aim to reduce the duration of ventilation. There is widespread support for clinical trials to determine the optimal use of mucoactive agent therapy in this patient population.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To explore and describe current UK physiotherapy practice relating to airway clearance techniques and mucoactive agents in critically ill adult patients with acute respiratory failure in the intensive care unit. DESIGN: A descriptive, qualitative study using focus group interviews. Focus groups were audio-recorded, independently transcribed, and data analysed thematically. Participants Senior, experienced physiotherapists, clinically active in critical care. RESULTS: Fifteen physiotherapists participated in four interview sessions. Five themes emerged describing airway clearance techniques: 'Repertoire of airway clearance techniques', 'Staffing and skillset', 'Commencing respiratory physiotherapy', 'Technique selection', and 'Determining effectiveness' were themes related to airway clearance techniques. Five themes were also identified in relation to mucoactive agents: 'Use in clinical practice', 'Decision to commence', 'Selection of agent', 'Stopping mucoactive agents', and 'Determining effectiveness'. A summary of key features of standard practice was developed. CONCLUSIONS: Standard UK physiotherapy practice of airway clearance techniques is variable, but patient-centred and targeted to individual need, with adjunctive use of mucoactive agents to enhance and optimise patient management if required. Based on this study, key features of airway clearance techniques have been summarised to help capture standard care, which could be used in future trials involving ACT as part of usual care.
Assuntos
Carbocisteína/uso terapêutico , Estado Terminal/reabilitação , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , Insuficiência Respiratória/tratamento farmacológico , Insuficiência Respiratória/reabilitação , Terapia Respiratória/métodos , Adulto , Terapia Combinada , Expectorantes/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Reino UnidoRESUMO
A modified skills training component of dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) was implemented in a group therapy format for non-suicidal outpatient young adolescents who met criteria for oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). Thirty-two youths completed the 16-week program, as well as pre- and post-treatment measures. The treatment was effective not only in decreasing negative behaviors, but also in increasing positive behaviors, per caregiver report. The youths reported a significant reduction in externalizing and internalizing symptoms and in depression. Reliable change indices indicated that far more participants were in the improved category than in the deteriorated category on the measures of interest. Despite the absence of control groups but consistent with the treatment outcome research literature for DBT-based treatments for other disorders, this study demonstrated that DBT skills training is feasible and shows promise in improving the behavior of ODD young adolescents.
Assuntos
Transtornos de Deficit da Atenção e do Comportamento Disruptivo/terapia , Terapia Comportamental/métodos , Psicoterapia de Grupo/métodos , Reabilitação Vocacional , Adolescente , Psiquiatria do Adolescente , Transtornos de Deficit da Atenção e do Comportamento Disruptivo/psicologia , Cuidadores , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Determinação da Personalidade , Escalas de Graduação Psiquiátrica , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To identify reasons for poor adherence to antibiotic intravenous-to-oral switch guidelines and to explore the possible solutions. To rate the importance of the barriers and solutions identified, as perceived by a multidisciplinary expert panel. METHODS: Three-round Delphi study in an expert panel comprising doctors, nurses and pharmacists, with concurrent semi-structured interviews. KEY FINDINGS: The three rounds of the Delphi were completed by 13 out of the 30 healthcare professionals invited to participate. No nurses were included in the final round. Consensus was achieved for 28 out of 35 statements, with the most important barrier being that of inappropriate antibiotic review at the weekend, and the most important solution being to raise guideline awareness. The findings from the seven interviews (three doctors, two pharmacists and two nurses) complemented those from the Delphi study, although they provided more specific suggestions on how to improve the adherence to guidelines. CONCLUSION: This study, using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, has identified several barriers to explore further and offered many practical solutions to improve practice. The importance of a multidisciplinary approach to address guideline non-adherence was emphasised. Clinical guidelines must be well publicised and well written to prevent a feeling of guideline saturation in the healthcare populous. Novel approaches may have to be investigated in order to further encourage adherence with antibiotic intravenous-to-oral switch guidelines.