RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between noninvasive ventilation (NIV) compared with invasive ventilation and mortality in subjects with severe acute respiratory infection. METHODS: This was a retrospective multi-center study of subjects with severe acute respiratory infection treated with ventilatory support between September 2012 and June 2018. We compared the 90-d mortality of subjects managed initially with NIV (NIV group) with those managed with invasive ventilation only (invasive ventilation group), adjusting by propensity score. RESULTS: Of 383 subjects, 189 (49%) were in the NIV group and 194 (51%) were in the invasive ventilation group. Of the subjects initially treated with NIV, 117 (62%) were eventually intubated. Crude 90-d mortality was lower in the NIV group versus the invasive ventilation group (42 [22.2%] vs 77 [39.7%]; P < .001). After propensity score adjustment, NIV was associated with lower 90-d mortality than invasive ventilation (odds ratio 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.76; P < .001). The association of NIV with mortality compared with invasive ventilation was not different across the studied subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In subjects with severe acute respiratory infection and acute respiratory failure, NIV was commonly used. NIV was associated with a lower 90-d mortality. The observed high failure rate suggests the need for further research to optimize patient selection and facilitate early recognition of NIV failure.
Assuntos
Estado Terminal , Ventilação não Invasiva , Pontuação de Propensão , Insuficiência Respiratória , Infecções Respiratórias , Humanos , Ventilação não Invasiva/métodos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infecções Respiratórias/terapia , Infecções Respiratórias/mortalidade , Infecções Respiratórias/complicações , Idoso , Estado Terminal/terapia , Estado Terminal/mortalidade , Doença Aguda , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Insuficiência Respiratória/mortalidade , Respiração Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , Respiração Artificial/métodos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Índice de Gravidade de DoençaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The optimal amount and timing of protein intake in critically ill patients are unknown. REPLENISH (Replacing Protein via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial evaluates whether supplemental enteral protein added to standard enteral nutrition to achieve a high amount of enteral protein given from ICU day five until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve a moderate amount of enteral protein would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized trial, critically ill patients will be randomized to receive supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition to achieve a high amount of enteral protein (range of 2-2.4 g/kg/day) or no supplemental enteral protein to achieve a moderate amount of enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day). The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality; other outcomes include functional and health-related quality-of-life assessments at 90 days. The study sample size of 2502 patients will have 80% power to detect a 5% absolute risk reduction in 90-day mortality from 30 to 25%. Consistent with international guidelines, this statistical analysis plan specifies the methods for evaluating primary and secondary outcomes and subgroups. Applying this statistical analysis plan to the REPLENISH trial will facilitate unbiased analyses of clinical data. CONCLUSION: Ethics approval was obtained from the institutional review board, Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (RC19/414/R). Approvals were also obtained from the institutional review boards of each participating institution. Our findings will be disseminated in an international peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences and meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.
Assuntos
Estado Terminal , Proteínas Alimentares , Nutrição Enteral , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Humanos , Nutrição Enteral/métodos , Proteínas Alimentares/administração & dosagem , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do Tratamento , Respiração Artificial , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Background Multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB) present a significant and escalating hazard to healthcare globally. Context-specific interventions have been implemented for the prevention and control of MDR-GNB in several healthcare facilities. The objective of this study was to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of evidence-based interventions in the incidence and dissemination of MDR-GNB. Methods This was a pre-and post-intervention study conducted in three phases at King Abdulaziz Medical City Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. During Phase-1, the data on each of the four MDR-GNB (Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Escherichia coli) were collected prospectively. Genomic fingerprinting was performed on isolates using enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-polymerase chain reaction (ERIC-PCR) to determine clonality and establish a link between different strains within and between the hospital wards/units. In the second phase, targeted interventions were implemented in the adult intensive care unit (ICU) based on previously determined risk factors and included the education of healthcare workers on hand hygiene, disinfection of patients' surrounding, daily chlorhexidine baths, and disinfection rooms on discharge with hydrogen peroxide fogging after MDR-GNB patients were discharged. An antibiotic restriction protocol was simultaneously implemented as part of the hospital antibiotic stewardship program. In the third phase, the effectiveness of the interventions was evaluated by comparing the incidence rate and clonality (using ERIC-PCR genetic fingerprints) of MDR-GNB before and after the intervention. Results A significant reduction of MDR-GNB was observed in Phase-2 and Phase-3 compared with Phase-1. The mean incidence rate of MDR-GNB per 1000 patient days in Phase-1 (pre-intervention) was 11.08/1000, followed by 6.07 and 3.54/1000 in Phase-2 and Phase-3, respectively. A statistically significant reduction was observed in the incidence rate of MDR-GNB in the adult ICU (P=0.007), whereas no statistically significant decrease (P=0.419) was observed in areas other than the adult ICU. Two A. baumannii strains appear to be circulating within the ICU environment with reduced frequency in Phase-2 and Phase-3 compared to Phase-1. Conclusion There was a significant reduction in the incidence of MDR-GNB in the adult ICU due to the successful implementation of both infection control and stewardship interventions, albeit challenging to ascertain the relative contribution of each.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Protein intake is recommended in critically ill patients to mitigate the negative effects of critical illness-induced catabolism and muscle wasting. However, the optimal dose of enteral protein remains unknown. We hypothesize that supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition formula to achieve high amount of enteral protein (range 2-2.4 g/kg/day) given from ICU day 5 until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve moderate amount enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day) would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: The REPLENISH (Replacing Protein Via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial is an open-label, multicenter randomized clinical trial. Patients will be randomized to the supplemental protein group or the control group. Patients in both groups will receive the primary enteral formula as per the treating team, which includes a maximum protein 1.2 g/kg/day. The supplemental protein group will receive, in addition, supplemental protein at 1.2 g/kg/day starting the fifth ICU day. The control group will receive the primary formula without supplemental protein. The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Other outcomes include functional and quality of life assessments at 90 days. The trial will enroll 2502 patients. DISCUSSION: The study has been initiated in September 2021. Interim analysis is planned at one third and two thirds of the target sample size. The study is expected to be completed by the end of 2025. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.
Assuntos
Estado Terminal , Qualidade de Vida , Adulto , Humanos , Estado Terminal/terapia , Nutrição Enteral/efeitos adversos , Nutrição Enteral/métodos , Tempo , Tamanho da Amostra , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Estudos Multicêntricos como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study assessed the mobility levels among critically ill patients and the association of early mobility with incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the multicenter PREVENT trial, which evaluated adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h and found no effect on the primary outcome of incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis. Mobility levels were documented daily up to day 28 in the ICU using a tool with an 8-point ordinal scale. We categorized patients according to mobility levels within the first 3 ICU days into three groups: early mobility level 4-7 (at least active standing), 1-3 (passive transfer from bed to chair or active sitting), and 0 (passive range of motion). We evaluated the association of early mobility and incident lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality by Cox proportional models adjusting for randomization and other co-variables. RESULTS: Of 1708 patients, only 85 (5.0%) had early mobility level 4-7 and 356 (20.8%) level 1-3, while 1267 (74.2%) had early mobility level 0. Patients with early mobility levels 4-7 and 1-3 had less illness severity, femoral central venous catheters, and organ support compared to patients with mobility level 0. Incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 1/85 (1.3%) patients in the early mobility 4-7 group, 7/348 (2.0%) patients in mobility 1-3 group, and 50/1230 (4.1%) patients in mobility 0 group. Compared with early mobility group 0, mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 were not associated with differences in incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 8.90; p = 0.87 and 0.91, 95% CI 0.39, 2.12; p = 0.83, respectively). However, early mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 had lower 90-day mortality (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 1.01; p = 0.052, and 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62; p < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Only a small proportion of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were mobilized early. Early mobility was associated with reduced mortality, but not with different incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. This association does not establish causality, and randomized controlled trials are required to assess whether and to what extent this association is modifiable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).
Assuntos
Cateteres Venosos Centrais , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Anticoagulantes , Estado Terminal , IncidênciaRESUMO
This prospective quasi-experimental study from the NASAM (National Approach to Standardize and Improve Mechanical Ventilation) collaborative assessed the impact of evidence-based practices including subglottic suctioning, daily assessment for spontaneous awakening trial (SAT), spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), head of bed elevation, and avoidance of neuromuscular blockers unless otherwise indicated. The study outcomes included VAE (primary) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Changes in daily care process measures and outcomes were evaluated using repeated measures mixed modeling. The results were reported as incident rate ratio (IRR) for each additional month with 95% confidence interval (CI). A comprehensive program that included education on evidence-based practices for optimal care of mechanically ventilated patients with real-time benchmarking of daily care process measures to drive improvement in forty-two ICUs from 26 hospitals in Saudi Arabia (>27,000 days of observation). Compliance with subglottic suctioning, SAT and SBT increased monthly during the project by 3.5%, 2.1% and 1.9%, respectively (IRR 1.035, 95%CI 1.007-1.064, p = 0.0148; 1.021, 95% CI 1.010-1.032, p = 0.0003; and 1.019, 95%CI 1.009-1.029, p = 0.0001, respectively). The use of neuromuscular blockers decreased monthly by 2.5% (IRR 0.975, 95%CI 0.953-0.998, p = 0.0341). The compliance with head of bed elevation was high at baseline and did not change over time. Based on data for 83153 ventilator days, VAE rate was 15.2/1000 ventilator day (95%CI 12.6-18.1) at baseline and did not change during the project (IRR 1.019, 95%CI 0.985-1.053, p = 0.2812). Based on data for 8523 patients; the mortality was 30.4% (95%CI 27.4-33.6) at baseline, and decreased monthly during the project by 1.6% (IRR 0.984, 95%CI 0.973-0.996, p = 0.0067). A national quality improvement collaborative was associated with improvements in daily care processes. These changes were associated with a reduction in mortality but not VAEs. Registration The study is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03790150).
Assuntos
Respiração Artificial , Desmame do Respirador , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Estudos Prospectivos , Respiração Artificial/métodos , Desmame do Respirador/métodos , Ventiladores MecânicosRESUMO
There are contradictory data regarding the effect of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) on the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and heart failure (HF) decompensation in critically ill patients. This study evaluated the effect of adjunctive use of IPC on the rate of incident DVT and ventilation-free days among critically ill patients with HF. In this pre-specified secondary analysis of the PREVENT trial (N = 2003), we compared the effect of adjunctive IPC added to pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (IPC group), with pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone (control group) in critically ill patients with HF. The presence of HF was determined by the treating teams according to local practices. Patients were stratified according to preserved (≥ 40%) versus reduced (< 40%) left ventricular ejection fraction, and by the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification. The primary outcome was incident proximal lower-limb DVT, determined with twice weekly venous Doppler ultrasonography. As a co-primary outcome, we evaluated ventilation-free days as a surrogate for clinically important HF decompensation. Among 275 patients with HF, 18 (6.5%) patients had prevalent proximal lower-limb DVT (detected on trial day 1 to 3). Of 257 patients with no prevalent DVT, 11/125 (8.8%) patients in the IPC group developed incident proximal lower-limb DVT compared to 6/132 (4.5%) patients in the control group (relative risk, 1.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-5.08, p = 0.17). There was no significant difference in ventilator-free days between the IPC and control groups (median 21 days versus 25 days respectively, p = 0.17). The incidence of DVT with IPC versus control was not different across NYHA classes (p value for interaction = 0.18), nor across patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction (p value for interaction = 0.15). Ventilator-free days with IPC versus control were also not different across NYHA classes nor across patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction. In conclsuion, the use of adjunctive IPC compared with control was associated with similar rate of incident proximal lower-limb DVT and ventilator-free days in critically ill patients with HF.Trial registration: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02040103 ) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).
Assuntos
Insuficiência Cardíaca , Tromboembolia Venosa , Trombose Venosa , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Estado Terminal/terapia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Humanos , Dispositivos de Compressão Pneumática Intermitente , Volume Sistólico , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiologia , Trombose Venosa/tratamento farmacológico , Trombose Venosa/prevenção & controle , Função Ventricular EsquerdaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Antibiotic-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii is a continuously-emerging worldwide health crisis, with mortality rates approaching 50% in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate regional, patient-related, and organism-related predictors of survival among critically-ill patients with confirmed Acinetobacter infection. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted within ten ICUs across six geographically- and climatologically-distinct cities across Saudi Arabia over 13 months. RESULTS: Of 169 patients with confirmed Acinetobacter infection enrolled in the study, 80 (47.6%) died. Survivors were statistically younger, predominantly male, more likely to be admitted for trauma, less likely to have hypertension, diabetes, or have undergone hemodialysis, and more likely to have been treated with antibiotics prior to having a positive culture for Acinetobacter, but less likely to have received an aminoglycoside. Survivors also had lower baseline APACHE II and SOFA scores and were infected with stains of Acinetobacter that had less meropenem- or colistin-resistance. Multivariate analysis identified the following independent predictors of survival: younger age, lower ICU-day#1 APACHE-II and ICU-day#3 SOFA scores, being admitted for trauma, and having no history of hemodialysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-related factors outweigh regional and hospital-related factors as predictors of survival among critically-ill patients with Acinetobacter infection.
Assuntos
Infecções por Acinetobacter , Acinetobacter baumannii , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Estudos de Coortes , Arábia Saudita/epidemiologia , Infecções por Acinetobacter/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Acinetobacter/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Estado Terminal , Cidades , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Importance: The efficacy and safety of prone positioning is unclear in nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of prone positioning in nonintubated adult patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, unblinded randomized clinical trial conducted at 21 hospitals in Canada, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the US. Eligible adult patients with COVID-19 were not intubated and required oxygen (≥40%) or noninvasive ventilation. A total of 400 patients were enrolled between May 19, 2020, and May 18, 2021, and final follow-up was completed in July 2021. Intervention: Patients were randomized to awake prone positioning (n = 205) or usual care without prone positioning (control; n = 195). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation within 30 days of randomization. The secondary outcomes included mortality at 60 days, days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days, days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days, adverse events, and serious adverse events. Results: Among the 400 patients who were randomized (mean age, 57.6 years [SD, 12.83 years]; 117 [29.3%] were women), all (100%) completed the trial. In the first 4 days after randomization, the median duration of prone positioning was 4.8 h/d (IQR, 1.8 to 8.0 h/d) in the awake prone positioning group vs 0 h/d (IQR, 0 to 0 h/d) in the control group. By day 30, 70 of 205 patients (34.1%) in the prone positioning group were intubated vs 79 of 195 patients (40.5%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12], P = .20; absolute difference, -6.37% [95% CI, -15.83% to 3.10%]). Prone positioning did not significantly reduce mortality at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.40], P = .54; absolute difference, -1.15% [95% CI, -9.40% to 7.10%]) and had no significant effect on days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days or on days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days. There were no serious adverse events in either group. In the awake prone positioning group, 21 patients (10%) experienced adverse events and the most frequently reported were musculoskeletal pain or discomfort from prone positioning (13 of 205 patients [6.34%]) and desaturation (2 of 205 patients [0.98%]). There were no reported adverse events in the control group. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19, prone positioning, compared with usual care without prone positioning, did not significantly reduce endotracheal intubation at 30 days. However, the effect size for the primary study outcome was imprecise and does not exclude a clinically important benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04350723.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Intubação Intratraqueal , Decúbito Ventral , Insuficiência Respiratória , Vigília , Adulto , Idoso , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Hipóxia/etiologia , Hipóxia/terapia , Intubação Intratraqueal/métodos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Respiração Artificial/métodos , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/etiologia , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/terapia , Insuficiência Respiratória/etiologia , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The rapid increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases during the subsequent waves in Saudi Arabia and other countries prompted the Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) to put together a panel of experts to issue evidence-based recommendations for the management of COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: The SCCS COVID-19 panel included 51 experts with expertise in critical care, respirology, infectious disease, epidemiology, emergency medicine, clinical pharmacy, nursing, respiratory therapy, methodology, and health policy. All members completed an electronic conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel addressed 9 questions that are related to the therapy of COVID-19 in the ICU. We identified relevant systematic reviews and clinical trials, then used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach as well as the evidence-to-decision framework (EtD) to assess the quality of evidence and generate recommendations. RESULTS: The SCCS COVID-19 panel issued 12 recommendations on pharmacotherapeutic interventions (immunomodulators, antiviral agents, and anticoagulants) for severe and critical COVID-19, of which 3 were strong recommendations and 9 were weak recommendations. CONCLUSION: The SCCS COVID-19 panel used the GRADE approach to formulate recommendations on therapy for COVID-19 in the ICU. The EtD framework allows adaptation of these recommendations in different contexts. The SCCS guideline committee will update recommendations as new evidence becomes available.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Cuidados Críticos , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , SARS-CoV-2 , Arábia SauditaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of screening for sepsis using an electronic sepsis alert vs. no alert in hospitalized ward patients on 90-day in-hospital mortality. METHODS: The SCREEN trial is designed as a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. Hospital wards (total of 45 wards, constituting clusters in this design) are randomized to have active alert vs. masked alert, 5 wards at a time, with each 5 wards constituting a sequence. The study consists of ten 2-month periods with a phased introduction of the intervention. In the first period, all wards have a masked alert for 2 months. Afterwards the intervention (alert system) is implemented in a new sequence every 2-month period until the intervention is implemented in all sequences. The intervention includes the implementation of an electronic alert system developed in the hospital electronic medical records based on the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA). The alert system sends notifications of "possible sepsis alert" to the bedside nurse, charge nurse, and primary medical team and requires an acknowledgment in the health information system from the bedside nurse and physician. The calculated sample size is 65,250. The primary endpoint is in-hospital mortality by 90 days. DISCUSSION: The trial started on October 1, 2019, and is expected to complete patient follow-up by the end of October 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04078594 . Registered on September 6, 2019.
Assuntos
Hospitais , Sepse , Eletrônica , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Pacientes , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Sepse/diagnóstico , Sepse/terapiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Acinetobacter is an increasingly-problematic organism, especially in intensive care units (ICUs). In this study, we compared its incidence, outcomes, and predictors spanning eight ICUs in five geographically and climatologically-diverse cities in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Geographic, climatologic, hospital-related, and patient-related factors were collected prospectively on 3179 patients admitted to eight Saudi ICUs from June 2018 through June 2019. These data then underwent both bivariable and multivariable analysis, the latter vis hierarchical logistic regression to identify predictors of clinically-manifest Acinetobacter infection. RESULTS: Overall incidence of Acinetobacter infection was 3.9% (n = 124). Of these 124 infections, 122 (98.4%) were cultured as A. baumannii. Incidence ranged from 1.0 to 7.9% across the eight ICUs. On bivariable analysis, incident Acinetobacter infection was more common in university and military hospitals, in hospitals with more total beds and ICU isolation rooms, and in 2018 versus 2019, incidence steadily declining over the 13 study months. Mechanically-ventilated patients had ten-fold increased odds of infection. Adjusted (multivariable) analysis revealed the risk of clinically-manifest Acinetobacter infection to increase the longer patients were on mechanical ventilation. Increased risk also existed at certain hospitals over others, especially in university-affiliated and military hospitals, larger hospitals with more isolation rooms, and hospitals with fewer ICU beds. CONCLUSION: In our study of eight ICUs across Saudi Arabia, inter-hospital differences did appear to account for inter-hospital differences in Acinetobacter incidence rates. Patients requiring mechanical ventilation for longer periods of time were particularly at risk.
Assuntos
Infecções por Acinetobacter , Acinetobacter baumannii , Infecção Hospitalar , Infecções por Acinetobacter/epidemiologia , Cuidados Críticos , Infecção Hospitalar/epidemiologia , Humanos , Incidência , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Fatores de Risco , Arábia Saudita/epidemiologiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) delivered by helmet has been used for respiratory support of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this study was to compare helmet NIV with usual care versus usual care alone to reduce mortality. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel randomised controlled trial that compares helmet NIV with usual care to usual care alone in a 1:1 ratio. A total of 320 patients will be enrolled in this study. The primary outcome is 28-day all-cause mortality. The primary outcome will be compared between the two study groups in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol cohorts. An interim analysis will be conducted for both safety and effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approvals are obtained from the institutional review boards of each participating institution. Our findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences and meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04477668.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Ventilação não Invasiva , Insuficiência Respiratória , Dispositivos de Proteção da Cabeça , Humanos , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal amount of protein intake in critically ill patients is unclear. The objective of this pilot trial is to assess the feasibility of a large randomized controlled trial testing higher versus lower protein intake in critically ill patients. METHODS: In this pilot randomized controlled trial (REPLacing Protein via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise ApproacH in critically ill patients: A pilot randomized controlled trial (REPLENISH pilot trial), critically ill patients underwent 2-step screening for eligibility on ICU day 1 and 5. Patients with renal disease were excluded. Eligible patients were randomized into REPLENISH group (target protein 1.8-2.2 g kg/day) and Standard group (target protein 0.8-1.0 g/kg/day) from day 6-14 after ICU admission. Dietitians adjusted caloric and protein intake throughout the study period (Day 1-14) to maintain similar caloric targets of permissive underfeeding (40-60% of estimated energy expenditure) in both study groups. RESULTS: Of 704 patients screened at 3 centers in Saudi Arabia from May 2018 to May 2019, only 63 (8.9%) were eligible and 40 (5.7% of screened) were randomized with an average of 2 patients enrolled in the trial per month. Among eligible patients, the consenting rate was high at 89%. During the intervention period, patients in the REPLENISH group (N = 21) had a modestly higher protein intake (median of 1.30 g/kg/day (Q1 Q3: 1.11, 1.57)) than those in the standard group (median of 0.77 g/kg/day (Q1 Q3: 0.57, 1.00); P = 0.0004). Only 31.4% of patients in the whole cohort had >80% of prescribed protein. The duration of daily interruption of feeding was almost 4 h in both groups. The 90-day mortality for the patient study cohort was 20.5%. Anthropometric and muscle strength measurements were performed in less than 50% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial highlighted several areas for improvement in the study protocol before launching a large randomized controlled trial. The restrictive eligibility criteria, the complex adjustments of protein and energy and some of the outcome measurements were identified as targets for modifications, to improve enrollment and generalizability and to enhance adherence to study interventions and measurements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03480555.
Assuntos
Estado Terminal , Nutrição Enteral , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Tempo de Internação , Projetos PilotoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a risk factor for infection with coronaviruses. This study describes the demographic, clinical data, and outcomes of critically ill patients with diabetes and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia (September 2012-January 2018). We compared the demographic characteristics, underlying medical conditions, presenting symptoms and signs, management and clinical course, and outcomes of critically ill patients with MERS who had diabetes compared to those with no diabetes. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine if diabetes was an independent predictor of 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Of the 350 critically ill patients with MERS, 171 (48.9%) had diabetes. Patients with diabetes were more likely to be older, and have comorbid conditions, compared to patients with no diabetes. They were more likely to present with respiratory failure requiring intubation, vasopressors, and corticosteroids. The median time to clearance of MERS-CoV RNA was similar (23 days (Q1, Q3: 17, 36) in patients with diabetes and 21.0 days (Q1, Q3: 10, 33) in patients with no diabetes). Mortality at 90 days was higher in patients with diabetes (78.9% versus 54.7%, p < 0.0001). Multivariable regression analysis showed that diabetes was an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-3.72). CONCLUSIONS: Half of the critically ill patients with MERS have diabetes; which is associated with more severe disease. Diabetes is an independent predictor of mortality among critically patients with MERS.
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Complicações do Diabetes/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Corticosteroides , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Líquido da Lavagem Broncoalveolar/virologia , Estudos de Coortes , Comorbidade , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/mortalidade , Estado Terminal , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Coronavírus da Síndrome Respiratória do Oriente Médio/genética , Coronavírus da Síndrome Respiratória do Oriente Médio/isolamento & purificação , Nasofaringe/virologia , Insuficiência Respiratória/etiologia , Insuficiência Respiratória/mortalidade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Arábia Saudita/epidemiologia , Escarro/virologia , Traqueia/virologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Whether combined treatment with recombinant interferon beta-1b and lopinavir-ritonavir reduces mortality among patients hospitalized with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, adaptive, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled patients at nine sites in Saudi Arabia. Hospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed MERS were randomly assigned to receive recombinant interferon beta-1b plus lopinavir-ritonavir (intervention) or placebo for 14 days. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality, with a one-sided P-value threshold of 0.025. Prespecified subgroup analyses and safety analyses were conducted. Because of the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019, the data and safety monitoring board requested an unplanned interim analysis and subsequently recommended the termination of enrollment and the reporting of the results. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were enrolled; 43 patients were assigned to the intervention group and 52 to the placebo group. A total of 12 patients (28%) in the intervention group and 23 (44%) in the placebo group died by day 90. The analysis of the primary outcome, with accounting for the adaptive design, yielded a risk difference of -19 percentage points (upper boundary of the 97.5% confidence interval [CI], -3; one-sided P = 0.024). In a prespecified subgroup analysis, treatment within 7 days after symptom onset led to lower 90-day mortality than use of placebo (relative risk, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.75), whereas later treatment did not. Serious adverse events occurred in 4 patients (9%) in the intervention group and in 10 (19%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of recombinant interferon beta-1b and lopinavir-ritonavir led to lower mortality than placebo among patients who had been hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed MERS. The effect was greatest when treatment was started within 7 days after symptom onset. (Funded by the King Abdullah International Medical Research Center; MIRACLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02845843.).
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Interferon beta-1b/uso terapêutico , Lopinavir/uso terapêutico , Ritonavir/uso terapêutico , Administração Oral , Adulto , Idoso , Infecções por Coronavirus/mortalidade , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Hospitalização , Humanos , Injeções Subcutâneas , Interferon beta-1b/efeitos adversos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Lopinavir/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ritonavir/efeitos adversos , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Tempo para o TratamentoRESUMO
PURPOSE: We examined the association between surveillance for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) among medical-surgical critically ill patients by twice-weekly ultrasonography and 90-day all-cause mortality. METHODS: This was a pre-planned sub-study of the Pneumatic Compression for Preventing Venous Thromboembolism (PREVENT) trial (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02040103) that compared addition of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) to pharmacologic prophylaxis versus pharmacologic prophylaxis alone. The surveillance group included enrolled patients in the trial, while the non-surveillance group included eligible non-enrolled patients. Using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models, we examined the association of surveillance with the primary outcome of 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were DVT and pulmonary embolism (PE). RESULTS: The surveillance group consisted of 1682 patients and the non-surveillance group included 383 patients. Using Cox proportional hazards model with bootstrapping, surveillance was associated with a decrease in 90-day mortality (adjusted HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.57, 0.98). Surveillance was associated with earlier diagnosis of DVT [(median 4 days (IQR 2, 10) vs. 20 days (IQR 16, 22)] and PE [median 4 days (IQR 2.5, 5) vs. 7.5 days (IQR 6.1, 28.9)]. There was an increase in diagnosis of DVT (adjusted HR 5.49; 95% CI 2.92, 13.02) with no change in frequency in diagnosis of PE (adjusted HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.19, 1.91). CONCLUSIONS: Twice-weekly surveillance ultrasonography was associated with an increase in DVT detection, reduction in diagnostic testing for non-lower limb DVT and PE, earlier diagnosis of DVT and PE, and lower 90-day mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103. Registered on 3 November 2013; Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506. Registered on 30 October 2013.
Assuntos
Embolia Pulmonar , Tromboembolia Venosa , Trombose Venosa , Estado Terminal , Humanos , Ultrassonografia , Trombose Venosa/diagnóstico por imagem , Trombose Venosa/prevenção & controleRESUMO
The MIRACLE trial (MERS-CoV Infection tReated with A Combination of Lopinavir/ritonavir and intErferon-ß1b) investigates the efficacy of a combination therapy of lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant interferon-ß1b provided with standard supportive care, compared to placebo provided with standard supportive care, in hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS. The MIRACLE trial is designed as a recursive, two-stage, group sequential, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized controlled trial. The aim of this article is to describe the statistical analysis plan for the MIRACLE trial. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality. The primary analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle. The MIRACLE trial is the first randomized controlled trial for MERS treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02845843. Registered on 27 July 2016.
Assuntos
Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Interferon beta-1b/uso terapêutico , Lopinavir/uso terapêutico , Coronavírus da Síndrome Respiratória do Oriente Médio/efeitos dos fármacos , Ritonavir/uso terapêutico , Antivirais/efeitos adversos , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/mortalidade , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Interpretação Estatística de Dados , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Interações Hospedeiro-Patógeno , Humanos , Interferon beta-1b/efeitos adversos , Lopinavir/efeitos adversos , Coronavírus da Síndrome Respiratória do Oriente Médio/patogenicidade , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Ritonavir/efeitos adversos , Arábia Saudita , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of ribavirin and recombinant interferon (RBV/rIFN) therapy on the outcomes of critically ill patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), accounting for time-varying confounders. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS from 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia diagnosed between September 2012 and January 2018. We evaluated the association of RBV/rIFN with 90-day mortality and MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) RNA clearance using marginal structural modeling to account for baseline and time-varying confounders. RESULTS: Of 349 MERS patients, 144 (41.3%) patients received RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a; none received rIFN-ß1b). RBV/rIFN was initiated at a median of 2 days (Q1, Q3: 1, 3 days) from intensive care unit admission. Crude 90-day mortality was higher in patients with RBV/rIFN compared to no RBV/rIFN (106/144 [73.6%] vs 126/205 [61.5%]; P = .02]. After adjusting for baseline and time-varying confounders using a marginal structural model, RBV/rIFN was not associated with changes in 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .73-1.44]; P = .87) or with more rapid MERS-CoV RNA clearance (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, .30-1.44]; P = .29). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study, RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a) therapy was commonly used in critically ill MERS patients but was not associated with reduction in 90-day mortality or in faster MERS-CoV RNA clearance.
Assuntos
Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Infecções por Coronavirus/mortalidade , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Interferon alfa-2/uso terapêutico , Ribavirina/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Estado Terminal , Feminino , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Coronavírus da Síndrome Respiratória do Oriente Médio , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , RNA Viral/sangue , Estudos Retrospectivos , Arábia Saudita , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Data are lacking on impact of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among survivors. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of MERS survivors who required hospitalization in Saudi Arabia during 2016-2017, approximately 1 year after diagnosis. The Short-Form General Health Survey 36 (SF-36) was administered by telephone interview to assess 8 quality of life domains for MERS survivors and a sample of survivors of severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) without MERS. We compared mean SF-36 scores of MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors using independent t-test, and compared categorical variables using chi-square test. Adjusted analyses were performed using multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Of 355 MERS survivors, 83 were eligible and 78 agreed to participate. MERS survivors were younger than non-MERS SARI survivors (mean ± SD): (44.9 years ±12.9) vs (50.0 years ±13.6), p = 0.031. Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions were similar for MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors (46.2% vs. 57.1%), p = 0.20. After adjusting for potential confounders, there were no significant differences between MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors in physical component or mental component summary scores. MERS ICU survivors scored lower than MERS survivors not admitted to an ICU for physical function (p = 0.05), general health (p = 0.01), vitality (p = 0.03), emotional role (p = 0.03) and physical component summary (p < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Functional scores were similar for MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors. However, MERS survivors of critical illness reported lower quality of life than survivors of less severe illness. Efforts are needed to address the long-term medical and psychological needs of MERS survivors.