[Non-invasive Mechanical Ventilation in Acute Respiratory Failure. Clinical Practice Guidelines - on behalf of the German Society of Pneumology and Ventilatory Medicine]. / S2k-Leitlinie Nichtinvasive Beatmung als Therapie der akuten respiratorischen Insuffizienz.

The guideline update outlines the advantages as well as the limitations of NIV in the treatment of acute respiratory failure in daily clinical practice and in different indications.Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has a high value in therapy of hypercapnic acute respiratory failure, as it significantly reduces the length of ICU stay and hospitalization as well as mortality.Patients with cardiopulmonary edema and acute respiratory failure should be treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and oxygen in addition to necessary cardiological interventions. This should be done already prehospital and in the emergency department.In case of other forms of acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure with only mild or moderately disturbed gas exchange (PaO2/FiO2 > 150 mmHg) there is no significant advantage or disadvantage compared to high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO). In severe forms of ARDS NIV is associated with high rates of treatment failure and mortality, especially in cases with NIV-failure and delayed intubation.NIV should be used for preoxygenation before intubation. In patients at risk, NIV is recommended to reduce extubation failure. In the weaning process from invasive ventilation NIV essentially reduces the risk of reintubation in hypercapnic patients. NIV is regarded useful within palliative care for reduction of dyspnea and improving quality of life, but here in concurrence to HFNO, which is regarded as more comfortable. Meanwhile NIV is also recommended in prehospital setting, especially in hypercapnic respiratory failure and pulmonary edema.With appropriate monitoring in an intensive care unit NIV can also be successfully applied in pediatric patients with acute respiratory insufficiency.

Quality indicators in intensive care medicine for Germany - fourth edition 2022.

The measurement of quality indicators supports quality improvement initiatives. The German Interdisciplinary Society of Intensive Care Medicine (DIVI) has published quality indicators for intensive care medicine for the fourth time now. After a scheduled evaluation after three years, changes in several indicators were made. Other indicators were not changed or only minimally. The focus remained strongly on relevant treatment processes like management of analgesia and sedation, mechanical ventilation and weaning, and infections in the ICU. Another focus was communication inside the ICU. The number of 10 indicators remained the same. The development method was more structured and transparency was increased by adding new features like evidence levels or author contribution and potential conflicts of interest. These quality indicators should be used in the peer review in intensive care, a method endorsed by the DIVI. Other forms of measurement and evaluation are also reasonable, for example in quality management. This fourth edition of the quality indicators will be updated in the future to reflect the recently published recommendations on the structure of intensive care units by the DIVI.

[Children visiting intensive care units and emergency departments : Kids are welcome!] / Besuche von minderjährigen Angehörigen in der Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin : Kinder als Besucher willkommen!

In this white paper, key recommendations for visitation by children in intensive care units (ICU; both pediatric and adult), intermediate care units and emergency departments (ED) are presented. In ICUs and EDs in German-speaking countries, the visiting policies for children and adolescents are regulated very heterogeneously: sometimes they are allowed to visit patients without restrictions in age and time duration, sometimes this is only possible from the age of teenager on, and only for a short duration. A request from children to visit often triggers different, sometimes restrictive reactions among the staff. Management is encouraged to reflect on this attitude together with their employees and to develop a culture of family-centered care. Despite limited evidence, there are more advantages for than against a visit, also in hygienic, psychosocial, ethical, religious, and cultural aspects. No general recommendation can be made for or against visits. The decisions for a visit are complex and require careful consideration.

[Cross-sectional study of COVID-19 patients on working conditions and quality of care]. / Querschnittsstudie zu Arbeitsbedingungen und Versorgungsqualität in der Versorgung von COVID-19-Patienten.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic challenges hospital clinicians by additional burdens. Key questions are whether hospital clinicians have experienced more stress in the care of COVID-19 patients and whether patient safety and quality of care have changed. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using an online survey with clinicians in German hospitals on working conditions and quality of care during the COVID-19 pandemic, comparing clinicians with (MmK) vs. without direct contact (MoK) to COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: In total, 2122 clinicians participated. Most clinicians were physicians (15.4%, n = 301) or nurses (77.0%, n = 1505) working in major acute care hospitals (46.0%, n = 899). Every second respondent stated that they worked more than usual (46.4%, n = 907) and took on additional activities (47.7%, n = 932). A quarter of the participants did not receive any training or get instructions in devices (21.5%, n = 421). Only 51.5% (n = 1006) of the respondents were provided with sufficient personal protective equipment. More than 30% (32.7%, n = 639) were more satisfied than usual. The comparing clinicans with vs. without direkt contact to Covid-19 patients worked more shifts than usual (> 2 shifts: 24.1%, n = 306 vs. 13.7%, n = 63, p < 0.001) and without instruction (27.9%, n = 364 vs. 17.1%), n = 57, p < 0.001). In terms of patient safety, there were more deficiencies in the care, mechanical ventilation and nursing (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The cross-sectional study indicates an increased burden on clinicians and a restricted quality of care for patients with COVID-19. A risk to patients or clinicians cannot be excluded.

[Quality Assurance in Intensive Care Medicine: Peer Reviews and Quality Indicators]. / Qualitätssicherung in der Intensivmedizin: Peer Reviews und Qualitätsindikatoren.

Goal-oriented quality management in health care is an essential tool to provide good medical practice and treatment. It aims at a patient-centred case management with high transparency of structural and clinical process aspects, as well as patient outcome. An objective and comprehensive description of clinical care includes the use of quality indicators. However, the appliance of those indicators falls short, when the evaluation of quality is not followed by recommendations for improvement.As a highly specified area in health care provided in hospitals, intensive care medicine is characterized by complex interprofessional and multidisciplinary approaches. In addition, critical care units are an expensive resource. In order to provide an economic and yet high quality patient care, treatments should be evidence-based, and cost-drivers must be analysed for their effectiveness on patient-outcome.Various methods of quality assurance allow for a formative evaluation of intensive care units by peer reviews, including the use of quality indicators. This article focuses on peer review systems currently applied in German hospitals, and particularly describes quality indicators that have been established by DIVI (German Interdisciplinary Society of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine). It also addresses the need for a professional dialogue between equal partners. This has to accompany each peer review that aims at an improvement in quality of critical patient care.

Assessment of mobilization capacity in 10 different ICU scenarios by different professions.

BACKGROUND: Mobilization of intensive care patients is a multi-professional task. Aim of this study was to explore how different professions working at Intensive Care Units (ICU) estimate the mobility capacity using the ICU Mobility Score in 10 different scenarios. METHODS: Ten fictitious patient-scenarios and guideline-related knowledge were assessed using an online survey. Critical care team members in German-speaking countries were invited to participate. All datasets including professional data and at least one scenario were analyzed. Kruskal Wallis test was used for the individual scenarios, while a linear mixed-model was used over all responses. RESULTS: In total, 515 of 788 (65%) participants could be evaluated. Physicians (p = 0.001) and nurses (p = 0.002) selected a lower ICU Mobility Score (-0.7 95% CI -1.1 to -0.3 and -0.4 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2, respectively) than physical therapists, while other specialists did not (p = 0.81). Participants who classified themselves as experts or could define early mobilization in accordance to the "S2e guideline: positioning and early mobilisation in prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary disorders" correctly selected higher mobilization levels (0.2 95% CI 0.0 to 0.4, p = 0.049 and 0.3 95% CI 0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSION: Different professions scored the mobilization capacity of patients differently, with nurses and physicians estimating significantly lower capacity than physical therapists. The exact knowledge of guidelines and recommendations, such as the definition of early mobilization, independently lead to a higher score. Interprofessional education, interprofessional rounds and mobilization activities could further enhance knowledge and practice of mobilization in the critical care team.

[Anaesthesia-related Infection Prevention during Operations]. / Anästhesiebezogene Hygiene und Infektionsprävention bei Operationen.

The processes of anaesthesia during operations enable surgical disciplines to perform a wide range of procedures. However, anaesthesia procedure may also represent a potential risk of infection for the surgical patient. Important hygiene measures concern the following topics: hand hygiene, surface disinfection, administration of parenteral drugs, dealing with catheters, intubation, perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis, temperature management, change intervals, OR workflow organization. The selection of hygiene measures for anaesthesia staff in the operating theatre listed in this article is presented in the sequence of the work flow, whereby certain topics such as hand hygiene naturally play an important role in all work phases.

Caloric consumption during early mobilisation of mechanically ventilated patients in Intensive Care Units.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a) the magnitude of the increase in caloric consumption due to early mobilisation of patients with mechanical ventilation (MV) in Intensive Care Units (ICU) as part of routine care, b) whether there are differences in caloric consumption due to active or passive mobilisation, and c) whether early mobilisation in routine care would lead to additional nutritional requirements. DESIGN: Prospective, observational, multi-centre study. SETTING: Medical, surgical and neurological ICUs from three centres. PATIENTS: Patients on MV in ICU who were mobilised out of bed as part of routine care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Caloric consumption was assessed in 66 patients by indirect calorimetry at six time points: (1) lying in bed 5-10 min prior to mobilisation, (2) sitting on the edge of the bed, (3) standing beside the bed, (4) sitting in a chair, (5) lying in bed 5-10 min after mobilisation, and (6) 2 h after mobilisation. Differences in caloric consumption in every mobilisation level vs. the baseline of lying in bed were measured for 5 min and found to have increased significantly by: +0.4 (Standard Deviation (SD) 0.59) kcal while sitting on the edge of the bed, +1.5 (SD 1.26) kcal while standing in front of the bed, +0.7 (SD 0.63) kcal while sitting in a chair (all p < 0.001). Active vs. passive transfers showed a higher, but non-significant consumption. A typical sequence of mobilisation including sitting on edge of the bed, standing beside the bed, sitting in a chair (20 min) and transfer back into bed, would require an additional 4.56 kcal compared to caloric consumption without mobilisation. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this data, routine mobilisation of MV patients in ICU increases caloric consumption, especially in active mobilisation. Nevertheless, an additional caloric intake because of routine mobilisation does not seem to be necessary.

[Perioperative Neurocognitive Disorders - Postoperative Prevention Strategies]. / Wie können postoperativ ein Delir und eine neurokognitive Störung verhindert werden?

Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common and serious complication after surgery. It is associated with increased morbidity and mortality as well as neurocognitive disorder and associated loss of autonomy and increased need for care. As professionals, it is our duty to treat our patients in a holistic individual concept with the aim to reintegrate our patients into their home and social environment afterwards. In addition to preoperative and intraoperative interventions, postoperative prevention is of particular importance. This article focuses on non-pharmacological prevention strategies to avoid postoperative delirium and neurocognitive disorder in postoperative inpatient care. It is based on the "Evidence-based and consensus-based guideline on postoperative delirium". Thus, risk factors are addressed and non-pharmacological strategies are presented, which include reorientation, mobilization and nutritional support. Interprofessional cooperation plays just as important a role as the implementation of the listed preventive measures. Finally, the modified Hospital Elder Life Program is presented, which presents and applies preventive measures as a system-oriented and interdisciplinary concept, which "prevents functional decline and allows older adults to return home at the maximal level of independence". From our point of view, the training of a professional delirium team is a future-oriented complementary measure in the treatment concept of Perioperative Neurocognitive Disorders (PND), which finds its justification as an interface in the treatment of high-risk patients.

Survey among critical care nurses and physicians about delirium management.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is a serious complication in patients in intensive care units. Previous surveys on delirium management in daily practice showed low adherence to published guidelines. AIM: To evaluate delirium management in nurses and physicians working in intensive care units in German-speaking countries and to identify related differences between nurses and physicians. DESIGN: The study used an open online survey with multiple-choice responses. METHODS: An invitation for participation was spread via journals and electronic resources using a snowball system. Apart from recording socio-demographical characteristics, the survey collected data on delirium assessment, delirium-related processes, non-pharmacological prevention and treatment and barriers for implementation. Differences between nurses and physicians were tested by Fisher's exact test with sequential Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: The survey was conducted in autumn 2016, and 559 clinicians participated. More nurses than physicians reported screening for delirium. The majority of clinicians reported screening for delirium when this was suspected; more than 50% used validated instruments. Half of the clinicians had delirium-related structures implemented, such as two thirds reporting delirium-related processes. Most cited barriers were lack of time and missing knowledge about delirium and its assessment. With significant difference, physicians recommended more than nurses early removal of catheters and daily interprofessional goals for patients. CONCLUSION: In German-speaking countries, assessment of delirium needs further improvement, leading to accurate assessment. Delirium-related structures and processes appear to be implemented widely, with only a few differences between nurses and physicians. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses and physicians in this survey reported similar perceptions and attitudes towards management of delirium. Both professions need more knowledge and inter-professional training on when and how to use validated assessment instruments.

Quality indicators in intensive care medicine for Germany - third edition 2017.

Quality improvement in medicine is depending on measurement of relevant quality indicators. The quality indicators for intensive care medicine of the German Interdisciplinary Society of Intensive Care Medicine (DIVI) from the year 2013 underwent a scheduled evaluation after three years. There were major changes in several indicators but also some indicators were changed only minimally. The focus on treatment processes like ward rounds, management of analgesia and sedation, mechanical ventilation and weaning, as well as the number of 10 indicators were not changed. Most topics remained except for early mobilization which was introduced instead of hypothermia following resuscitation. Infection prevention was added as an outcome indicator. These quality indicators are used in the peer review in intensive care, a method endorsed by the DIVI. A validity period of three years is planned for the quality indicators.

Barriers and Strategies for Early Mobilization of Patients in Intensive Care Units.

Early mobilization of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is safe, feasible, and beneficial. However, implementation of early mobility as part of routine clinical care can be challenging. The objective of this review is to identify barriers to early mobilization and discuss strategies to overcome such barriers. Based on a literature search, we synthesize data from 40 studies reporting 28 unique barriers to early mobility, of which 14 (50%) were patient-related, 5 (18%) structural, 5 (18%) ICU cultural, and 4 (14%) process-related barriers. These barriers varied across ICUs and within disciplines, depending on the ICU patient population, setting, attitude, and ICU culture. To overcome the identified barriers, over 70 strategies were reported and are synthesized in this review, including: implementation of safety guidelines; use of mobility protocols; interprofessional training, education, and rounds; and involvement of physician champions. Systematic efforts to change ICU culture to prioritize early mobilization using an interprofessional approach and multiple targeted strategies are important components of successfully implementing early mobility in clinical practice.

Early mobilization of mechanically ventilated patients: a 1-day point-prevalence study in Germany.

OBJECTIVES: There is growing evidence to support early mobilization of adult mechanically ventilated patients in ICUs. However, there is little knowledge regarding early mobilization in routine ICU practice. Hence, the interdisciplinary German ICU Network for Early Mobilization undertook a 1-day point-prevalence survey across Germany. DESIGN: One-day point-prevalence study. SETTING: One hundred sixteen ICUs in Germany in 2011. PATIENTS: All adult mechanically ventilated patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For a 24-hour period, data were abstracted on hospital and ICU characteristics, the level of patient mobilization and associated barriers, and complications occurring during mobilization. One hundred sixteen participating ICUs provided data for 783 patients. Overall, 185 patients (24%) were mobilized out of bed (i.e., sitting on the edge of the bed or higher level of mobilization). Among patients with an endotracheal tube, tracheostomy, and noninvasive ventilation, 8%, 39%, and 53% were mobilized out of bed, respectively (p < 0.001 for difference between three groups). The most common perceived barriers to mobilizing patients out of bed were cardiovascular instability (17%) and deep sedation (15%). Mobilization out of bed versus remaining in bed was not associated with a higher frequency of complications, with no falls or extubations occurring in those mobilized out of bed. CONCLUSIONS: In this 1-day point-prevalence study conducted across Germany, only 24% of all mechanically ventilated patients and only 8% of patients with an endotracheal tube were mobilized out of bed as part of routine care. Addressing modifiable barriers for mobilization, such as deep sedation, will be important to increase mobilization in German ICUs.