Multicentre implementation of a quality improvement initiative to reduce delirium in adult intensive care units: An interrupted time series analysis.

PURPOSE: The ABCDEF bundle may improve delirium outcomes among intensive care unit (ICU) patients, however population-based studies are lacking. In this study we evaluated effects of a quality improvement initiative based on the ABCDEF bundle in adult ICUs in Alberta, Canada. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a pre-post, registry-based clinical trial, analysed using interrupted time series methodology. Outcomes were examined via segmented linear regression using mixed effects models. The main data source was a population-based electronic health record. RESULTS: 44,405 consecutive admissions (38,400 unique patients) admitted to 15 general medical/surgical and/or neurologic adult ICUs between 2014 and 2019 were included. The proportion of delirium days per ICU increased from 30.24% to 35.31% during the pre-intervention period. After intervention implementation it decreased significantly (bimonthly decrease of 0.34%, 95%CI 0.18-0.50%, p < 0.01) from 33.48% (95%CI 29.64-37.31%) in 2017 to 28.74% (95%CI 25.22-32.26%) in 2019. The proportion of sedation days using midazolam demonstrated an immediate decrease of 7.58% (95%CI 4.00-11.16%). There were no significant changes in duration of invasive ventilation, proportion of partial coma days, ICU mortality, or potential adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: An ABCDEF delirium initiative was implemented on a population-basis within adult ICUs and was successful at reducing the prevalence of delirium.

Divergent expiratory braking activity of costal and crural diaphragm.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing clinical interest in understanding the contribution of the diaphragm in early expiration, especially during mechanical ventilation. However, current experimental evidence is limited, so essential activity of the diaphragm during expiration and diaphragm segmental differences in expiratory activity, are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine if: 1) the diaphragm is normally active into expiration during spontaneous breathing and hypercapnic ventilation, 2) expiratory diaphragmatic activity is distributed equally among the segments of the diaphragm, costal and crural. METHODS: In 30 spontaneously breathing male and female canines, awake without confounding anesthetic, we measured directly both inspiratory and expiratory electrical activity (EMG), and corresponding mechanical shortening, of costal and crural diaphragm, during room air and hypercapnia. RESULTS: During eupnea, costal and crural diaphragm are active into expiration, showing significant and distinct expiratory activity, with crural expiratory activity greater than costal, for both magnitude and duration. This diaphragm segmental difference diverged further during progressive hypercapnic ventilation: crural expiratory activity progressively increased, while costal expiratory activity disappeared. CONCLUSION: The diaphragm is not passive during expiration. During spontaneous breathing, expiratory activity -"braking"- of the diaphragm is expressed routinely, but is not equally distributed. Crural muscle "braking" is greater than costal muscle in magnitude and duration. With increasing ventilation during hypercapnia, expiratory activity -"braking"- diverges notably. Crural expiratory activity greatly increases, while costal expiratory "braking" decreases in magnitude and duration, and disappears. Thus, diaphragm expiratory "braking" action represents an inherent, physiological function of the diaphragm, distinct for each segment, expressing differing neural activation.

Modelling the potential increase in eligible participants in clinical trials with inclusion of community intensive care unit patients in Alberta, Canada: a decision tree analysis.

PURPOSE: Critical care research in Canada is conducted primarily in academically affiliated intensive care units (ICUs) with established research infrastructure. Efforts are made to engage community hospital ICUs in research, although the impacts of their inclusion in clinical research have never been explicitly quantified. We therefore sought to determine the number of additional eligible patients that could be recruited into critical care trials and the change in time to study completion if community ICUs were included in clinical research. METHODS: We conducted a decision tree analysis using 2018 Alberta Health Services data. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics for all ICU patients were compared against eligibility criteria from ten landmark, randomized, multicentre critical care trials. Individual patients from academic and community ICUs were assessed for eligibility in each of the ten studies, and decision tree analysis models were built based on prior inclusion and exclusion criteria from those trials. RESULTS: The number of potentially eligible patients for the ten trials ranged from 2,082 to 10,157. Potentially eligible participants from community ICUs accounted for 40.0% of total potentially eligible participants. The recruitment of community ICU patients in trials would have increased potential enrolment by an average of 64.0%. The inclusion of community ICU patients was predicted to decrease time to trial completion by a mean of 14 months (43% reduction). CONCLUSION: Inclusion of community ICU patients in critical care research trials has the potential to substantially increase enrolment and decrease time to trial completion.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La recherche en soins intensifs au Canada est principalement réalisée dans des unités de soins intensifs affiliées à des centres universitaires jouissant d'infrastructures de recherche bien établies. Des efforts ont été déployés pour engager les unités de soins intensifs des hôpitaux communautaires en recherche, mais les impacts de leur participation à la recherche clinique n'ont jamais été explicitement quantifiés. Nous avons conséquemment cherché à déterminer le nombre de patient·es additionnel·les pouvant être recruté·es dans des études de soins critiques ainsi que la variation du temps nécessaire pour compléter les études si la patientèle issue d'unités de soins intensifs d'hôpitaux communautaires participait à la recherche clinique. MéTHODE: Une analyse par arbre de décision a été réalisée à partir de données provenant des Alberta Health Services pour l'année 2018. Les données démographiques et les caractéristiques cliniques de tou·tes les patient·es admis·es aux soins intensifs ont été comparées avec les critères d'éligibilité de dix importantes études multicentriques, randomisées, contrôlées en soins intensifs. Les patient·es des unités de soins intensifs universitaires et communautaires ont tou·tes été évalué·es pour leur éligibilité à chacune des dix études, et des modèles d'arbres décisionnels ont été construits en se basant sur les critères originaux d'inclusion et d'exclusion. RéSULTATS: Le nombre de personnes potentiellement éligibles pour les dix études s'est situé entre 2082 et 10 157. Les patient·es potentiellement admissibles en provenance d'unités de soins intensifs communautaires ont représenté 40,0 % de toutes les personnes potentiellement admissibles. Le recrutement de patient·es en provenance d'unités de soins intensifs communautaires aurait permis une hausse moyenne du recrutement potentiel de 64,0 %. L'inclusion de patient·es des unités de soins intensifs communautaires pourrait également réduire le temps nécessaire à la complétion des études de 14 mois en moyenne (réduction de 43 %). CONCLUSION: L'inclusion de patient·es en provenance d'unités de soins intensifs d'hôpitaux communautaires dans la recherche clinique en soins critiques a le potentiel d'augmenter substantiellement le recrutement et de diminuer le temps nécessaire à la complétion des études.

Designing a Behaviour Change Wheel guided implementation strategy for a hypoxaemic respiratory failure and ARDS care pathway that targets barriers.

BACKGROUND: A significant gap exists between ideal evidence-based practice and real-world application of evidence-informed therapies for patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure (HRF) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Pathways can improve the quality of care provided by helping integrate and organise the use of evidence informed practices, but barriers exist that can influence their adoption and successful implementation. We sought to identify barriers to the implementation of a best practice care pathway for HRF and ARDS and design an implementation science-based strategy targeting these barriers that is tailored to the critical care setting. METHODS: The intervention assessed was a previously described multidisciplinary, evidence-based, stakeholder-informed, integrated care pathway for HRF and ARDS. A survey questionnaire (12 open text questions) was administered to intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians (physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists) in 17 adult ICUs across Alberta. The Behaviour Change Wheel, capability, opportunity, motivation - behaviour components, and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) were used to perform qualitative analysis on open text responses to identify barriers to the use of the pathway. Behaviour change technique (BCT) taxonomy, and Affordability, Practicality, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side effects and safety and Equity (APEASE) criteria were used to design an implementation science-based strategy specific to the critical care context. RESULTS: Survey responses (692) resulted in 16 belief statements and 9 themes with 9 relevant TDF domains. Differences in responses between clinician professional group and hospital setting were common. Based on intervention functions linked to each belief statement and its relevant TDF domain, 26 candidate BCTs were identified and evaluated using APEASE criteria. 23 BCTs were selected and grouped to form 8 key components of a final strategy: Audit and feedback, education, training, clinical decision support, site champions, reminders, implementation support and empowerment. The final strategy was described using the template for intervention description and replication framework. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to a best practice care pathway were identified and were amenable to the design of an implementation science-based mitigation strategy. Future work will evaluate the ability of this strategy to improve quality of care by assessing clinician behaviour change via better adherence to evidence-based care.

Methods for determination of optimal positive end-expiratory pressure: a protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Titrated application of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) is an important part of any mechanical ventilation strategy. However, the method by which the optimal PEEP is determined and titrated varies widely. Methods for determining optimal PEEP have been assessed using a variety of different study designs and patient populations. We will conduct a scoping review to systematically identify all methods for determining optimal PEEP, and to identify the patient populations, outcomes measured and study designs used for each method. The goal will be to identify gaps in the optimal PEEP literature and identify areas where there may be an opportunity to further systematically synthesise and meta-analyse existing literature. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using scoping review methodology, we will generate a comprehensive search strategy based on inclusion and exclusion criteria generated using the population, concept, context framework. Five different databases will be searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science and Scopus). Three investigators will independently screen titles and abstracts, and two investigators will independently complete full-text review and data extraction. Included citations will be categorised in terms of PEEP method, study design, patient population and outcomes measured. The methods for PEEP titration will be described in detail, including strengths and limitations. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Given this is a synthesis of existing literature, ethics approval is not required. The results will be disseminated to stakeholders via presentation at local, regional and national levels, as well as publication in a high-impact critical care journal. There is also the potential to impact local clinical care protocols and inform broader clinical practice guidelines undertaken by societies.

A population-based assessment of avoidable hospitalizations and resource use of non-vaccinated patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has precipitated a prolonged public health crisis. Numerous public health protections were widely implemented. The availability of effective and safe vaccines for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presented an opportunity to resolve this crisis; however, vaccine uptake was slow and inconsistent. This study evaluated the potential for preventable hospitalizations and avoidable resource use among eligible non-vaccinated persons hospitalized for COVID-19 had these persons been vaccinated. METHODS: This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study. The population-at-risk were persons aged ≥ 12 years in Alberta (mid-year 2021 population ~ 4.4 million). The primary exposure was vaccination status. The primary outcome was hospitalization with confirmed SARS-CoV-2, and secondary outcomes included avoidable hospitalizations, avoidable hospital bed-days, and the potential cost avoidance related to COVID-19. The study inception period was 27 September 2021 to 25 January 2022. Data on COVID-19 hospitalizations, vaccination status, health services, and costs were obtained from the Government of Alberta and from the Discharge Abstract Database. RESULTS: Hospitalizations occurred in 3835, 1907, and 481 persons who were non-vaccinated, fully vaccinated, and boosted (risk of hospitalization/100,000 population: 886, 92, and 43), respectively. For non-vaccinated persons compared with fully vaccinated and boosted persons, the risk ratios (95%CI) of hospitalization were 9.7 (7.9-11.8) and 20.6 (17.9-23.6), respectively. For non-vaccinated persons, estimates of avoidable hospitalizations and bed-days used were 3439 and 36,331 if fully vaccinated and 3764 and 40,185 if boosted. Estimates of cost avoidance for non-vaccinated persons were $101.46 million if fully vaccinated and $110.24 million if boosted. CONCLUSION: Eligible non-vaccinated persons with COVID-19 had tenfold and 21-fold higher risks of hospitalization relative to whether they had been fully vaccinated or boosted, resulting in considerable avoidable hospital bed-days and costs.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La pandémie de maladie à coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) a précipité une crise de santé publique prolongée. De nombreuses mesures de protection de la santé publique ont été appliquées à grande échelle. La disponibilité de vaccins sûrs et efficaces contre le coronavirus du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère 2 (SRAS-CoV-2) a présenté une occasion de résoudre la crise, mais l'acceptation de la vaccination a été lente et inégale. Dans cette étude, nous évaluons le potentiel d'hospitalisations évitables et d'utilisation évitable des ressources pour les personnes non vaccinées admissibles hospitalisées pour la COVID-19, si ces personnes avaient été vaccinées. MéTHODES: Il s'agissait d'une étude de cohorte populationnelle rétrospective. La population à risque était les personnes de ≥ 12 ans en Alberta (~ 4,4 millions au milieu de l'année 2021). Le principal risque était le statut vaccinal. Le principal résultat clinique était l'hospitalisation avec SRAS-CoV-2 confirmé, et les résultats cliniques secondaires étaient les hospitalisations évitables, les jours-lits à l'hôpital évitables et l'évitement potentiel des coûts liés à la COVID-19. La période initiale de l'étude s'est étendue du 27 septembre 2021 au 25 janvier 2022. Les données sur les hospitalisations pour la COVID-19, le statut vaccinal, les coûts et les services de santé provenaient du gouvernement de l'Alberta et de la Base de données sur les congés des patients. RéSULTATS: En tout, 3 835 personnes non vaccinées, 1 907 personnes ayant reçu tous leurs vaccins et 481 personnes ayant reçu des doses de rappel ont été hospitalisées (risque d'hospitalisation p. 100 000 personnes : 886, 92 et 43, respectivement). Pour les personnes non vaccinées, comparativement aux personnes ayant reçu tous leurs vaccins et/ou les doses de rappel, les risques relatifs d'hospitalisation (IC de 95%) étaient de 9,7 (7,9­11,8) et de 20,6 (17,9­23,6), respectivement. Selon nos estimations, les personnes non vaccinées auraient évité 3 439 hospitalisations et 36 331 jours-lits si elles avaient reçu tous leurs vaccins, et 3 764 hospitalisations et 40 185 jours-lits si elles avaient en plus reçu les doses de rappel. Nous avons aussi estimé que les personnes non vaccinées auraient évité des coûts de 101,46 millions de dollars si elles avaient reçu tous leurs vaccins et de 110,24 millions de dollars si elles avaient en plus reçu les doses de rappel. CONCLUSION: Les personnes non vaccinées admissibles ayant contracté la COVID-19 ont présenté un risque d'hospitalisation 10 fois plus élevé que si elles avaient reçu tous leurs vaccins et 21 fois plus élevé que si elles avaient en plus reçu les doses de rappel, ce qui représente des jours-lits à l'hôpital et des coûts évitables considérables.

STOP Signs: A Population-based Interrupted Time Series Analysis of Antibiotic Duration for Complicated Intraabdominal Infection Before and After the Publication of a Landmark RCT.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the STOP-IT randomized controlled trial changed antibiotic prescribing in patients with Complicated Intraabdominal Infection (CIAI). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: CIAI is common and causes significant morbidity. In May 2015, the STOP-IT randomized controlled trial showed equivalent outcomes between four-day and clinically determined antibiotic duration. METHODS: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using interrupted time series methods. The STOP-IT publication date was the exposure. Median duration of inpatient antibiotic prescription was the outcome. All adult patients admitted to four hospitals in Calgary, Canada between July 2012 and December 2018 with CIAI who survived at least four days following source control were included. Analysis was stratified by infectious source as appendix or biliary tract (group A) versus other (group B). RESULTS: Among 4384 included patients, clinical and demographic attributes were similar before vs after publication. In Group A, median inpatient antibiotic duration was 3 days and unchanged from the beginning to the end of the study period [adjusted median difference -0.00 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.37 - 0.37 days]. In Group B, antibiotic duration was shorter at the end of the study period (7.87 vs 6.73 days; -1.14 days, CI-2.37 - 0.09 days), however there was no change in trend following publication (-0.03 days, CI -0.16 - 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: For appendiceal or biliary sources of CIAI, antibiotic duration was commensurate with the experimental arm of STOP-IT. For other sources, antibiotic duration was long and did not change in response to trial publication. Additional implementation science is needed to improve antibiotic stewardship.

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the identification and treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome with protection, paralysis, and proning: A type-1 hybrid stepped-wedge cluster randomised effectiveness-implementation study.

Objective: To describe a study protocol and statistical analysis plan (SAP) for the identification and treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure (HRF) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with protection, paralysis, and proning (TheraPPP) study prior to completion of recruitment, electronic data retrieval, and analysis of any data. Design: TheraPPP is a stepped-wedge cluster randomised study evaluating a care pathway for HRF and ARDS patients. This is a type-1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation study design evaluating both intervention effectiveness and implementation; however primarily powered for the effectiveness outcome. Setting: Seventeen adult intensive care units (ICUs) across Alberta, Canada. Participants: We estimate a sample size of 18816 mechanically ventilated patients, with 11424 patients preimplementation and 7392 patients postimplementation. We estimate 2688 sustained ARDS patients within our study cohort. Intervention: An evidence-based, stakeholder-informed, multidisciplinary care pathway called Venting Wisely that standardises diagnosis and treatment of HRF and ARDS patients. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome is 28-day ventilator-free days (VFDs). The primary analysis will compare the mean 28-day VFDs preimplementation and postimplementation using a mixed-effects linear regression model. Prespecified subgroups include sex, age, HRF, ARDS, COVID-19, cardiac surgery, body mass index, height, illness acuity, and ICU volume. Results: This protocol and SAP are reported using the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials guidance and the Guidelines for the Content of Statistical Analysis Plans in Clinical Trials. The study received ethics approval and was registered (ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT04744298) prior to patient enrolment. Conclusions: TheraPPP will evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of an HRF and ARDS care pathway.

Avoidable intensive care unit resource use and costs of unvaccinated patients with COVID-19: a historical population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been proven effective at preventing poor outcomes from COVID-19; however, voluntary vaccination rates have been suboptimal. We assessed the potential avoidable intensive care unit (ICU) resource use and associated costs had unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 been fully vaccinated. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study of persons aged 12 yr or greater in Alberta (2021 population ~ 4.4 million) admitted to any ICU with COVID-19 from 6 September 2021 to 4 January 2022. We used publicly available aggregate data on COVID-19 infections, vaccination status, and health services use. Intensive care unit admissions, bed-days, lengths of stay, and costs were estimated for patients with COVID-19 and stratified by vaccination status. RESULTS: In total, 1,053 patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 were unvaccinated, 42 were partially vaccinated, and 173 were fully vaccinated (cumulative incidence 230.6, 30.8, and 5.5 patients/100,000 population, respectively). Cumulative incidence rate ratios of ICU admission were 42.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.7 to 44.9) for unvaccinated patients and 5.6 (95% CI, 4.1 to 7.6) for partially vaccinated patients when compared with fully vaccinated patients. During the study period, 1,028 avoidable ICU admissions and 13,015 bed-days were recorded for unvaccinated patients and the total avoidable costs were CAD 61.3 million. The largest opportunity to avoid ICU bed-days and costs was in unvaccinated patients aged 50 to 69 yr. CONCLUSIONS: Unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 had substantially greater rates of ICU admissions, ICU bed-days, and ICU-related costs than vaccinated patients did. This increased resource use would have been potentially avoidable had these unvaccinated patients been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les vaccins contre le SRAS-CoV-2 se sont avérés efficaces pour prévenir les devenirs défavorables associés à la COVID-19; toutefois, les taux de vaccination volontaire ont été sous-optimaux. Nous avons évalué l'utilisation potentiellement évitable des ressources des unités de soins intensifs (USI) et les coûts associés si les patients non vaccinés ou partiellement vaccinés qui ont dû être hospitalisés pour la COVID-19 avaient été complètement vaccinés. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de cohorte rétrospective basée sur la population de personnes âgées de 12 ans ou plus en Alberta (population de 2021 ~ 4,4 millions) admises dans une unité de soins intensifs et atteintes de COVID-19 du 6 septembre 2021 au 4 janvier 2022. Nous avons utilisé des données agrégées accessibles au public sur les infections à la COVID-19, le statut vaccinal et l'utilisation des services de santé. Les admissions aux soins intensifs, les journées-patients, les durées de séjour et les coûts ont été estimés pour les patients atteints de la COVID-19 et stratifiés selon le statut vaccinal. RéSULTATS: Au total, 1053 patients admis à l'USI souffrant de la COVID-19 n'étaient pas vaccinés, 42 étaient partiellement vaccinés et 173 étaient complètement vaccinés (incidence cumulative 230,6, 30,8 et 5,5 patients / 100 000 habitants, respectivement). Les taux d'incidence cumulés des admissions aux soins intensifs étaient de 42,2 (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 39,7 à 44,9) pour les patients non vaccinés et de 5,6 (IC 95 %, 4,1 à 7,6) pour les patients partiellement vaccinés par rapport aux patients entièrement vaccinés. Au cours de la période à l'étude, 1028 admissions évitables aux soins intensifs et 13 015 journées-patients ont été enregistrées pour les patients non vaccinés, et les coûts totaux évitables étaient de 61,3 millions de dollars canadiens. L'économie potentielle la plus importante en matière de journées-patients et de coûts en soins intensifs touchait les patients non vaccinés âgés de 50 à 69 ans. CONCLUSION: Les patients non vaccinés atteints de COVID-19 ont affiché des taux beaucoup plus élevés d'admissions à l'USI, de journées-patients à l'USI et de coûts liés à l'USI que les patients vaccinés. Cette utilisation accrue des ressources aurait été potentiellement évitable si ces patients non vaccinés avaient été vaccinés contre le SRAS-CoV-2.

Non-COVID outcomes associated with the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic effects study (COPES): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: As the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues, healthcare providers struggle to manage both COVID-19 and non-COVID patients while still providing high-quality care. We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis to describe the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with non-COVID illness and on healthcare systems compared to non-pandemic epochs. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE/EMBASE/Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/CENTRAL/CINAHL (inception to December 31, 2020). All study types with COVID-pandemic time period (after December 31, 2019) with comparative non-pandemic time periods (prior to December 31, 2019). Data regarding study characteristics/case-mix/interventions/comparators/ outcomes (primary: mortality; secondary: morbidity/hospitalizations/disruptions-to-care. Paired reviewers conducted screening and abstraction, with conflicts resolved by discussion. Effect sizes for specific therapies were pooled using random-effects models. Risk of bias was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, with evidence rating using GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Of 11,581 citations, 167 studies met eligibility. Our meta-analysis showed an increased mortality of 16% during the COVID pandemic for non-COVID illness compared with 11% mortality during the pre-pandemic period (RR 1.38, 95% CI: 1.28-1.50; absolute risk difference: 5% [95% CI: 4-6%], p<0.00001, very low certainty evidence). Twenty-eight studies (17%) reported significant changes in morbidity (where 93% reported increases), while 30 studies (18%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Thirty-nine studies (23%) reported significant changes in hospitalizations (97% reporting decreases), while 111 studies (66%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). Sixty-two studies (37%) reported significant disruptions in standards-to-care (73% reporting increases), while 62 studies (37%) reported no significant change (very low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant increase in mortality during the COVID pandemic compared to pre-pandemic times for non-COVID illnesses. When significant changes were reported, there was increased morbidity, decreased hospitalizations and increased disruptions in standards-of-care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020201256 (Sept 2, 2020).

Efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors versus histamine-2 receptor blockers in the cardiac surgical population: insights from the PEPTIC trial.

OBJECTIVES: The comparative effectiveness and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) versus histamine-2 receptor blockers for stress ulcer prophylaxis in the cardiac surgical intensive care unit population is uncertain. Although the Proton Pump Inhibitors versus Histamine-2 Receptor Blockers for Ulcer Prophylaxis Therapy in the Intensive Care Unit (PEPTIC) trial reported a higher risk of mortality in the PPI arm with no difference in gastrointestinal bleeding, detailed information on surgical variables and clinically relevant surgical subgroups was not available. METHODS: The analysis included all Canadian cardiac surgery patients enrolled in the PEPTIC trial. Data were electronically linked using unique patient identifiers to a clinical information system. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, gastrointestinal bleeding, Clostridium difficile infections, ventilator-associated conditions and length of stay. RESULTS: We studied 823 (50.6%) randomized to PPIs and 805 (49.4%) to histamine-2-receptor blockers. In the intention-to-treat analysis, there were no differences in hospital mortality [PPI: 4.3% vs histamine-2 receptor blockers: 4.8%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.70], gastrointestinal bleeding (3.9% vs 4.8%, aOR 1.09, 95% CI 0.66-1.81), C. difficile infections (0.9% vs 0.1%, aOR 0.18, 95% CI 0.02-1.59), ventilator-associated conditions (1.6% vs 1.7%, aOR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-1.00) or median length of stay (9.2 vs 9.8 days, adjusted risk ratio 1.06, 85% CI 0.99-1.13). No significant treatment differences were observed among subgroups of interest or per-protocol populations. CONCLUSIONS: In a secondary analysis of cardiac surgery patients enrolled in the PEPTIC trial in Canada, no differences in effectiveness or safety were observed between use of PPIs and histamine-2 receptor blockers for stress ulcer prophylaxis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: anzctr.org.au identifier: ACTRN12616000481471.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) excess mortality outcomes associated with pandemic effects study (COPES): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and aim: With the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continuing to impact healthcare systems around the world, healthcare providers are attempting to balance resources devoted to COVID-19 patients while minimizing excess mortality overall (both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients). To this end, we conducted a systematic review (SR) to describe the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on all-cause excess mortality (COVID-19 and non-COVID-19) during the pandemic timeframe compared to non-pandemic times. Methods: We searched EMBASE, Cochrane Database of SRs, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), from inception (1948) to December 31, 2020. We used a two-stage review process to screen/extract data. We assessed risk of bias using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). We used Critical Appraisal and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Of 11,581 citations, 194 studies met eligibility. Of these studies, 31 had mortality comparisons (n = 433,196,345 participants). Compared to pre-pandemic times, during the COVID-19 pandemic, our meta-analysis demonstrated that COVID-19 mortality had an increased risk difference (RD) of 0.06% (95% CI: 0.06-0.06% p < 0.00001). All-cause mortality also increased [relative risk (RR): 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.38-1.70, p < 0.00001] alongside non-COVID-19 mortality (RR: 1.18, 1.07-1.30, p < 0.00001). There was "very low" certainty of evidence through GRADE assessment for all outcomes studied, demonstrating the evidence as uncertain. Interpretation: The COVID-19 pandemic may have caused significant increases in all-cause excess mortality, greater than those accounted for by increases due to COVID-19 mortality alone, although the evidence is uncertain. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#recordDetails], identifier [CRD42020201256].

Association Between Pandemic Coronavirus Disease 2019 Public Health Measures and Reduction in Critical Care Utilization Across ICUs in Alberta, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has disrupted critical care services across the world. In anticipation of surges in the need for critical care services, governments implemented "lockdown" measures to preserve and create added critical care capacity. Herein, we describe the impact of lockdown measures on the utilization of critical care services and patient outcomes compared with nonlockdown epochs in a large integrated health region. DESIGN: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Seventeen adult ICUs across 14 acute care hospitals in Alberta, Canada. PATIENTS: All adult (age ≥ 15 yr) patients admitted to any study ICU. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The main exposure was ICU admission during "lockdown" occurring between March 16, 2020, and June 30, 2020. This period was compared with two nonpandemic control periods: "year prior" (March 16, 2019, to June 30, 2019) and "pre lockdown" immediately prior (November 30, 2019, to March 15, 2020). The primary outcome was the number of ICU admissions. Secondary outcomes included the following: daily measures of ICU utilization, ICU duration of stay, avoidable delay in ICU discharge, and occupancy; and patient outcomes. Mixed multilevel negative binomial regression and interrupted time series regression were used to compare rates of ICU admissions between periods. Multivariable regressions were used to compare patient outcomes between periods. During the lockdown, there were 3,649 ICU admissions (34.1 [8.0] ICU admissions/d), compared with 4,125 (38.6 [9.3]) during the prelockdown period and 3,919 (36.6 [8.7]) during the year prior. Mean bed occupancy declined significantly during the lockdown compared with the nonpandemic periods (78.7%, 95.9%, and 96.4%; p < 0.001). Avoidable ICU discharge delay also decreased significantly (42.0%, 53.2%, and 58.3%; p < 0.001). During the lockdown, patients were younger, had fewer comorbid diseases, had higher acuity, and were more likely to be medical admissions compared with the nonpandemic periods. Adjusted ICU and hospital mortality and ICU and hospital lengths of stay were significantly lower during the lockdown compared with nonpandemic periods. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus disease 2019 lockdown resulted in substantial changes to ICU utilization, including a reduction in admissions, occupancy, patient lengths of stay, and mortality.

Association Between Afterhours Discharge From the Intensive Care Unit and Hospital Mortality: A Multi-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence on the association between afterhours discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital mortality. We examined the effects of afterhours discharge, including the potential effect of residual organ dysfunction, on hospital mortality in a large integrated health region. METHODS: We performed a multi-center retrospective cohort study of 10,463 adults discharged from 9 mixed medical/surgical ICUs in Alberta from June 2012 to December 2014. We applied a 2-stage modeling strategy to investigate the association between afterhours discharge (19:00h to 07:59h) and post-ICU hospital mortality. We applied mixed-effect multi-variable linear regression to assess the relationship between discharge organ dysfunction and afterhours discharge. We then applied mixed-effect multi-variable logistic regression to evaluate the direct, indirect and integrated associations of afterhours discharge on hospital mortality and hospitalization duration. RESULTS: Of 10,463 patients, 23.7% (n = 2,480) were discharged afterhours, of which 27.4% occurred on a holiday or weekend. This varied significantly by ICU size, type, and site. Patients discharged afterhours were more likely medical admissions, had greater multi-morbidity and illness acuity. A greater average SOFA score in the 72 hours prior to ICU discharge was not associated with afterhours discharge. However, a greater average SOFA score was associated with hospital mortality (adjusted-odds ratio [OR], 1.23; 95% CI, 1.18-1.28). Afterhours discharge was associated with higher hospital mortality (adjusted-OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01-1.39), increased hospital stay (adjusted-risk ratio [RR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.09-1.11) and increased post-ICU stay (adjusted-RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.14-1.17) when compared with workhours discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Afterhours discharge is common, occurring in 1 in 4 discharges, and is widely variable across ICUs. Patients discharged afterhours have greater risk of hospital mortality and prolonged hospitalization.

Needs Assessment Survey Identifying Research Processes Which may be Improved by Automation or Artificial Intelligence: ICU Community Modeling and Artificial Intelligence to Improve Efficiency (ICU-Comma).

BACKGROUND: Critical care research in Canada is conducted primarily in academically-affiliated intensive care units with established research infrastructure, including research coordinators (RCs). Recently, efforts have been made to engage community hospital ICUs in research albeit with barriers. Automation or artificial intelligence (AI) could aid the performance of routine research tasks. It is unclear which research study processes might be improved through AI automation. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of Canadian ICU research personnel. The survey contained items characterizing opinions regarding research processes that may be amenable to AI automation. We distributed the questionnaire via email distribution lists of 3 Canadian research societies. Open-ended questions were analyzed using a thematic content analysis approach. RESULTS: A total of 49 survey responses were received (response rate: 8%). Tasks that respondents felt were time-consuming/tedious/tiresome included: screening for potentially eligible patients (74%), inputting data into case report forms (65%), and preparing internal tracking logs (53%). Tasks that respondents felt could be performed by AI automation included: screening for eligible patients (59%), inputting data into case report forms (55%), preparing internal tracking logs (51%), and randomizing patients into studies (45%). Open-ended questions identified enthusiasm for AI automation to improve information accuracy and efficiency while freeing up RCs to perform tasks that require human interaction. This enthusiasm was tempered by the need for proper AI education and oversight. CONCLUSIONS: There were balanced supportive (increased efficiency and re-allocation of tasks) and challenges (informational accuracy and oversight) with regards to AI automation in ICU research.

Parasternal intercostal, costal, and crural diaphragm neural activation during hypercapnia.

The parasternal intercostal is an obligatory inspiratory muscle working in coordination with the diaphragm, apparently sharing a common pathway of neural response. This similarity has attracted clinical interest, promoting the parasternal as a noninvasive alternative to the diaphragm, to monitor central neural respiratory output. However, this role may be confounded by the distinct and different functions of the costal and crural diaphragm. Given the anatomic location, parasternal activation may significantly impact the chest wall via both mechanical shortening or as a "fixator" for the chest wall. Either mechanical function of the parasternal may also impact differential function of the costal and crural. The objectives of the present study were, during eupnea and hypercapnia, 1) to compare the intensity of neural activation of the parasternal with the costal and crural diaphragm and 2) to examine parasternal recruitment and changes in mechanical action during progressive hypercapnia, including muscle baseline length and shortening. In 30 spontaneously breathing canines, awake without confounding anesthetic, we directly measured the electrical activity of the parasternal, costal, and crural diaphragm, and the corresponding mechanical shortening of the parasternal, during eupnea and hypercapnia. During eupnea and hypercapnia, the parasternal and costal diaphragm share a similar intensity of neural activation, whereas both differ significantly from crural diaphragm activity. The shortening of the parasternal increases significantly with hypercapnia, without a change in baseline end-expiratory length. In conclusion, the parasternal shares an equivalent intensity of neural activation with the costal, but not crural, diaphragm. The parasternal maintains and increases its active inspiratory shortening during augmented ventilation, despite high levels of diaphragm recruitment. Throughout hypercapnic ventilation, the parasternal contributes mechanically; it is not relegated to chest wall fixation.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This investigation directly compares neural activation of the parasternal intercostal muscle with the two distinct segments of the diaphragm, costal and crural, during room air and hypercapnic ventilation. During eupnea and hypercapnia, the parasternal intercostal muscle and costal diaphragm share a similar neural activation, whereas they both differ significantly from the crural diaphragm. The parasternal intercostal muscle maintains and increases active inspiratory mechanical action with shortening during ventilation, even with high levels of diaphragm recruitment.

Development and Content Validation of a Multidisciplinary Standardized Management Pathway for Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Treatment of hypoxemic respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome is complex. Evidence-based therapies that can improve survival and guidelines advocating their use exist; however, implementation is inconsistent. Our objective was to develop and validate an evidence-based, stakeholder-informed standardized management pathway for hypoxemic respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome to improve adherence to best practice. DESIGN: A standardized management pathway was developed using a modified Delphi consensus process with a multidisciplinary group of ICU clinicians. The proposed pathway was externally validated with a survey involving multidisciplinary stakeholders and clinicians. SETTING: In-person meeting and web-based surveys of ICU clinicians from 17 adult ICUs in the province of Alberta, Canada. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The consensus panel was comprised of 30 ICU clinicians (4 nurses, 10 respiratory therapists, 15 intensivists, 1 nurse practitioner; median years of practice 17 [interquartile range, 13-21]). Ninety-one components were serially rated and revised over two rounds of online and one in-person review. The final pathway included 46 elements. For the validation survey, 692 responses (including 59% nurses, 33% respiratory therapists, 7% intensivists and 1% nurse practitioners) were received. Agreement of greater than 75% was achieved on 43 of 46 pathway elements. CONCLUSIONS: A 46-element evidence-informed hypoxemic respiratory failure and acute respiratory distress syndrome standardized management pathway was developed and demonstrated to have content validity.

Natural language processing to measure the frequency and mode of communication between healthcare professionals and family members of critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVE: To apply natural language processing (NLP) techniques to identify individual events and modes of communication between healthcare professionals and families of critically ill patients from electronic medical records (EMR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 280 randomly selected adult patients admitted to 1 of 15 intensive care units (ICU) in Alberta, Canada from June 19, 2012 to June 11, 2018. Individual events and modes of communication were independently abstracted using NLP and manual chart review (reference standard). Preprocessing techniques and 2 NLP approaches (rule-based and machine learning) were evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC). RESULTS: Over 2700 combinations of NLP methods and hyperparameters were evaluated for each mode of communication using a holdout subset. The rule-based approach had the highest AUROC in 65 datasets compared to the machine learning approach in 21 datasets. Both approaches had similar performance in 17 datasets. The rule-based AUROC for the grouped categories of patient documented to have family or friends (0.972, 95% CI 0.934-1.000), visit by family/friend (0.882 95% CI 0.820-0.943) and phone call with family/friend (0.975, 95% CI: 0.952-0.998) were high. DISCUSSION: We report an automated method to quantify communication between healthcare professionals and family members of adult patients from free-text EMRs. A rule-based NLP approach had better overall operating characteristics than a machine learning approach. CONCLUSION: NLP can automatically and accurately measure frequency and mode of documented family visitation and communication from unstructured free-text EMRs, to support patient- and family-centered care initiatives.

Prone positioning for ARDS patients-tips for preparation and use during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Many patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) will develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Prone positioning is an important non-pharmacologic strategy that should be considered for all invasively ventilated patients with moderate to severe ARDS (including those with COVID-19). Prone positioning offers several physiologic and clinical benefits, including improving hypoxemia, matching ventilation with perfusion, reducing regional hyperinflation, and improving survival. To safely offer prone positioning, appropriate training, simulation, and health system planning should be undertaken. In this review, we offer ten tips, based on the Alberta provincial prone positioning strategy during COVID-19, to safely implement and improve the appropriate use of prone positioning. We provide special considerations for its use during the COVID-19 pandemic or future respiratory pandemics.

RéSUMé: De nombreux patients atteints de la maladie du coronavirus (COVID-19) développeront un syndrome de détresse respiratoire aiguë (SDRA, ARDS en anglais). Le positionnement ventral est une importante stratégie non pharmacologique qui devrait être envisagée pour tous les patients ventilés de manière invasive et souffrant d'un SDRA modéré à grave (y compris ceux atteints de la COVID-19). Le positionnement ventral offre plusieurs avantages physiologiques et cliniques, notamment l'amélioration de l'hypoxémie, une adéquation de la ventilation avec la perfusion, la réduction de l'hyperinflation régionale et l'amélioration de la survie. Pour offrir un positionnement ventral en toute sécurité, une formation, des simulations et une planification des ressources appropriées devraient être entreprises. Dans le cadre de ce compte rendu, nous proposons dix conseils, fondés sur la stratégie provinciale de positionnement ventral de l'Alberta au cours de la COVID-19, afin de mettre en œuvre et d'améliorer en toute sécurité l'utilisation appropriée du positionnement ventral. Nous décrivons des considérations particulières pour son utilisation pendant la pandémie de COVID-19 ou les futures pandémies respiratoires.