Interventions to promote cost-effectiveness in adult intensive care units: consensus statement and considerations for best practice from a multidisciplinary and multinational eDelphi study.

BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence to guide interventions that promote cost-effectiveness in adult intensive care units (ICU). The aim of this consensus statement is to identify globally applicable interventions for best ICU practice and provide guidance for judicious use of resources. METHODS: A three-round modified online Delphi process, using a web-based platform, sought consensus from 61 multidisciplinary ICU experts (physicians, nurses, allied health, administrators) from 21 countries. Round 1 was qualitative to ascertain opinions on cost-effectiveness criteria based on four key domains of high-value healthcare (foundational elements; infrastructure fundamentals; care delivery priorities; reliability and feedback). Round 2 was qualitative and quantitative, while round 3 was quantitative to reiterate and establish criteria. Both rounds 2 and 3 utilized a five-point Likert scale for voting. Consensus was considered when > 70% of the experts voted for a proposed intervention. Thereafter, the steering committee endorsed interventions that were identified as 'critical' by more than 50% of steering committee members. These interventions and experts' comments were summarized as final considerations for best practice. RESULTS: At the conclusion of round 3, consensus was obtained on 50 best practice considerations for cost-effectiveness in adult ICU. Finally, the steering committee endorsed 9 'critical' best practice considerations. This included adoption of a multidisciplinary ICU model of care, focus on staff training and competency assessment, ongoing quality audits, thus ensuring high quality of critical care services whether within or outside the four walls of ICUs, implementation of a dynamic staff roster, multidisciplinary approach to implementing end-of-life care, early mobilization and promoting international consensus efforts on the Green ICU concept. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi study with international experts resulted in 9 consensus statements and best practice considerations promoting cost-effectiveness in adult ICUs. Stakeholders (government bodies, professional societies) must lead the efforts to identify locally applicable specifics while working within these best practice considerations with the available resources.

Feasibility analysis of a novel non-invasive ultrasonographic method for the measurement of intra-abdominal pressure in the intensive care unit.

Increased intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) is an important vital sign in critically ill patients and has a negative impact on morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to validate a novel non-invasive ultrasonographic approach to IAP measurement against the gold standard intra-bladder pressure (IBP) method. We conducted a prospective observational study in an adult medical ICU of a university hospital. IAP measurements using ultrasonography by two independent operators, with different experience levels (experienced, IAPUS1; inexperienced, IAPUS2), were compared with the gold standard IBP method performed by a third blinded operator. For the ultrasonographic method, decremental external pressure was applied on the anterior abdominal wall using a bottle filled with decreasing volumes of water. Ultrasonography looked at peritoneal rebound upon brisk withdrawal of the external pressure. The loss of peritoneal rebound was identified as the point where IAP was equal to or above the applied external pressure. Twenty-one patients underwent 74 IAP readings (range 2-15 mmHg). The number of readings per patient was 3.5 ± 2.5, and the abdominal wall thickness was 24.6 ± 13.1 mm. Bland and Altman's analysis showed a bias (0.39 and 0.61 mmHg) and precision (1.38 and 1.51 mmHg) for the comparison of IAPUS1 and IAPUS2 and vs. IBP, respectively with small limits of agreement that were in line with the research guidelines of the Abdominal Compartment Society (WSACS). Our novel ultrasound-based IAP method displayed good correlation and agreement between IAP and IBP at levels up to 15 mmHg and is an excellent solution for quick decision-making in critically ill patients.

Use of Robots in Critical Care: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The recent focus on the critical setting, especially with the COVID-19 pandemic, has highlighted the need for minimizing contact-based care and increasing robotic use. Robotics is a rising field in the context of health care, and we sought to evaluate the use of robots in critical care settings. OBJECTIVE: Although robotic presence is prevalent in the surgical setting, its role in critical care has not been well established. We aimed to examine the uses and limitations of robots for patients who are critically ill. METHODS: This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, IEEE Xplore, and ACM Library were searched from their inception to December 23, 2021. Included studies involved patients requiring critical care, both in intensive care units or high-dependency units, or settings that required critical care procedures (eg, intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Randomized trials and observational studies were included. RESULTS: A total of 33 studies were included. The greatest application of robots in the intensive care unit was in the field of telepresence, whereby robots proved advantageous in providing a reduced response time, earlier intervention, and lower mortality rates. Challenges of telepresence included regulatory and financial barriers. In therapy and stroke rehabilitation, robots achieved superior clinical outcomes safely. Robotic use in patient evaluation and assessment was mainly through ultrasound evaluation, obtaining satisfactory to superior results with the added benefits of remote assessment, time savings, and increased efficiency. Robots in drug dispensing and delivery increased efficiency and generated cost savings. All the robots had technological limitations and hidden costs. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our results show that robotic use in critical care settings is a beneficial, effective, and well-received intervention that delivers significant benefits to patients, staff, and hospitals. Looking ahead, it is necessary to form strong ethical and legislative frameworks and overcome various regulatory and financial barriers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021234162; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=234162.

High-flow nasal cannula therapy: A multicentred survey of the practices among physicians and respiratory therapists in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has become a regular intervention in the intensive care units especially in patients coming in with hypoxaemic respiratory failure. Clinical practices may differ from published literature. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the clinical practices of physicians and respiratory therapists (RTs) on the use of HFNC. METHODS: A retrospective observational study looking at medical records on HFNC usage from January 2015 to September 2017 was performed and was followed by a series of questions related to HFNC practices. The survey involved physicians and RTs in intensive care units from multiple centres in Singapore from January to April 2018. Indications and thresholds for HFNC usage with titration and weaning practices were compared with the retrospective observational study data. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three recipients (69.9%) responded to the survey and reported postextubation (87.8%), pneumonia in nonimmunocompromised (65.9%), and pneumonia in immunocompromised (61.8%) patients as the top three indications for HFNC. Of all, 39.8% of respondents wanted to use HFNC for palliative intent. Similar practices were observed in the retrospective study with the large cohort of 63% patients (483 of the total 768 patients) where HFNC was used for acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure and 274 (35.7%) patients to facilitate extubation. The survey suggested that respondents would initiate HFNC at a lower fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), higher partial pressure of oxygen to FiO2 ratio, and higher oxygen saturation to FiO2 ratio for nonpneumonia patients than patients with pneumonia. RTs were less likely to start HFNC for patients suffering from pneumonia and interstitial lung disease than physicians. RTs also preferred adjustment of FiO2 to improve oxygen saturations and noninvasive ventilation for rescue. CONCLUSIONS: Among the different intensive care units surveyed, the indications and thresholds for the initiation of HFNC differed in the clinical practices of physicians and RTs.

Managing patient-ventilator asynchrony with a twice-daily screening protocol: A retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Severe patient-ventilator asynchrony (PVA) might be associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation and mortality. It is unknown if systematic screening and application of conventional methods for PVA management can modify these outcomes. We therefore constructed a twice-daily bedside PVA screening and management protocol and investigated its effect on patient outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients who were intubated in the emergency department and directly admitted to the medical intensive care unit (ICU). In phase 1 (6 months; August 2016 to January 2017), patients received usual care comprising lung protective ventilation and moderate analgesia/sedation. In phase 2 (6 months; February 2017 to July 2017), patients were additionally managed with a PVA protocol on ICU admission and twice daily (7 am, 7 pm). RESULTS: A total of 280 patients (160 in phase 1, 120 in phase 2) were studied (age = 64.5 ± 21.4 years, 107 women [38.2%], Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score = 27.1 ± 8.5, 271 [96.8%] on volume assist-control ventilation initially). Phase 2 patients had lower hospital mortality than phase 1 patients (20.0% versus 34.4%, respectively, P = 0.011), even after adjustment for age and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (odds ratio = 0.46, 95% confidence interval = 0.25-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Application of a bedside PVA protocol for mechanically ventilated patients on ICU admission and twice daily was associated with decreased hospital mortality. There was however no association with sedation-free days or mechanical ventilation-free days through day 28 or length of hospital stay.

Artificial Intelligence for COVID-19: Rapid Review.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 was first discovered in December 2019 and has since evolved into a pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To address this global health crisis, artificial intelligence (AI) has been deployed at various levels of the health care system. However, AI has both potential benefits and limitations. We therefore conducted a review of AI applications for COVID-19. METHODS: We performed an extensive search of the PubMed and EMBASE databases for COVID-19-related English-language studies published between December 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. We supplemented the database search with reference list checks. A thematic analysis and narrative review of AI applications for COVID-19 was conducted. RESULTS: In total, 11 papers were included for review. AI was applied to COVID-19 in four areas: diagnosis, public health, clinical decision making, and therapeutics. We identified several limitations including insufficient data, omission of multimodal methods of AI-based assessment, delay in realization of benefits, poor internal/external validation, inability to be used by laypersons, inability to be used in resource-poor settings, presence of ethical pitfalls, and presence of legal barriers. AI could potentially be explored in four other areas: surveillance, combination with big data, operation of other core clinical services, and management of patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: In view of the continuing increase in the number of cases, and given that multiple waves of infections may occur, there is a need for effective methods to help control the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite its shortcomings, AI holds the potential to greatly augment existing human efforts, which may otherwise be overwhelmed by high patient numbers.

Reinforcement Learning for Clinical Decision Support in Critical Care: Comprehensive Review.

BACKGROUND: Decision support systems based on reinforcement learning (RL) have been implemented to facilitate the delivery of personalized care. This paper aimed to provide a comprehensive review of RL applications in the critical care setting. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to survey the literature on RL applications for clinical decision support in critical care and to provide insight into the challenges of applying various RL models. METHODS: We performed an extensive search of the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), and Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE). Studies published over the past 10 years (2010-2019) that have applied RL for critical care were included. RESULTS: We included 21 papers and found that RL has been used to optimize the choice of medications, drug dosing, and timing of interventions and to target personalized laboratory values. We further compared and contrasted the design of the RL models and the evaluation metrics for each application. CONCLUSIONS: RL has great potential for enhancing decision making in critical care. Challenges regarding RL system design, evaluation metrics, and model choice exist. More importantly, further work is required to validate RL in authentic clinical environments.

Chest radiography versus lung ultrasound for identification of acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Lung ultrasound may be a reasonable alternative to chest radiography for the identification of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but the diagnostic performance of lung ultrasound for ARDS is uncertain. We therefore analyzed the clinical outcomes of ARDS diagnosed according to the Berlin Definition, using either chest radiography (Berlin-CXR) or lung ultrasound (Berlin-LUS) as an alternative imaging method. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study in a 20-bed medical intensive care unit (ICU). Patients who required noninvasive ventilation or invasive ventilation for hypoxemic respiratory failure on ICU admission from August 2014 to March 2017 were included. Both chest radiography and lung ultrasound were performed routinely upon ICU admission. Comparisons were made using either the Berlin-CXR or Berlin-LUS definitions to diagnose ARDS with respect to the patient characteristics and clinical outcomes for each definition. ICU and hospital mortality were the main outcome measures for both definitions. RESULTS: The first admissions of 456 distinct patients were analyzed. Compared with the 216 patients who met the Berlin-CXR definition (ICU mortality 19.4%, hospital mortality 36.1%), 229 patients who met the Berlin-LUS definition (ICU mortality 22.7%, hospital mortality 34.5%) and 79 patients who met the Berlin-LUS but not the Berlin-CXR definition (ICU mortality 21.5%, hospital mortality 29.1%) had similar outcomes. In contrast, the 295 patients who met either definition had higher mortality than the 161 patients who did not meet either definition (ICU mortality 20.0% versus 12.4%, P = 0.041; hospital mortality 34.2% versus 24.2%, P = 0.027). Compared with Berlin-CXR, Berlin-LUS had a positive predictive value of 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.59-0.72) and a negative predictive value of 0.71 (0.65-0.77). Among the 216 Berlin-CXR ARDS patients, 150 patients (69.4%) also fulfilled Berlin-LUS definition. CONCLUSIONS: For the identification of ARDS using the Berlin definition, both chest radiography and lung ultrasound were equally related to mortality. The Berlin definition using lung ultrasound helped identify patients at higher risk of death, even if these patients did not fulfill the conventional Berlin definition using chest radiography. However, the moderate overlap of patients when chest imaging modalities differed suggests that chest radiography and lung ultrasound should be complementary rather than used interchangeably.

Nurse-performed screening for postextubation dysphagia: a retrospective cohort study in critically ill medical patients.

BACKGROUND: Swallowing difficulties are common, and dysphagia occurs frequently in intensive care unit (ICU) patients after extubation. Yet, no guidelines on postextubation swallowing assessment exist. We aimed to investigate the safety and effectiveness of nurse-performed screening (NPS) for postextubation dysphagia in the medical ICU. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of mechanically ventilated patients who were extubated in a 20-bed medical ICU. Phase I (no NPS, October 2012 to January 2014) and phase II (NPS, February 2014 to July 2015) were compared. In phase II, extubated patients received NPS up to three times on consecutive days; patients who failed were referred to speech-language pathologists. Outcomes analyzed included oral feeding at ICU discharge, reintubation, ICU readmission, postextubation pneumonia, ICU and/or hospital mortality, and ICU and/or hospital length of stay (LOS). Subgroup analysis was done for patients extubated after >72 h of mechanical ventilation, as the latter may predispose patients to postextubation dysphagia. Multivariable adjustments for Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score and comorbidities were done because of baseline differences between the phases. RESULTS: A total of 468 patients were studied (281 in phase I, 187 in phase II). Patients in phase II had higher APACHE II scores than those in phase I (27.2 ± 8.2 vs. 25.4 ± 8.2; P = 0.018). Despite this, patients in phase II showed a 111 % increase in (the odds of) oral feeding at ICU discharge and a 59 % decrease in postextubation pneumonia (multivariate P values 0.001 and 0.006, respectively). In the subgroup analysis, NPS was associated with a 127 % increase in oral feeding at ICU discharge, an 80 % decrease in postextubation pneumonia, and a 25 % decrease in hospital LOS (multivariate P values 0.021, 0.004, and 0.009, respectively). No other outcome differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: NPS for dysphagia is safe and may be superior to no screening with respect to several patient-centered outcomes.