A New Global Definition of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Background: Since publication of the 2012 Berlin definition of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), several developments have supported the need for an expansion of the definition, including the use of high-flow nasal oxygen, the expansion of the use of pulse oximetry in place of arterial blood gases, the use of ultrasound for chest imaging, and the need for applicability in resource-limited settings. Methods: A consensus conference of 32 critical care ARDS experts was convened, had six virtual meetings (June 2021 to March 2022), and subsequently obtained input from members of several critical care societies. The goal was to develop a definition that would 1) identify patients with the currently accepted conceptual framework for ARDS, 2) facilitate rapid ARDS diagnosis for clinical care and research, 3) be applicable in resource-limited settings, 4) be useful for testing specific therapies, and 5) be practical for communication to patients and caregivers. Results: The committee made four main recommendations: 1) include high-flow nasal oxygen with a minimum flow rate of ⩾30 L/min; 2) use PaO2:FiO2 ⩽ 300 mm Hg or oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry SpO2:FiO2 ⩽ 315 (if oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry is ⩽97%) to identify hypoxemia; 3) retain bilateral opacities for imaging criteria but add ultrasound as an imaging modality, especially in resource-limited areas; and 4) in resource-limited settings, do not require positive end-expiratory pressure, oxygen flow rate, or specific respiratory support devices. Conclusions: We propose a new global definition of ARDS that builds on the Berlin definition. The recommendations also identify areas for future research, including the need for prospective assessments of the feasibility, reliability, and prognostic validity of the proposed global definition.

Dyspnoea in acutely ill mechanically ventilated adult patients: an ERS/ESICM statement.

This statement outlines a review of the literature and current practice concerning the prevalence, clinical significance, diagnosis and management of dyspnoea in critically ill, mechanically ventilated adult patients. It covers the definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology, short- and middle-term impact, detection and quantification, and prevention and treatment of dyspnoea. It represents a collaboration of the European Respiratory Society and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Dyspnoea ranks among the most distressing experiences that human beings can endure. Approximately 40% of patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) report dyspnoea, with an average intensity of 45 mm on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 100 mm. Although it shares many similarities with pain, dyspnoea can be far worse than pain in that it summons a primal fear response. As such, it merits universal and specific consideration. Dyspnoea must be identified, prevented and relieved in every patient. In the ICU, mechanically ventilated patients are at high risk of experiencing breathing difficulties because of their physiological status and, in some instances, because of mechanical ventilation itself. At the same time, mechanically ventilated patients have barriers to signalling their distress. Addressing this major clinical challenge mandates teaching and training, and involves ICU caregivers and patients. This is even more important because, as opposed to pain which has become a universal healthcare concern, very little attention has been paid to the identification and management of respiratory suffering in mechanically ventilated ICU patients.

Meeting complex multidimensional needs in older patients and their families during and beyond critical illness.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight the emerging crisis of critically ill elderly patients and review the unique burden of multidimensional morbidity faced by these patients and caregivers and potential interventions. RECENT FINDINGS: Physical, psychological, and cognitive sequelae after critical illness are frequent, durable, and robust across the international ICU outcome literature. Elderly patients are more vulnerable to the multisystem sequelae of critical illness and its treatment and the resultant multidimensional morbidity may be profound, chronic, and significantly affect functional independence, transition to the community, and quality of life for patients and families. Recent data reinforce the importance of baseline functional status, health trajectory, and chronic illness as key determinants of long-term functional disability after ICU. These risks are even more pronounced in older patients. SUMMARY: The current article is an overview of the outcomes of older survivors of critical illness, putative interventions to mitigate the long-term morbidity of patients, and the consequences for families and caregivers. A multimodal longitudinal approach designed to follow patients for one or more years may foster a better understanding of multidimensional morbidity faced by vulnerable older patients and families and provides a detailed understanding of recovery trajectories in this unique population to optimize outcome, goals of care directives, and ongoing informed consent to ICU treatment.

Recovery from Sepsis: Management beyond Acute Care.

Recovery from sepsis is a key global health issue, impacting 38 million sepsis survivors worldwide per year. Sepsis survivors face a wide range of physical, cognitive, and psychosocial sequelae. Readmissions to hospital following sepsis are an important driver of global healthcare utilization and cost. Family members of sepsis survivors also experience significant stressors related to their role as informal caregivers. Increasing recognition of the burdens of sepsis survivorship has led to the development of postsepsis recovery programs to better support survivors and their families, although optimal models of care remain uncertain. The goal of this article is to perform a narrative review of recovery from sepsis from the perspective of patients, families, and health systems.

Characterizing usual-care physical rehabilitation in Canadian intensive care unit patients: a secondary analysis of the Canadian multicentre Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength pilot randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Physical rehabilitation (PR) in the intensive care unit (ICU) may improve outcomes for survivors but clinical trial results have been discordant. We hypothesized that discordant results may reflect treatment heterogeneity received by "usual care" comparator groups in PR studies. Usual-care PR is typically underspecified, which is a barrier to comparing results across treatment studies. The primary objective of the present study was to describe the usual-care PR received by critically ill patients enrolled in the Canadian multicentre Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength (CYCLE) pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) of PR. Other objectives were to help contextualize current research and provide data for international comparison. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of the CYCLE pilot RCT, patients were randomized to in-bed cycling and usual-care PR or usual-care PR alone. Physiotherapists documented usual-care PR including therapy received, type of activity, duration, adverse events and consequences, reasons for no PR, and concurrent relevant medical interventions. We characterized usual care using descriptive statistics at the cohort and patient levels. RESULTS: Across seven Canadian centres, 30 patients were randomized to usual-care PR. The median [interquartile range (IQR)] ICU stay was 10 [9-24] days and patients received PR on a median [IQR] of 5 [3-9] days for 23 [17-30] min per day. Eighteen patients (60%) stood, marched, or walked during usual care. Transient adverse events occurred in three patients on 1.5% (3/198) of days and none prompted session termination. CONCLUSIONS: In the usual-care arm of the CYCLE pilot RCT, PR was delivered on half of ICU days and over half of patients stood, marched, or walked. Adverse events during usual-care PR were uncommon. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02377830 ); first posted 4 March 2015.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La réadaptation physique (RP) à l'unité de soins intensifs (USI) pourrait améliorer les devenirs pour les personnes survivantes, mais les résultats des études cliniques sont contradictoires. Nous avons émis l'hypothèse que les résultats contradictoires pourraient refléter l'hétérogénéité des traitements reçus par les groupes de comparaison de « soins standards ¼ dans les études sur la RP. La RP habituelle est généralement sous-spécifiée, ce qui constitue un obstacle à la comparaison des résultats entre les études de traitement. L'objectif principal de la présente étude était de décrire les RP habituelles reçues par les patient·es gravement malades inscrit·es dans l'étude randomisée contrôlée (ERC) multicentrique canadienne pilote sur les RP intitulée CYCLE (Critical Care Cycling to Improve Lower Extremity Strength, soit Cyclisme en soins intensifs pour améliorer la force des membres inférieurs). D'autres objectifs étaient d'aider à contextualiser les recherches actuelles et de fournir des données pour une comparaison internationale. MéTHODE: Dans cette analyse secondaire de l'ERC pilote CYCLE, les patient·es ont été randomisé·es à faire du vélo au lit et de la RP habituelle ou seulement de la RP habituelle. Les physiothérapeutes ont documenté la RP habituelle, y compris la thérapie reçue, le type d'activité, la durée, les événements indésirables et les conséquences, les raisons de l'absence de RP et les interventions médicales pertinentes concomitantes. Nous avons caractérisé les soins standards à l'aide de statistiques descriptives au niveau de la cohorte et de la personne traitée. RéSULTATS: Dans sept centres canadiens, 30 patient·es ont été randomisé·es pour recevoir la RP habituelle. La durée de séjour médiane [écart interquartile (ÉIQ)] aux soins intensifs était de 10 [9-24] jours et les patient·es ont reçu de la RP sur une durée médiane [ÉIQ] de 5 [3-9] jours pendant 23 [17-30] minutes par jour. Dix-huit patient·es (60 %) se sont tenu·es debout, ont marché de façon stationnaire ou ont marché pendant les soins standards. Des effets indésirables transitoires sont survenus chez trois patient·es pendant 1,5 % (3/198) des jours et aucun n'a entraîné l'interruption de la séance. CONCLUSION: Dans le volet soins habituels de l'ERC pilote CYCLE, la réadaptation physique a été dispensée pendant la moitié des jours de soins intensifs et plus de la moitié des patient·es se sont tenu·es debout, ont marché de façon stationnaire ou ont marché. Les événements indésirables lors de la RP habituelle étaient rares. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02377830 ); première mise en ligne le 4 mars 2015.

Clustering of critically ill patients using an individualized learning approach enables dose optimization of mobilization in the ICU.

BACKGROUND: While early mobilization is commonly implemented in intensive care unit treatment guidelines to improve functional outcome, the characterization of the optimal individual dosage (frequency, level or duration) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that artificial intelligence-based clustering of a large ICU cohort can provide individualized mobilization recommendations that have a positive impact on the likelihood of being discharged home. METHODS: This study is an analysis of a prospective observational database of two interdisciplinary intensive care units in Munich, Germany. Dosage of mobilization is determined by sessions per day, mean duration, early mobilization as well as average and maximum level achieved. A k-means cluster analysis was conducted including collected parameters at ICU admission to generate clinically definable clusters. RESULTS: Between April 2017 and May 2019, 948 patients were included. Four different clusters were identified, comprising "Young Trauma," "Severely ill & Frail," "Old non-frail" and "Middle-aged" patients. Early mobilization (< 72 h) was the most important factor to be discharged home in "Young Trauma" patients (ORadj 10.0 [2.8 to 44.0], p < 0.001). In the cluster of "Middle-aged" patients, the likelihood to be discharged home increased with each mobilization level, to a maximum 24-fold increased likelihood for ambulating (ORadj 24.0 [7.4 to 86.1], p < 0.001). The likelihood increased significantly when standing or ambulating was achieved in the older, non-frail cluster (ORadj 4.7 [1.2 to 23.2], p = 0.035 and ORadj 8.1 [1.8 to 45.8], p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: An artificial intelligence-based learning approach was able to divide a heterogeneous critical care cohort into four clusters, which differed significantly in their clinical characteristics and in their mobilization parameters. Depending on the cluster, different mobilization strategies supported the likelihood of being discharged home enabling an individualized and resource-optimized mobilization approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT03666286, retrospectively registered 04 September 2018.

Outcomes of patients with respiratory failure declined for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Descriptive information on referral patterns and short-term outcomes of patients with respiratory failure declined for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is lacking. METHODS: We conducted a prospective single-centre observational cohort study of ECMO referrals to Toronto General Hospital (receiving hospital) for severe respiratory failure (COVID-19 and non-COVID-19), between 1 December 2019 and 30 November 2020. Data related to the referral, the referral decision, and reasons for refusal were collected. Reasons for refusal were grouped into three mutually exclusive categories selected a priori: "too sick now," "too sick before," and "not sick enough." In declined referrals, referring physicians were surveyed to collect patient outcome on day 7 after the referral. The primary study endpoints were referral outcome (accepted/declined) and patient outcome (alive/deceased). RESULTS: A total of 193 referrals were included; 73% were declined for transfer. Referral outcome was influenced by age (odds ratio [OR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 0.96; P < 0.01) and involvement of other members of the ECMO team in the discussion (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 1.28 to 15.2; P < 0.01). Patient outcomes were missing in 46 (24%) referrals (inability to locate the referring physician or the referring physician being unable to recall the outcome). Using available data (95 declined and 52 accepted referrals; n = 147), survival to day 7 was 49% for declined referrals (35% for patients deemed "too sick now," 53% for "too sick before," 100% for "not sick enough," and 50% for reason for refusal not reported) and 98% for transferred patients. Sensitivity analysis setting missing outcomes to directional extreme values retained robustness of survival probabilities. CONCLUSION: Nearly half of the patients declined for ECMO consideration were alive on day 7. More information on patient trajectory and long-term outcomes in declined referrals is needed to refine selection criteria.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: On manque d'informations descriptives sur les schémas de références et les devenirs à court terme des patient·es atteint·es d'insuffisance respiratoire n'ayant pas pu recevoir une oxygénation par membrane extracorporelle (ECMO). MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude de cohorte observationnelle prospective monocentrique sur les références vers l'ECMO à l'Hôpital général de Toronto (hôpital d'accueil) pour insuffisance respiratoire grave (COVID-19 et non-COVID-19), entre le 1er décembre 2019 et le 30 novembre 2020. Les données relatives à la référence, à la décision de référence et aux motifs du refus ont été recueillies. Les motifs de refus ont été regroupés en trois catégories mutuellement exclusives sélectionnées a priori : « Trop malade maintenant ¼, « Trop malade avant ¼ et « Pas assez malade ¼. En ce qui concerne les références refusées, un sondage envoyé aux médecins traitant·es avait pour objectif de recueillir les devenirs des patient·es le jour 7 suivant la référence. Les critères d'évaluation principaux de l'étude étaient le résultat de la référence (accepté/refusé) et le devenir des patient·es (vivant·e/décédé·e). RéSULTATS: Au total, 193 références ont été incluses; le transfert a été refusé dans 73 % des cas. L'acceptation ou le refus de la référence était influencé par l'âge (rapport de cotes [RC], 0,97; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 0,95 à 0,96; P < 0,01) et la participation d'autres membres de l'équipe ECMO à la discussion (RC, 4,42; IC 95 %, 1,28 à 15,2; P < 0,01). Les devenirs des patient·es étaient manquants pour 46 (24 %) des personnes référées (incapacité de localiser les médecins traitant·es ou incapacité des médecins de se souvenir du devenir). À l'aide des données disponibles (95 références refusées et 52 références acceptées; n = 147), la survie jusqu'au jour 7 était de 49 % pour les références refusées (35 % pour la patientèle jugée « trop malade maintenant ¼, 53 % pour celle « trop malade avant ¼, 100 % pour celle « pas assez malade ¼ et 50 % pour les cas où la raison du refus n'était pas déclarée) et 98 % pour les patient·es transféré·es. L'analyse de sensibilité établissant les résultats manquants à des valeurs extrêmes directionnelles a conservé la robustesse des probabilités de survie. CONCLUSION: Près de la moitié des patient·es pour lesquel·les un traitement sous ECMO a été refusé étaient en vie au jour 7. Davantage d'informations concernant la trajectoire et les devenirs à long terme des patient·es refusé·es sont nécessaires pour parfaire les critères de sélection.

Studying the post-COVID-19 condition: research challenges, strategies, and importance of Core Outcome Set development.

BACKGROUND: A substantial portion of people with COVID-19 subsequently experience lasting symptoms including fatigue, shortness of breath, and neurological complaints such as cognitive dysfunction many months after acute infection. Emerging evidence suggests that this condition, commonly referred to as long COVID but also known as post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) or post-COVID-19 condition, could become a significant global health burden. MAIN TEXT: While the number of studies investigating the post-COVID-19 condition is increasing, there is no agreement on how this new disease should be defined and diagnosed in clinical practice and what relevant outcomes to measure. There is an urgent need to optimise and standardise outcome measures for this important patient group both for clinical services and for research and to allow comparing and pooling of data. CONCLUSIONS: A Core Outcome Set for post-COVID-19 condition should be developed in the shortest time frame possible, for improvement in data quality, harmonisation, and comparability between different geographical locations. We call for a global initiative, involving all relevant partners, including, but not limited to, healthcare professionals, researchers, methodologists, patients, and caregivers. We urge coordinated actions aiming to develop a Core Outcome Set (COS) for post-COVID-19 condition in both the adult and paediatric populations.

Wellness and Coping of Physicians Who Worked in ICUs During the Pandemic: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional North American Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Few surveys have focused on physician moral distress, burnout, and professional fulfilment. We assessed physician wellness and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey using four validated instruments. SETTING: Sixty-two sites in Canada and the United States. SUBJECTS: Attending physicians (adult, pediatric; intensivist, nonintensivist) who worked in North American ICUs. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analysed 431 questionnaires (43.3% response rate) from 25 states and eight provinces. Respondents were predominantly male (229 [55.6%]) and in practice for 11.8 ± 9.8 years. Compared with prepandemic, respondents reported significant intrapandemic increases in days worked/mo, ICU bed occupancy, and self-reported moral distress (240 [56.9%]) and burnout (259 [63.8%]). Of the 10 top-ranked items that incited moral distress, most pertained to regulatory/organizational ( n = 6) or local/institutional ( n = 2) issues or both ( n = 2). Average moral distress (95.6 ± 66.9), professional fulfilment (6.5 ± 2.1), and burnout scores (3.6 ± 2.0) were moderate with 227 physicians (54.6%) meeting burnout criteria. A significant dose-response existed between COVID-19 patient volume and moral distress scores. Physicians who worked more days/mo and more scheduled in-house nightshifts, especially combined with more unscheduled in-house nightshifts, experienced significantly more moral distress. One in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We identified four coping profiles (active/social, avoidant, mixed/ambivalent, infrequent) that were associated with significant differences across all wellness measures. CONCLUSIONS: Despite moderate intrapandemic moral distress and burnout, physicians experienced moderate professional fulfilment. However, one in five physicians used at least one maladaptive coping strategy. We highlight potentially modifiable factors at individual, institutional, and regulatory levels to enhance physician wellness.

Outcomes in patients with and without disability admitted to hospital with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Disability-related considerations have largely been absent from the COVID-19 response, despite evidence that people with disabilities are at elevated risk for acquiring COVID-19. We evaluated clinical outcomes in patients who were admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with a disability compared with patients without a disability. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included adults with COVID-19 who were admitted to hospital and discharged between Jan. 1, 2020, and Nov. 30, 2020, at 7 hospitals in Ontario, Canada. We compared in-hospital death, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), hospital length of stay and unplanned 30-day readmission among patients with and without a physical disability, hearing or vision impairment, traumatic brain injury, or intellectual or developmental disability, overall and stratified by age (≤ 64 and ≥ 65 yr) using multivariable regression, controlling for sex, residence in a long-term care facility and comorbidity. RESULTS: Among 1279 admissions to hospital for COVID-19, 22.3% had a disability. We found that patients with a disability were more likely to die than those without a disability (28.1% v. 17.6%), had longer hospital stays (median 13.9 v. 7.8 d) and more readmissions (17.6% v. 7.9%), but had lower ICU admission rates (22.5% v. 28.3%). After adjustment, there were no statistically significant differences between those with and without disabilities for in-hospital death or admission to ICU. After adjustment, patients with a disability had longer hospital stays (rate ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19-1.56) and greater risk of readmission (relative risk 1.77, 95% CI 1.14-2.75). In age-stratified analyses, we observed longer hospital stays among patients with a disability than in those without, in both younger and older subgroups; readmission risk was driven by younger patients with a disability. INTERPRETATION: Patients with a disability who were admitted to hospital with COVID-19 had longer stays and elevated readmission risk than those without disabilities. Disability-related needs should be addressed to support these patients in hospital and after discharge.

Identifying clinical subtypes in sepsis-survivors with different one-year outcomes: a secondary latent class analysis of the FROG-ICU cohort.

BACKGROUND: Late mortality risk in sepsis-survivors persists for years with high readmission rates and low quality of life. The present study seeks to link the clinical sepsis-survivors heterogeneity with distinct biological profiles at ICU discharge and late adverse events using an unsupervised analysis. METHODS: In the original FROG-ICU prospective, observational, multicenter study, intensive care unit (ICU) patients with sepsis on admission (Sepsis-3) were identified (N = 655). Among them, 467 were discharged alive from the ICU and included in the current study. Latent class analysis was applied to identify distinct sepsis-survivors clinical classes using readily available data at ICU discharge. The primary endpoint was one-year mortality after ICU discharge. RESULTS: At ICU discharge, two distinct subtypes were identified (A and B) using 15 readily available clinical and biological variables. Patients assigned to subtype B (48% of the studied population) had more impaired cardiovascular and kidney functions, hematological disorders and inflammation at ICU discharge than subtype A. Sepsis-survivors in subtype B had significantly higher one-year mortality compared to subtype A (respectively, 34% vs 16%, p < 0.001). When adjusted for standard long-term risk factors (e.g., age, comorbidities, severity of illness, renal function and duration of ICU stay), subtype B was independently associated with increased one-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 1.74 (95% CI 1.16-2.60); p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: A subtype with sustained organ failure and inflammation at ICU discharge can be identified from routine clinical and laboratory data and is independently associated with poor long-term outcome in sepsis-survivors. Trial registration NCT01367093; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01367093 .

Outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 survivors and caregivers: a case study-centred narrative review.

PURPOSE: Critical illness is a transformative experience for both patients and their family members. For COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), survival may be the start of a long road to recovery. Our knowledge of the post-ICU long-term sequelae of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) may inform our understanding and management of the long-term effects of COVID-19. SOURCE: We identified international and Canadian epidemiologic data on ICU admissions for COVID-19, COVID-19 pathophysiology, emerging ICU practice patterns, early reports of long-term outcomes, and federal support programs for survivors and their families. Centred around an illustrating case study, we applied relevant literature from ARDS and SARS to contextualize knowledge within emerging COVID-19 research and extrapolate findings to future long-term outcomes. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: COVID-19 is a multisystem disease with unknown long-term morbidity and mortality. Its pathophysiology is distinct and unique from ARDS, SARS, and critical illness. Nevertheless, based on initial reports of critical care management for COVID-19 and the varied injurious supportive practices employed in the ICU, patients and families are at risk for post-intensive care syndrome. The distinct incremental risk of COVID-19 multiple organ dysfunction is unknown. The risk of mood disorders in family members may be further exacerbated by imposed isolation and stigma. CONCLUSION: Emerging literature on COVID-19 outcomes suggests some similarities with those of ARDS/SARS and prolonged mechanical ventilation. The pathophysiology of COVID-19 is presented here in the context of early outcome data and to inform an agenda for longitudinal research for patients and families.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les maladies au stade critique constituent une expérience bouleversante tant pour les patients que pour leurs proches. Pour les patients atteints de la COVID-19 admis aux soins intensifs (USI), la survie peut être le début d'un long parcours vers la guérison. Notre connaissance des séquelles à long terme post-USI d'un syndrome de détresse respiratoire aiguë (SDRA) ou d'un syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère (SRAS) pourrait éclairer notre compréhension et notre prise en charge des effets à long terme de la COVID-19. SOURCES: Nous avons identifié des données épidémiologiques internationales et canadiennes sur les admissions aux soins intensifs pour la COVID-19, la physiopathologie de la COVID-19, les schémas de pratique émergents en soins intensifs, les premiers rapports sur les issues à long terme et les programmes de soutien fédéraux pour les survivants et leurs familles. En nous centrant autour d'une étude de cas pour illustrer notre propos, nous avons appliqué la littérature pertinente à propos du SDRA et du SRAS afin de contextualiser les connaissances de la recherche émergente sur la COVID-19 et extrapoler les conclusions aux futures issues à long terme. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: La COVID-19 est une maladie multisystémique dont la morbidité et la mortalité à long terme sont inconnues. Sa physiopathologie est unique et distincte du SDRA, du SRAS et des maladies graves. Néanmoins, en nous fondant sur les rapports initiaux de prise en charge aux soins intensifs de la COVID-19 et sur les diverses pratiques de support préjudiciables utilisées aux soins intensifs, les patients et les familles sont à risque de syndrome post-soins intensifs. Le risque distinct supplémentaire de dysfonctionnement multiviscéral de la COVID-19 est inconnu. Le risque de troubles de l'humeur chez les proches peut être encore exacerbé par l'isolement imposé et la stigmatisation. CONCLUSION: La littérature émergente sur les issues de la COVID-19 suggère certaines similitudes avec celles du SDRA/SRAS et de la ventilation mécanique prolongée. La physiopathologie de la COVID-19 est présentée ici dans le contexte des premières données sur les issues et pour éclairer un programme de recherche longitudinale pour les patients et leurs familles.

Association of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation With New Mental Health Diagnoses in Adult Survivors of Critical Illness.

Importance: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used as temporary cardiorespiratory support in critically ill patients, but little is known regarding long-term psychiatric sequelae among survivors after ECMO. Objective: To investigate the association between ECMO survivorship and postdischarge mental health diagnoses among adult survivors of critical illness. Design, Setting, and Participants: Population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, from April 1, 2010, through March 31, 2020. Adult patients (N=4462; age ≥18 years) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), and surviving to hospital discharge were included. Exposures: Receipt of ECMO. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a new mental health diagnosis (a composite of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder; schizophrenia, other psychotic disorders; other mental health disorders; and social problems) following discharge. There were 8 secondary outcomes including incidence of substance misuse, deliberate self-harm, death by suicide, and individual components of the composite primary outcome. Patients were compared with ICU survivors not receiving ECMO using overlap propensity score-weighted cause-specific proportional hazard models. Results: Among 642 survivors who received ECMO (mean age, 50.7 years; 40.7% female), median length of follow-up was 730 days; among 3820 matched ICU survivors who did not receive ECMO (mean age, 51.0 years; 40.0% female), median length of follow-up was 1390 days. Incidence of new mental health conditions among survivors who received ECMO was 22.1 per 100-person years (95% confidence interval [CI] 19.5-25.1), and 14.5 per 100-person years (95% CI, 13.8-15.2) among non-ECMO ICU survivors (absolute rate difference of 7.6 per 100-person years [95% CI, 4.7-10.5]). Following propensity weighting, ECMO survivorship was significantly associated with an increased risk of new mental health diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.24 [95% CI, 1.01-1.52]). There were no significant differences between survivors who received ECMO vs ICU survivors who did not receive ECMO in substance misuse (1.6 [95% CI, 1.1 to 2.4] per 100 person-years vs 1.4 [95% CI, 1.2 to 1.6] per 100 person-years; absolute rate difference, 0.2 per 100 person-years [95% CI, -0.4 to 0.8]; HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.48 to 1.53]) or deliberate self-harm (0.4 [95% CI, 0.2 to 0.9] per 100 person-years vs 0.3 [95% CI, 0.2 to 0.3] per 100 person-years; absolute rate difference, 0.1 per 100 person-years [95% CI, -0.2 to 0.4]; HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.21 to 2.23]). There were fewer than 5 total cases of death by suicide in the entire cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adult survivors of critical illness, receipt of ECMO, compared with ICU hospitalization without ECMO, was significantly associated with a modestly increased risk of new mental health diagnosis or social problem diagnosis after discharge. Further research is necessary to elucidate the potential mechanisms underlying this relationship.

Characteristics and outcomes of hospital admissions for COVID-19 and influenza in the Toronto area.

BACKGROUND: Patient characteristics, clinical care, resource use and outcomes associated with admission to hospital for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Canada are not well described. METHODS: We described all adults with COVID-19 or influenza discharged from inpatient medical services and medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) between Nov. 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020, at 7 hospitals in Toronto and Mississauga, Ontario. We compared patient outcomes using multivariable regression models, controlling for patient sociodemographic factors and comorbidity level. We validated the accuracy of 7 externally developed risk scores to predict mortality among patients with COVID-19. RESULTS: There were 1027 hospital admissions with COVID-19 (median age 65 yr, 59.1% male) and 783 with influenza (median age 68 yr, 50.8% male). Patients younger than 50 years accounted for 21.2% of all admissions for COVID-19 and 24.0% of ICU admissions. Compared with influenza, patients with COVID-19 had significantly greater in-hospital mortality (unadjusted 19.9% v. 6.1%, adjusted relative risk [RR] 3.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.56-4.68), ICU use (unadjusted 26.4% v. 18.0%, adjusted RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.25-1.80) and hospital length of stay (unadjusted median 8.7 d v. 4.8 d, adjusted rate ratio 1.45, 95% CI 1.25-1.69). Thirty-day readmission was not significantly different (unadjusted 9.3% v. 9.6%, adjusted RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.70-1.39). Three points-based risk scores for predicting in-hospital mortality showed good discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] ranging from 0.72 to 0.81) and calibration. INTERPRETATION: During the first wave of the pandemic, admission to hospital for COVID-19 was associated with significantly greater mortality, ICU use and hospital length of stay than influenza. Simple risk scores can predict in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19 with good accuracy.

Gender Differences in Authorship of Critical Care Literature.

Rationale: Gender gaps exist in academic leadership positions in critical care. Peer-reviewed publications are crucial to career advancement, and yet little is known regarding gender differences in authorship of critical care research.Objectives: To evaluate gender differences in authorship of critical care literature.Methods: We used a validated database of author gender to analyze authorship of critical care articles indexed in PubMed between 2008 and 2018 in 40 frequently cited journals. High-impact journals were defined as those in the top 5% of all journals. We used mixed-effects logistic regression to evaluate the association of senior author gender with first and middle author gender, as well as association of first author gender with journal impact factor.Measurements and Main Results: Among 18,483 studies, 30.8% had female first authors, and 19.5% had female senior authors. Female authorship rose slightly over the last decade (average annual increases of 0.44% [P < 0.01] and 0.51% [P < 0.01] for female first and senior authors, respectively). When the senior author was female, the odds of female coauthorship rose substantially (first author adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.71-2.17; middle author aOR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.29-1.69). Female first authors had higher odds than men of publishing in lower-impact journals (aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.16-1.45).Conclusions: Women comprise less than one-third of first authors and one-fourth of senior authors of critical care research, with minimal increase over the past decade. When the senior author was female, the odds of female coauthorship rose substantially. However, female first authors tend to publish in lower-impact journals. These findings may help explain the underrepresentation of women in critical care academic leadership positions and identify targets for improvement.

Effect of Probiotics on Incident Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Critically Ill Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Growing interest in microbial dysbiosis during critical illness has raised questions about the therapeutic potential of microbiome modification with probiotics. Prior randomized trials in this population suggest that probiotics reduce infection, particularly ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), although probiotic-associated infections have also been reported. Objective: To evaluate the effect of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG on preventing VAP, additional infections, and other clinically important outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized placebo-controlled trial in 44 ICUs in Canada, the United States, and Saudi Arabia enrolling adults predicted to require mechanical ventilation for at least 72 hours. A total of 2653 patients were enrolled from October 2013 to March 2019 (final follow-up, October 2020). Interventions: Enteral L rhamnosus GG (1 × 1010 colony-forming units) (n = 1321) or placebo (n = 1332) twice daily in the ICU. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was VAP determined by duplicate blinded central adjudication. Secondary outcomes were other ICU-acquired infections including Clostridioides difficile infection, diarrhea, antimicrobial use, ICU and hospital length of stay, and mortality. Results: Among 2653 randomized patients (mean age, 59.8 years [SD], 16.5 years), 2650 (99.9%) completed the trial (mean age, 59.8 years [SD], 16.5 years; 1063 women [40.1%.] with a mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 22.0 (SD, 7.8) and received the study product for a median of 9 days (IQR, 5-15 days). VAP developed among 289 of 1318 patients (21.9%) receiving probiotics vs 284 of 1332 controls (21.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.03 (95% CI, 0.87-1.22; P = .73, absolute difference, 0.6%, 95% CI, -2.5% to 3.7%). None of the 20 prespecified secondary outcomes, including other ICU-acquired infections, diarrhea, antimicrobial use, mortality, or length of stay showed a significant difference. Fifteen patients (1.1%) receiving probiotics vs 1 (0.1%) in the control group experienced the adverse event of L rhamnosus in a sterile site or the sole or predominant organism in a nonsterile site (odds ratio, 14.02; 95% CI, 1.79-109.58; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Among critically ill patients requiring mechanical ventilation, administration of the probiotic L rhamnosus GG compared with placebo, resulted in no significant difference in the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia. These findings do not support the use of L rhamnosus GG in critically ill patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02462590.