Geo-economic Influence on the Effect of Fluid Volume for Sepsis Resuscitation: A Meta-Analysis.

Rationale: Sepsis management relies on fluid resuscitation avoiding fluid overload and its related organ congestion. Objectives: To explore the influence of country income group on risk-benefit balance of fluid management strategies in sepsis. Methods: We searched e-databases for all randomized controlled trials on fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis or septic shock up to January 2023, excluding studies on hypertonic fluids, colloids, and depletion-based interventions. The effect of fluid strategies (higher versus lower volumes) on mortality was analyzed per income group (i.e., low- and middle-income countries [LMICs] or high-income countries [HICs]). Measurements and Main Results: Twenty-nine studies (11,798 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. There was a numerically higher mortality in studies of LMICs as compared with those of HICs: median, 37% (interquartile range [IQR]: 26-41) versus 29% (IQR: 17-38; P = 0.06). Income group significantly interacted with the effect of fluid volume on mortality: Higher fluid volume was associated with higher mortality in LMICs but not in HICs: odds ratio (OR), 1.47; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.14-1.90 versus 1.00 (95% CI: 0.87-1.16), P = 0.01 for subgroup differences. Higher fluid volume was associated with increased need for mechanical ventilation in LMICs (OR, 1.24 [95% CI: 1.08-1.43]) but not in HICs (OR, 1.02 [95% CI: 0.80-1.29]). Self-reported access to mechanical ventilation also significantly influenced the effect of fluid volume on mortality, which increased with higher volumes only in settings with limited access to mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.09-1.93] vs. 1.09 [95% CI: 0.93-1.28], P = 0.02 for subgroup differences). Conclusions: In sepsis trials, the effect of fluid resuscitation approach differed by setting, with higher volume of fluid resuscitation associated with increased mortality in LMICs and in settings with restricted access to mechanical ventilation. The precise reason for these differences is unclear and may be attributable in part to resource constraints, participant variation between trials, or other unmeasured factors.

White Paper on Early Critical Care Services in Low Resource Settings.

This White Paper has been formally accepted for support by the International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM) and by the World Federation of Intensive and Critical Care (WFICC), put forth by a multi-specialty group of intensivists and emergency medicine providers from low- and low-middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HiCs) with the aim of 1) defining the current state of caring for the critically ill in low-resource settings (LRS) within LMICs and 2) highlighting policy options and recommendations for improving the system-level delivery of early critical care services in LRS. LMICs have a high burden of critical illness and worse patient outcomes than HICs, hence, the focus of this White Paper is on the care of critically ill patients in the early stages of presentation in LMIC settings. In such settings, the provision of early critical care is challenged by a fragmented health system, costs, a health care workforce with limited training, and competing healthcare priorities. Early critical care services are defined as the early interventions that support vital organ function during the initial care provided to the critically ill patient-these interventions can be performed at any point of patient contact and can be delivered across diverse settings in the healthcare system and do not necessitate specialty personnel. Currently, a single "best" care delivery model likely does not exist in LMICs given the heterogeneity in local context; therefore, objective comparisons of quality, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness between varying models are difficult to establish. While limited, there is data to suggest that caring for the critically ill may be cost effective in LMICs, contrary to a widely held belief. Drawing from locally available resources and context, strengthening early critical care services in LRS will require a multi-faceted approach, including three core pillars: education, research, and policy. Education initiatives for physicians, nurses, and allied health staff that focus on protocolized emergency response training can bridge the workforce gap in the short-term; however, each country's current human resources must be evaluated to decide on the duration of training, who should be trained, and using what curriculum. Understanding the burden of critical Illness, best practices for resuscitation, and appropriate quality metrics for different early critical care services implementation models in LMICs are reliant upon strengthening the regional research capacity, therefore, standard documentation systems should be implemented to allow for registry use and quality improvement. Policy efforts at a local, national and international level to strengthen early critical care services should focus on funding the building blocks of early critical care services systems and promoting the right to access early critical care regardless of the patient's geographic or financial barriers. Additionally, national and local policies describing ethical dilemmas involving the withdrawal of life-sustaining care should be developed with broad stakeholder representation based on local cultural beliefs as well as the optimization of limited resources.

Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury: An Exploratory Multicenter International Quality-Improvement Study in the ICUs With Variable Resources.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the "Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury" decision support tool during ICU admission and rounding is associated with improvements in nonadherence to evidence-based daily care processes and outcomes in variably resourced ICUs. DESIGN, SETTINGS, PATIENTS: This before-after study was performed in 34 ICUs (15 countries) from 2013 to 2017. Data were collected for 3 months before and 6 months after Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation. INTERVENTIONS: Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation using remote simulation training. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The coprimary outcomes, modified from the original protocol before data analysis, were nonadherence to 10 basic care processes and ICU and hospital length of stay. There were 1,447 patients in the preimplementation phase and 2,809 patients in the postimplementation phase. After adjusting for center effect, Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation was associated with reduced nonadherence to care processes (adjusted incidence rate ratio [95% CI]): deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis (0.74 [0.68-0.81), peptic ulcer prophylaxis (0.46 [0.38-0.57]), spontaneous breathing trial (0.81 [0.76-0.86]), family conferences (0.86 [0.81-0.92]), and daily assessment for the need of central venous catheters (0.85 [0.81-0.90]), urinary catheters (0.84 [0.80-0.88]), antimicrobials (0.66 [0.62-0.71]), and sedation (0.62 [0.57-0.67]). Analyses adjusted for baseline characteristics showed associations of Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation with decreased ICU length of stay (adjusted ratio of geometric means [95% CI]) 0.86 [0.80-0.92]), hospital length of stay (0.92 [0.85-0.97]), and hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.81 (0.69-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: A quality-improvement intervention with remote simulation training to implement a decision support tool was associated with decreased nonadherence to daily care processes, shorter length of stay, and decreased mortality.

Pediatric Emergency and Critical Care Resources and Infrastructure in Resource-Limited Settings: A Multicountry Survey.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the infrastructure and resources for pediatric emergency and critical care delivery in resource-limited settings worldwide. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey with survey items developed through literature review and revised following piloting. SETTING: The electronic survey was disseminated internationally in November 2019 via e-mail directories of pediatric intensive care societies and networks and using social media. PATIENTS: Healthcare providers who self-identified as working in resource-limited settings. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Results were summarized using descriptive statistics and resource availability was compared across World Bank country income groups. We received 328 responses (238 hospitals, 60 countries), predominantly in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa (n = 161, 67.4%). Hospitals were in low-income (28, 11.7%), middle-income (166, 69.5%), and high-income (44, 18.4%) countries. Across 174 PICU and adult ICU admitting children, there were statistically significant differences in the proportion of hospitals reporting consistent resource availability ("often" or "always") between country income groups (p < 0·05). Resources with limited availability in lower income countries included advanced ventilatory support, invasive and noninvasive monitoring, central venous access, renal replacement therapy, advanced imaging, microbiology, biochemistry, blood products, antibiotics, parenteral nutrition, and analgesic/sedative drugs. Seventy-seven ICUs (52.7%) were staffed 24/7 by a pediatric intensivist or anesthetist. The nurse-to-patient ratio was less than 1:2 in 71 ICUs (49.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary data demonstrate significant disparity in the availability of essential and advanced human and material resources for the care of critically ill children in resource-limited settings. Minimum standards for essential pediatric emergency and critical care in resource-limited settings are needed.

Comparison of 2 Triage Scoring Guidelines for Allocation of Mechanical Ventilators.

Importance: In the current setting of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, there is concern for the possible need for triage criteria for ventilator allocation; to our knowledge, the implications of using specific criteria have never been assessed. Objective: To determine which and how many admissions to intensive care units are identified as having the lowest priority for ventilator allocation using 2 distinct sets of proposed triage criteria. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study conducted in spring 2020 used data collected from US hospitals and reported in the Philips eICU Collaborative Research Database. Adult admissions (N = 40 439) to 291 intensive care units from 2014 to 2015 who received mechanical ventilation and were not elective surgery patients were included. Exposures: New York State triage criteria and original triage criteria proposed by White and Lo. Main Outcomes and Measures: Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were calculated for admissions. The proportion of patients who met initial criteria for the lowest level of priority for mechanical ventilation using each set of criteria and their characteristics and outcomes were assessed. Agreement was compared between the 2 sets of triage criteria, recognizing differences in stated criteria aims. Results: Among 40 439 intensive care unit admissions of patients who received mechanical ventilation, the mean (SD) age was 62.6 (16.6) years, 54.9% were male, and the mean (SD) SOFA score was 4.5 (3.7). Using the New York State triage criteria, 8.9% (95% CI, 8.7%-9.2%) were in the lowest priority category; these lowest priority admissions had a mean (SD) age of 62.9 (16.6) years, used a median (interquartile range) of 57.3 (20.1-133.5) ventilator hours each, and had a hospital survival rate of 38.6% (95% CI, 37.0%-40.2%). Using the White and Lo triage criteria, 4.3% (95% CI, 4.1%-4.5%) were in the lowest priority category; these admissions had a mean (SD) age of 68.6 (13.2) years, used a median (interquartile range) of 61.7 (24.3-142.8) ventilator hours each, and had a hospital survival rate of 56.2% (95% CI, 53.8%-58.7%). Only 655 admissions (1.6%) were in the lowest priority category for both guidelines, with the κ statistic for agreement equal to 0.20 (95% CI, 0.18-0.21). Conclusions and Relevance: Use of 2 initially proposed ventilator triage guidelines identified approximately 1 in every 10 to 25 admissions as having the lowest priority for ventilator allocation, with little agreement. Clinical assessment of different potential criteria for triage decisions in critically ill populations is important to ensure valid and equitable allocation of resources.

Point-of-care diagnostic tests for influenza in the emergency department: A cost-effectiveness analysis in a high-risk population from a Canadian perspective.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of novel rapid diagnostic tests: rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDT), digital immunoassays (DIA), rapid nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT), and other treatment algorithms for influenza in high-risk patients presenting to hospital with influenza-like illness (ILI). METHODS: We developed a decision-analytic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic test strategies (RIDT, DIA, NAAT, clinical judgement, batch polymerase chain reaction) preceding treatment; no diagnostic testing and treating everyone; and not treating anyone. We modeled high-risk 65-year old patients from a health payer perspective and accrued outcomes over a patient's lifetime. We reported health outcomes, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), healthcare costs, and net health benefit (NHB) to measure cost-effectiveness per cohort of 100,000 patients. RESULTS: Treating everyone with no prior testing was the most cost-effective strategy, at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000/QALY, in over 85% of simulations. This strategy yielded the highest NHB of 15.0344 QALYs, but inappropriately treats all patients without influenza. Of the novel rapid diagnostics, NAAT resulted in the highest NHB (15.0277 QALYs), and the least number of deaths (1,571 per 100,000). Sensitivity analyses determined that results were most impacted by the pretest probability of ILI being influenza, diagnostic test sensitivity, and treatment effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our model, treating high-risk patients presenting to hospital with influenza-like illness, without performing a novel rapid diagnostic test, resulted in the highest NHB and was most cost-effective. However, consideration of whether treatment is appropriate in the absence of diagnostic confirmation should be taken into account for decision-making by clinicians and policymakers.

Association of Surrogate Decision-making Interventions for Critically Ill Adults With Patient, Family, and Resource Use Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Physicians often rely on surrogate decision-makers (SDMs) to make important decisions on behalf of critically ill patients during times of incapacity. It is uncertain whether targeted interventions to improve surrogate decision-making in the intensive care unit (ICU) reduce nonbeneficial treatment and improve SDM comprehension, satisfaction, and psychological morbidity. Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to determine the association of such interventions with patient- and family-centered outcomes and resource use. Data Sources: A search was conducted of MEDLINE, Embase, and other relevant databases for potentially relevant studies from inception through May 30, 2018. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials studying interventions that were targeted at SDMs or family members of critically ill adults in the ICU were included. Key search terms included surrogate or substitute decision-maker, critically ill, randomized controlled trials, and their respective related terms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two independent, blinded reviewers independently screened citations and extracted data. Random effects models with inverse variance weighting were used to pool outcomes data when possible and otherwise present findings qualitatively. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were divided into 3 categories: (1) patient-related clinical outcomes (mortality, length of stay [LOS], duration of life-sustaining therapies), (2) SDM and family-related outcomes (comprehension, major change in goals of care, incident psychological comorbidities [posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression], and satisfaction with care), and (3) use of resources (cost of care and health care resource use). Results: Of 3735 studies screened, 13 RCTs were included, comprising a total of 10 453 patients. Interventions were categorized as health care professional led (n = 6), ethics consultation (n = 3), palliative care consultation (n = 2), and media (n = 1 pamphlet and 1 video). No association with mortality was observed (risk ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.98-1.08; P = .22). Intensive care unit LOS was significantly shorter among patients who died (mean difference, -2.11 days; 95% CI, -4.16 to -0.07; P = .04), but not in the overall population (mean difference, -0.79 days; 95% CI, -2.33 to 0.76 days; P = .32). There was no consistent difference in SDM-related outcomes, including satisfaction with care or perceived quality of care (n = 6 studies) and incident psychological comorbidities (depression: ratio of means, -0.11; 95% CI, -0.29 to 0.08; P = .26; anxiety: ratio of means, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.25 to 0.08; P = .31; or posttraumatic stress disorder: ratio of means: -0.04; 95% CI, -0.21 to 0.13; P = .65). Among 6 trials reporting effects on health care resource use, only 1 nurse-led intervention observed a significant reduction in costs ($75 850 control vs $51 060 intervention; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: Systematic interventions aimed at improving surrogate decision-making for critically ill adults may reduce ICU LOS among patients who die in the ICU, without influencing overall mortality. Better understanding of the complex processes related to surrogate decision-making is needed.

Determinants of Depressive Symptoms at 1 Year Following ICU Discharge in Survivors of ≥ 7 Days of Mechanical Ventilation: Results From the RECOVER Program, a Secondary Analysis of a Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Moderate to severe depressive symptoms occur in up to one-third of patients at 1 year following ICU discharge, negatively affecting patient outcomes. This study evaluated patient and caregiver factors associated with the development of these symptoms. METHODS: This study used the Rehabilitation and Recovery in Patients after Critical Illness and Their Family Caregivers (RECOVER) Program (Phase 1) cohort of 391 patients from 10 medical/surgical university-affiliated ICUs across Canada. We determined the association between patient depressive symptoms (captured by using the Beck Depression Inventory II [BDI-II]), patient characteristics (age, sex, socioeconomic status, Charlson score, and ICU length of stay [LOS]), functional independence measure (FIM) motor subscale score, and caregiver characteristics (Caregiver Assistance Scale and Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression Scale) by using linear mixed models at time points 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: BDI-II data were available for 246 patients. Median age at ICU admission was 56 years (interquartile range, 45-65 years), 143 (58%) were male, and median ICU LOS was 19 days (interquartile range, 13-32 days). During the 12-month follow-up, 67 of 246 (27.2%) patients had a BDI-II score ≥ 20, indicating moderate to severe depressive symptoms. Mixed models showed worse depressive symptoms in patients with lower FIM motor subscale scores (1.1 BDI-II points per 10 FIM points), lower income status (by 3.7 BDI-II points; P = .007), and incomplete secondary education (by 3.8 BDI-II points; P = .009); a curvilinear relation with age (P = .001) was also reported, with highest BDI-II at ages 45 to 50 years. No associations were found between patient BDI-II and comorbidities (P = .92), sex (P = .25), ICU LOS (P = .51), or caregiver variables (Caregiver Assistance Scale [P = .28] and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale [P = .74]). CONCLUSIONS: Increased functional dependence, lower income, and lower education are associated with increased severity of post-ICU depressive symptoms, whereas age has a curvilinear relation with symptom severity. Knowledge of risk factors may inform surveillance and targeted mental health follow-up. Early mobilization and rehabilitation aiming to improve function may serve to modify mood disorders.

Global Critical Care: Moving Forward in Resource-Limited Settings.

Caring for critically ill patients is challenging in resource-limited settings, where the burden of disease and mortality from potentially treatable illnesses is higher than in resource-rich areas. Barriers to delivering quality critical care in these settings include lack of epidemiologic data and context-specific evidence for medical decision-making, deficiencies in health systems organization and resources, and institutional obstacles to implementation of life-saving interventions. Potential solutions include the development of common definitions for intensive care unit (ICU), intensivist, and intensive care to create a universal ICU organization framework; development of educational programs for capacity building of health care professionals working in resource-limited settings; global prioritization of epidemiologic and clinical research in resource-limited settings to conduct timely and ethical studies in response to emerging threats; adaptation of international guidelines to promote implementation of evidence-based care; and strengthening of health systems that integrates these interventions. This manuscript reviews the field of global critical care, barriers to safe high-quality care, and potential solutions to existing challenges. We also suggest a roadmap for improving the treatment of critically ill patients in resource-limited settings.

Current challenges in the management of sepsis in ICUs in resource-poor settings and suggestions for the future.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a major reason for intensive care unit (ICU) admission, also in resource-poor settings. ICUs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) face many challenges that could affect patient outcome. AIM: To describe differences between resource-poor and resource-rich settings regarding the epidemiology, pathophysiology, economics and research aspects of sepsis. We restricted this manuscript to the ICU setting even knowing that many sepsis patients in LMICs are treated outside an ICU. FINDINGS: Although many bacterial pathogens causing sepsis in LMICs are similar to those in high-income countries, resistance patterns to antimicrobial drugs can be very different; in addition, causes of sepsis in LMICs often include tropical diseases in which direct damaging effects of pathogens and their products can sometimes be more important than the response of the host. There are substantial and persisting differences in ICU capacities around the world; not surprisingly the lowest capacities are found in LMICs, but with important heterogeneity within individual LMICs. Although many aspects of sepsis management developed in rich countries are applicable in LMICs, implementation requires strong consideration of cost implications and the important differences in resources. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing both disease-specific and setting-specific factors is important to improve performance of ICUs in LMICs. Although critical care for severe sepsis is likely cost-effective in LMIC setting, more detailed evaluation at both at a macro- and micro-economy level is necessary. Sepsis management in resource-limited settings is a largely unexplored frontier with important opportunities for research, training, and other initiatives for improvement.

What is an intensive care unit? A report of the task force of the World Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine.

Since their widespread introduction more than half a century ago, intensive care units (ICUs) have become an integral part of the health care system. Although most ICUs are found in high-income countries, they are increasingly a feature of health care systems in low- and middle-income countries. The World Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine convened a task force whose objective was to answer the question "What is an ICU?" in an internationally meaningful manner and to develop a system for stratifying ICUs on the basis of the intensity of the care they provide. We undertook a scoping review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature to assemble existing models for ICU stratification. Based on these and on discussions among task force members by teleconference and 2 face-to-face meetings, we present a proposed definition and classification of ICUs. An ICU is an organized system for the provision of care to critically ill patients that provides intensive and specialized medical and nursing care, an enhanced capacity for monitoring, and multiple modalities of physiologic organ support to sustain life during a period of life-threatening organ system insufficiency. Although an ICU is based in a defined geographic area of a hospital, its activities often extend beyond the walls of the physical space to include the emergency department, hospital ward, and follow-up clinic. A level 1 ICU is capable of providing oxygen, noninvasive monitoring, and more intensive nursing care than on a ward, whereas a level 2 ICU can provide invasive monitoring and basic life support for a short period. A level 3 ICU provides a full spectrum of monitoring and life support technologies, serves as a regional resource for the care of critically ill patients, and may play an active role in developing the specialty of intensive care through research and education. A formal definition and descriptive framework for ICUs can inform health care decision-makers in planning and measuring capacity and provide clinicians and patients with a benchmark to evaluate the level of resources available for clinical care.

Assessment of Global Incidence and Mortality of Hospital-treated Sepsis. Current Estimates and Limitations.

RATIONALE: Reducing the global burden of sepsis, a recognized global health challenge, requires comprehensive data on the incidence and mortality on a global scale. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the worldwide incidence and mortality of sepsis and identify knowledge gaps based on available evidence from observational studies. METHODS: We systematically searched 15 international citation databases for population-level estimates of sepsis incidence rates and fatality in adult populations using consensus criteria and published in the last 36 years. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The search yielded 1,553 reports from 1979 to 2015, of which 45 met our criteria. A total of 27 studies from seven high-income countries provided data for metaanalysis. For these countries, the population incidence rate was 288 (95% confidence interval [CI], 215-386; τ = 0.55) for hospital-treated sepsis cases and 148 (95% CI, 98-226; τ = 0.99) for hospital-treated severe sepsis cases per 100,000 person-years. Restricted to the last decade, the incidence rate was 437 (95% CI, 334-571; τ = 0.38) for sepsis and 270 (95% CI, 176-412; τ = 0.60) for severe sepsis cases per 100,000 person-years. Hospital mortality was 17% for sepsis and 26% for severe sepsis during this period. There were no population-level sepsis incidence estimates from lower-income countries, which limits the prediction of global cases and deaths. However, a tentative extrapolation from high-income country data suggests global estimates of 31.5 million sepsis and 19.4 million severe sepsis cases, with potentially 5.3 million deaths annually. CONCLUSIONS: Population-level epidemiologic data for sepsis are scarce and nonexistent for low- and middle-income countries. Our analyses underline the urgent need to implement global strategies to measure sepsis morbidity and mortality, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.

A survey on critical care resources and practices in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Timely and appropriate care is the key to achieving good outcomes in acutely ill patients, but the effectiveness of critical care may be limited in resource-limited settings. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to understand how to implement best practices in intensive care units (ICU) in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and to develop a point-of-care training and decision-support tool. METHODS: An internationally representative group of clinicians performed a 22-item capacity-and-needs assessment survey in a convenience sample of 13 ICU in Eastern Europe (4), Asia (4), Latin America (3), and Africa (2), between April and July 2012. Two ICU were from low-income, 2 from low-middle-income, and 9 from upper-middle-income countries. Clinician respondents were asked about bed capacity, patient characteristics, human resources, available medications and equipment, access to education, and processes of care. RESULTS: Thirteen clinicians from each of 13 hospitals (1 per ICU) responded. Surveyed hospitals had median of 560 (interquartile range [IQR]: 232, 1,200) beds. ICU had a median of 9 (IQR: 7, 12) beds and treated 40 (IQR: 20, 67) patients per month. Many ICU had ≥ 1 staff member with some formal critical care training (n = 9, 69%) or who completed Fundamental Critical Care Support (n = 7, 54%) or Advanced Cardiac Life Support (n = 9, 69%) courses. Only 2 ICU (15%) used any kind of checklists for acute resuscitation. Ten (77%) ICU listed lack of trained staff as the most important barrier to improving the care and outcomes of critically ill patients. CONCLUSIONS: In a convenience sample of 13 ICU from LMIC, specialty-trained staff and standardized processes of care such as checklists are frequently lacking. ICU needs-assessment evaluations should be expanded in LMIC as a global priority, with the goal of creating and evaluating context-appropriate checklists for ICU best practices.

Global health care of the critically ill in low-resource settings.

The care of the critically ill patient in low-resource settings is challenging because of many factors, including limitations in the existing infrastructure, lack of disposables, and low numbers of trained healthcare workers. Although cost constraints in low-resource settings have traditionally caused critical care to be relegated to a low priority, ethical issues and the potential for mitigation of the lethal effects of often reversible acute conditions, such as sepsis and traumatic hemorrhage, argue for prudent deployment of critical care resources. Given these challenges, issues that require prioritization include timely and reliable delivery of evidence-based or generally accepted interventions to acutely ill patients before the development of organ failure, context-specific adaptation and evaluation of clinical evidence, and sustained investments in quality improvement and health systems strengthening. Specific examples include fluid resuscitation algorithms for patients with sepsis and reliable, low-cost, high-flow oxygen concentrators for patients with pneumonia. The lessons from new research on clinical management and sustainable education and quality improvement approaches will likely improve the care of critically ill patients worldwide.

Worldwide demand for critical care.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Interest in the global burden of critical illness is growing, but comprehensive data to describe this burden and the resources available to provide care for critically ill patients are lacking. RECENT FINDINGS: Challenges to obtaining population-based global estimates of critical illness and resources to treat it include the syndrome-based definitions of critical illness, incorrect equating of 'critical illness' with 'admission to an intensive care unit', lack of reliable case ascertainment in administrative data, and short prodrome and high mortality of critical illness, limiting the number of prevalent cases. Modeling techniques will be required to estimate the burden of critical illness and disparities in access to critical care using existing data sources. Demand for critical care is likely to increase, related to urbanization, an aging demographic, and the ongoing wars, disasters, and pandemics, whereas economic crises will likely decrease the ability to pay for it. SUMMARY: Major unexplored research and public health questions remain unanswered regarding the worldwide burden of critical illness, variation in resources available for treatment, and strategies to prevent and treat critical illness that are broadly effective and feasible.

Critical care and the global burden of critical illness in adults.

Critical care has evolved from treatment of poliomyelitis victims with respiratory failure in an intensive care unit to treatment of severely ill patients irrespective of location or specific technology. Population-based studies in the developed world suggest that the burden of critical illness is higher than generally appreciated and will increase as the population ages. Critical care capacity has long been needed in the developing world, and efforts to improve the care of the critically ill in these settings are starting to occur. Expansion of critical care to handle the consequences of an ageing population, natural disasters, conflict, inadequate primary care, and higher-risk medical therapies will be challenged by high costs at a time of economic constraint. To meet this challenge, investigators in this discipline will need to measure the global burden of critical illness and available critical-care resources, and develop both preventive and therapeutic interventions that are generalisable across countries.

An official American Thoracic Society systematic review: the association between health insurance status and access, care delivery, and outcomes for patients who are critically ill.

RATIONALE: One in three Americans under 65 years of age does not have health insurance during some portion of each year. Patients who are critically ill and lack health insurance may be at particularly high risk of morbidity and mortality due to the high cost of intensive care. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the medical and nonmedical literature to determine whether differences in critical care access, delivery, and outcomes are associated with health insurance status. METHODS: Nine electronic databases (inception to 11 April 2008) were independently screened and abstracted in duplicate. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: From 5,508 citations, 29 observational studies met eligibility criteria. Among the general U.S. population, patients who were uninsured were less likely to receive critical care services than those with insurance (odds ratio [OR], 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.56). Once admitted to the intensive care unit, patients who were uninsured had 8.5% (95% CI, 6.0-11.1) fewer procedures, were more likely to experience hospital discharge delays (OR 4.51; 95% CI, 1.46-13.93), and were more likely to have life support withdrawn (OR 2.80; 95% CI, 1.12-7.02). Lack of insurance may confer an independent risk of death for patients who are critically ill (OR 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01-1.33). Patients in managed care systems had 14.3% (95% CI, 11.5-17.2) fewer procedures in intensive care, but were also less likely to receive "potentially ineffective" care. Differences in unmeasured confounding factors may contribute to these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the United States who are critically ill and do not have health insurance receive fewer critical care services and may experience worse clinical outcomes. Improving preexisting health care coverage, as opposed to solely delivering more critical care services, may be one mechanism to reduce such disparities.

Clinical review: critical care in the global context--disparities in burden of illness, access, and economics.

World health care expenditures exceed US $4 trillion. However, there is marked variation in global health care spending, from upwards of US $7,000 per capita in the US to under US $25 per capita in most of sub-Saharan Africa. In developed countries, care of the critically ill comprises a large proportion of health care spending; however, in developing countries, with a greater burden of both illness and critical illness, there is little infrastructure to provide care for these patients. There is sparse research to inform the needs of critically ill patients, but often basic requirements such as trained personnel, medications, oxygen, diagnostic and therapeutic equipment, reliable power supply, and safe transportation are unavailable. Why should this be a focus of intensivists of the developed world? Nearly all of those dying in developing countries would be our patients without the accident of latitude. Tailored to the needs of the region, the provision of critical care has a role, even in the context of limited preventive and primary care. Internationally and locally driven solutions are needed. We can help by recognizing the '10/90 gap' that is pervasive within global health care and our profession by educating ourselves of needs, contacting and collaborating with colleagues in the developing world, and advocating that our professional societies and funding agencies consider an increasingly global perspective in education and research.

Legislative barriers to outpatient e-prescribing in a randomized trial.

Newer outpatient electronic prescribing software programs produce typewritten paper prescriptions with electronically created signatures. Current Canadian federal legislation forbids static (unchanging) signature images on prescriptions. We conducted a randomized trial of electronic prescribing in outpatients at a university-affiliated hospital. The application was a wireless Palm-based system that creates a prescription that is either printed and given to the patient or faxed to a pharmacy. Using the software, the physician creates a unique signature image for each prescription. We successfully overcame challenges related to wireless network reliability, local printer availability and physician training. However, to comply with federal legislation and provincial regulations, we were required to design workarounds to create acceptable prescribing processes. Our experience suggests that the legality of the electronic signature must be clearly defined to realize the full potential of standalone outpatient electronic prescribing systems and fully integrated hospital-wide electronic medical records.