National ICU Registries as Enablers of Clinical Research and Quality Improvement.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical quality registries (CQRs) have been implemented worldwide by several medical specialties aiming to generate a better characterization of epidemiology, treatments, and outcomes of patients. National ICU registries were created almost 3 decades ago to improve the understanding of case-mix, resource use, and outcomes of critically ill patients. This narrative review describes the challenges, proposed solutions, and evidence generated by National ICU registries as facilitators for research and quality improvement. DATA SOURCES: English language articles were identified in PubMed using phrases related to ICU registries, CQRs, outcomes, and case-mix. STUDY SELECTION: Original research, review articles, letters, and commentaries, were considered. DATA EXTRACTION: Data from relevant literature were identified, reviewed, and integrated into a concise narrative review. DATA SYNTHESIS: CQRs have been implemented worldwide by several medical specialties aiming to generate a better characterization of epidemiology, treatments, and outcomes of patients. National ICU registries were created almost 3 decades ago to improve the understanding of case-mix, resource use, and outcomes of critically ill patients. The initial experience in European countries and in Oceania ensured that through locally generated data, ICUs could assess their performances by using risk-adjusted measures and compare their results through fair and validated benchmarking metrics with other ICUs contributing to the CQR. The accomplishment of these initiatives, coupled with the increasing adoption of information technology, resulted in a broad geographic expansion of CQRs as well as their use in quality improvement studies, clinical trials as well as international comparisons, and benchmarking for ICUs. CONCLUSIONS: ICU registries have provided increased knowledge of case-mix and outcomes of ICU patients based on real-world data and contributed to improve care delivery through quality improvement initiatives and trials. Recent increases in adoption of new technologies (i.e., cloud-based structures, artificial intelligence, machine learning) will ensure a broader and better use of data for epidemiology, healthcare policies, quality improvement, and clinical trials.

Epidemiology of Renal Replacement Therapy for Critically Ill Patients across Seven Health Jurisdictions.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring treatment with renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a common complication after admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, the prevalence of RRT use and the associated outcomes in critically patients across the globe are not well described. Therefore, we describe the epidemiology and outcomes of patients receiving RRT for AKI in ICUs across several large health system jurisdictions. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis using nationally representative and comparable databases from seven health jurisdictions in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, New Zealand, Scotland, and the USA between 2006 and 2023, depending on data availability of each dataset. Patients with a history of end-stage kidney disease receiving chronic RRT and patients with a history of renal transplant were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 4,104,480 patients in the ICU cohort and 3,520,516 patients in the mechanical ventilation cohort were included. Overall, 156,403 (3.8%) patients in the ICU cohort and 240,824 (6.8%) patients in the mechanical ventilation cohort were treated with RRT for AKI. In the ICU cohort, the proportion of patients treated with RRT was lowest in Australia and Brazil (3.3%) and highest in Scotland (9.2%). The in-hospital mortality for critically ill patients treated with RRT was almost fourfold higher (57.1%) than those not receiving RRT (16.8%). The mortality of patients treated with RRT varied across the health jurisdictions from 37 to 65%. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of patients who receive RRT in ICUs throughout the world vary widely. Our research suggests that differences in access to and provision of this therapy are contributing factors.

Biomarkers: Are They Useful in Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia?

Community acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a prevalent infectious disease often requiring hospitalization, although its diagnosis remains challenging as there is no gold standard test. In severe CAP, clinical and radiologic criteria have poor sensitivity and specificity, and microbiologic documentation is usually delayed and obtained in less than half of sCAP patients. Biomarkers could be an alternative for diagnosis, treatment monitoring and establish resolution. Beyond the existing evidence about biomarkers as an adjunct diagnostic tool, most evidence comes from studies including CAP patients in primary care or emergency departments, and not only sCAP patients. Ideally, biomarkers used in combination with signs, symptoms, and radiological findings can improve clinical judgment to confirm or rule out CAP diagnosis, and may be valuable adjunctive tools for risk stratification, differentiate viral pneumonia and monitoring the course of CAP. While no single biomarker has emerged as an ideal one, CRP and PCT have gathered the most evidence. Overall, biomarkers offer valuable information and can enhance clinical decision-making in the management of CAP, but further research and validation are needed to establish their optimal use and clinical utility.

ICU registries: From tracking to fostering better outcomes.

NA.

ICU-acquired infections in immunocompromised patients.

Immunocompromised patients account for an increasing proportion of the typical intensive care unit (ICU) case-mix. Because of the increased availability of new drugs for cancer and auto-immune diseases, and improvement in the care of the most severely immunocompromised ICU patients (including those with hematologic malignancies), critically ill immunocompromised patients form a highly heterogeneous patient population. Furthermore, a large number of ICU patients with no apparent immunosuppression also harbor underlying conditions altering their immune response, or develop ICU-acquired immune deficiencies as a result of sepsis, trauma or major surgery. While infections are associated with significant morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised critically ill patients, little specific data are available on the incidence, microbiology, management and outcomes of ICU-acquired infections in this population. As a result, immunocompromised patients are usually excluded from trials and guidelines on the management of ICU-acquired infections. The most common ICU-acquired infections in immunocompromised patients are ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infections (which include ventilator-associated pneumonia and tracheobronchitis) and bloodstream infections. Recently, several large observational studies have shed light on some of the epidemiological specificities of these infections-as well as on the dynamics of colonization and infection with multidrug-resistant bacteria-in these patients, and these will be discussed in this review. Immunocompromised patients are also at higher risk than non-immunocompromised hosts of fungal and viral infections, and the diagnostic and therapeutic management of these infections will be covered. Finally, we will suggest some important areas of future investigation.

Biomarkers in pulmonary infections: a clinical approach.

Severe acute respiratory infections, such as community-acquired pneumonia, hospital-acquired pneumonia, and ventilator-associated pneumonia, constitute frequent and lethal pulmonary infections in the intensive care unit (ICU). Despite optimal management with early appropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy and adequate supportive care, mortality remains high, in part attributable to the aging, growing number of comorbidities, and rising rates of multidrug resistance pathogens. Biomarkers have the potential to offer additional information that may further improve the management and outcome of pulmonary infections. Available pathogen-specific biomarkers, for example, Streptococcus pneumoniae urinary antigen test and galactomannan, can be helpful in the microbiologic diagnosis of pulmonary infection in ICU patients, improving the timing and appropriateness of empiric antimicrobial therapy since these tests have a short turnaround time in comparison to classic microbiology. On the other hand, host-response biomarkers, for example, C-reactive protein and procalcitonin, used in conjunction with the clinical data, may be useful in the diagnosis and prediction of pulmonary infections, monitoring the response to treatment, and guiding duration of antimicrobial therapy. The assessment of serial measurements overtime, kinetics of biomarkers, is more informative than a single value. The appropriate utilization of accurate pathogen-specific and host-response biomarkers may benefit clinical decision-making at the bedside and optimize antimicrobial stewardship.

Comparing causal random forest and linear regression to estimate the independent association of organisational factors with ICU efficiency.

PURPOSE: Parametric regression models have been the main statistical method for identifying average treatment effects. Causal machine learning models showed promising results in estimating heterogeneous treatment effects in causal inference. Here we aimed to compare the application of causal random forest (CRF) and linear regression modelling (LRM) to estimate the effects of organisational factors on ICU efficiency. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 277,459 patients admitted to 128 Brazilian and Uruguayan ICUs over three years. ICU efficiency was assessed using the average standardised efficiency ratio (ASER), measured as the average of the standardised mortality ratio (SMR) and the standardised resource use (SRU) according to the SAPS-3 score. Using a causal inference framework, we estimated and compared the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) of seven common structural and organisational factors on ICU efficiency using LRM with interaction terms and CRF. RESULTS: The hospital mortality was 14 %; median ICU and hospital lengths of stay were 2 and 7 days, respectively. Overall median SMR was 0.97 [IQR: 0.76,1.21], median SRU was 1.06 [IQR: 0.79,1.30] and median ASER was 0.99 [IQR: 0.82,1.21]. Both CRF and LRM showed that the average number of nurses per ten beds was independently associated with ICU efficiency (CATE [95 %CI]: -0.13 [-0.24, -0.01] and -0.09 [-0.17,-0.01], respectively). Finally, CRF identified some specific ICUs with a significant CATE in exposures that did not present a significant average effect. CONCLUSION: In general, both methods were comparable to identify organisational factors significantly associated with CATE on ICU efficiency. CRF however identified specific ICUs with significant effects, even when the average effect was nonsignificant. This can assist healthcare managers in further in-dept evaluation of process interventions to improve ICU efficiency.

Challenges for a broad international implementation of the current severe community-acquired pneumonia guidelines.

Severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) remains one of the leading causes of admission to the intensive care unit, thus consuming a large share of resources and is associated with high mortality rates worldwide. The evidence generated by clinical studies in the last decade was translated into recommendations according to the first published guidelines focusing on severe community-acquired pneumonia. Despite the advances proposed by the present guidelines, several challenges preclude the prompt implementation of these diagnostic and therapeutic measures. The present article discusses the challenges for the broad implementation of the sCAP guidelines and proposes solutions when applicable.

Delirium severity and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of delirium severity in critically ill COVID-19 patients and its association with outcomes. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was performed in two tertiary intensive care units in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. COVID-19 patients were evaluated daily during the first 7 days of intensive care unit stay using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and Confusion Method Assessment for Intensive Care Unit-7 (CAM-ICU-7). Delirium severity was correlated with outcomes and one-year mortality. RESULTS: Among the 277 COVID-19 patients included, delirium occurred in 101 (36.5%) during the first 7 days of intensive care unit stay, and it was associated with a higher length of intensive care unit stay in days (IQR 13 [7 - 25] versus 6 [4 - 12]; p < 0.001), higher hospital mortality (25.74% versus 5.11%; p < 0.001) and additional higher one-year mortality (5.3% versus 0.6%, p < 0.001). Delirium was classified by CAM-ICU-7 in terms of severity, and higher scores were associated with higher in-hospital mortality (17.86% versus 34.38% versus 38.46%, 95%CI, p value < 0.001). Severe delirium was associated with a higher risk of progression to coma (OR 7.1; 95%CI 1.9 - 31.0; p = 0.005) and to mechanical ventilation (OR 11.09; 95%CI 2.8 - 58.5; p = 0.002) in the multivariate analysis, adjusted by severity and frailty. CONCLUSION: In patients admitted with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit, delirium was an independent risk factor for the worst prognosis, including mortality. The delirium severity assessed by the CAM-ICU-7 during the first week in the intensive care unit was associated with poor outcomes, including progression to coma and to mechanical ventilation.

High-value care for critically ill oncohematological patients: what do we know thus far? / Cuidados de alto valor para pacientes oncohematológicos graves: o que sabemos até agora?

ABSTRACT The number of patients with cancer requiring intensive care unit admission is increasing around the world. The improvement in the pathophysiological understanding of this group of patients, as well as the increasingly better and more targeted treatment options for their underlying disease, has led to a significant increase in their survival over the past three decades. Within the organizational concepts, it is necessary to know what adds value in the care of critical oncohematological patients. Practices in medicine that do not benefit patients and possibly cause harm are called low-value practices, while high-value practices are defined as high-quality care at relatively low cost. In this article, we discuss ten domains with high-value evidence in the care of cancer patients: (1) intensive care unit admission policies; (2) intensive care unit organization; (3) etiological investigation of hypoxemia; (4) management of acute respiratory failure; (5) management of febrile neutropenia; (6) urgent chemotherapy treatment in critically ill patients; (7) patient and family experience; (8) palliative care; (9) care of intensive care unit staff; and (10) long-term impact of critical disease on the cancer population. The disclosure of such policies is expected to have the potential to change health care standards. We understand that it is a lengthy process, and initiatives such as this paper are one of the first steps in raising awareness and beginning a discussion about high-value care in various health scenarios.

RESUMO O número de pacientes oncológicos com necessidade de internação em unidades de terapia intensiva está aumentando em todo o mundo. A maior compreensão fisiopatológica desse grupo de pacientes, bem como opções de tratamento cada vez melhores e mais direcionadas à doença subjacente, tem levado a um aumento significativo da sobrevida nas últimas três décadas. Dentro dos conceitos organizacionais é necessário saber o que agrega valor ao cuidado de pacientes onco-hematológicos graves. As práticas terapêuticas não benéficas aos pacientes e possivelmente causadoras de danos são chamadas práticas de baixo valor, enquanto as práticas de alto valor são definidas como cuidados de alta qualidade a um custo relativamente baixo. Neste artigo discutimos dez domínios com evidências de alto valor no cuidado de pacientes com câncer: (1) políticas de internação na unidade de terapia intensiva; (2) organização da unidade de terapia intensiva; (3) investigação etiológica da hipoxemia; (4) manejo da insuficiência respiratória aguda; (5) manejo da neutropenia febril; (6) tratamento quimioterápico de urgência em pacientes graves; (7) experiência do paciente e da família; (8) cuidados paliativos; (9) cuidados com a equipe da unidade de terapia intensiva; e (10) impacto a longo prazo da doença grave na população oncológica. Esperase que a divulgação dessas políticas traga mudanças aos padrões atuais do cuidado em saúde. Entendemos que é um processo longo, e iniciativas como o presente artigo são um dos primeiros passos para aumentar a conscientização e possibilitar discussão sobre cuidados de alto valor em vários cenários de saúde.

Delirium severity and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients / Gravidade do delirium e desfechos de pacientes críticos com COVID-19

ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the impact of delirium severity in critically ill COVID-19 patients and its association with outcomes. Methods: This prospective cohort study was performed in two tertiary intensive care units in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. COVID-19 patients were evaluated daily during the first 7 days of intensive care unit stay using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and Confusion Method Assessment for Intensive Care Unit-7 (CAM-ICU-7). Delirium severity was correlated with outcomes and one-year mortality. Results: Among the 277 COVID-19 patients included, delirium occurred in 101 (36.5%) during the first 7 days of intensive care unit stay, and it was associated with a higher length of intensive care unit stay in days (IQR 13 [7 - 25] versus 6 [4 - 12]; p < 0.001), higher hospital mortality (25.74% versus 5.11%; p < 0.001) and additional higher one-year mortality (5.3% versus 0.6%, p < 0.001). Delirium was classified by CAM-ICU-7 in terms of severity, and higher scores were associated with higher in-hospital mortality (17.86% versus 34.38% versus 38.46%, 95%CI, p value < 0.001). Severe delirium was associated with a higher risk of progression to coma (OR 7.1; 95%CI 1.9 - 31.0; p = 0.005) and to mechanical ventilation (OR 11.09; 95%CI 2.8 - 58.5; p = 0.002) in the multivariate analysis, adjusted by severity and frailty. Conclusion: In patients admitted with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit, delirium was an independent risk factor for the worst prognosis, including mortality. The delirium severity assessed by the CAM-ICU-7 during the first week in the intensive care unit was associated with poor outcomes, including progression to coma and to mechanical ventilation.

RESUMO Objetivo: Investigar como a gravidade do delirium afeta pacientes graves com COVID-19 e sua associação com os desfechos. Métodos: Estudo de coorte prospectivo realizado em duas unidades de terapia intensiva terciárias no Rio de Janeiro (RJ). Os pacientes com COVID-19 foram avaliados diariamente durante os primeiros 7 dias de internação na unidade de terapia intensiva usando a escala de agitação e sedação de Richmond, a Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) e a Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit-7 (CAM-ICU-7). A gravidade do delirium foi correlacionada com os desfechos e a mortalidade em 1 ano. Resultados: Entre os 277 pacientes com COVID-19 incluídos, o delirium ocorreu em 101 (36,5%) durante os primeiros 7 dias de internação na unidade de terapia intensiva e foi associado a maior tempo de internação na unidade de terapia intensiva em dias (IQ: 13 [7 - 25] versus 6 [4 - 12]; p < 0,001), maior mortalidade hospitalar (25,74% versus 5,11%; p < 0,001) e maior mortalidade em 1 ano (5,3% versus 0,6%, p < 0,001). O delirium foi classificado pela CAM-ICU-7 em termos de gravidade, e escores maiores foram associados à maior mortalidade hospitalar (17,86% versus 34,38% versus 38,46%, IC95%, valor de p < 0,001). O delirium grave foi associado a um risco maior de progressão ao coma (RC de 7,1; IC95% 1,9 - 31,0; p = 0,005) e à ventilação mecânica (RC de 11,09; IC95% 2,8 - 58,5; p = 0,002) na análise multivariada, ajustada por gravidade e fragilidade Conclusão: Em pacientes internados com COVID-19 na unidade de terapia intensiva, o delirium foi fator de risco independente para o pior prognóstico, incluindo mortalidade. A gravidade do delirium avaliada pela CAM-ICU-7 durante a primeira semana na unidade de terapia intensiva foi associada a desfechos desfavoráveis, incluindo a progressão ao coma e à ventilação mecânica.

Percepções e práticas sobre sedação superficial em pacientes sob ventilação mecânica: um inquérito sobre as atitudes de médicos intensivistas brasileiros / Perceptions and practices regarding light sedation in mechanically ventilated patients: a survey on the attitudes of Brazilian critical care physicians

RESUMO Objetivo: Caracterizar o conhecimento e as atitudes percebidas em relação às intervenções farmacológicas para sedação superficial em pacientes sob ventilação mecânica e entender as lacunas atuais, comparando a prática atual com as recomendações das Diretrizes de Prática Clínica para a Prevenção e Tratamento da Dor, Agitação/Sedação, Delirium, Imobilidade e Interrupção do Sono em Pacientes Adultos na Unidade de Terapia Intensiva. Métodos: Trata-se de estudo de coorte transversal baseado na aplicação de um questionário eletrônico centrado nas práticas de sedação. Resultados: Responderam ao inquérito 303 médicos intensivistas. A maioria dos entrevistados relatou uso de rotina de uma escala de sedação estruturada (281; 92,6%). Quase metade dos entrevistados relatou realizar interrupções diárias da sedação (147; 48,4%), e a mesma percentagem de participantes (48,0%) concordou com a afirmação de que os pacientes costumam ser sedados em excesso. Durante a pandemia da COVID-19, os participantes relataram que os pacientes tinham maior chance de receber midazolam do que antes da pandemia (178; 58,8% versus 106; 34,0%; p = 0,05); além disso, a sedação profunda foi mais comum durante a pandemia da COVID-19 (241; 79,4% versus 148; 49,0%; p = 0,01). Conclusão: Este inquérito fornece dados valiosos sobre as atitudes percebidas dos médicos intensivistas brasileiros em relação à sedação. Embora a interrupção diária da sedação fosse um conceito bem conhecido e as escalas de sedação fossem frequentemente utilizadas pelos entrevistados, foi colocado esforço insuficiente no monitoramento frequente, no uso de protocolos e na implementação sistemática de estratégias de sedação. Apesar da percepção dos benefícios associados à sedação superficial, há necessidade de identificar metas de melhoria para se proporem estratégias educacionais que melhorem as práticas atuais.

ABSTRACT Objective: To characterize the knowledge and perceived attitudes toward pharmacologic interventions for light sedation in mechanically ventilated patients and to understand the current gaps comparing current practice with the recommendations of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the Intensive Care Unit. Methods: This was a cross-sectional cohort study based on the application of an electronic questionnaire focused on sedation practices. Results: A total of 303 critical care physicians provided responses to the survey. Most respondents reported routine use of a structured sedation scale (281; 92.6%). Almost half of the respondents reported performing daily interruptions of sedation (147; 48.4%), and the same percentage of participants (48.0%) agreed that patients are often over sedated. During the COVID-19 pandemic, participants reported that patients had a higher chance of receiving midazolam compared to before the pandemic (178; 58.8% versus 106; 34.0%; p = 0.05), and heavy sedation was more common during the COVID-19 pandemic (241; 79.4% versus 148; 49.0%; p = 0.01). Conclusion: This survey provides valuable data on the perceived attitudes of Brazilian intensive care physicians regarding sedation. Although daily interruption of sedation was a well-known concept and sedation scales were often used by the respondents, insufficient effort was put into frequent monitoring, use of protocols and systematic implementation of sedation strategies. Despite the perception of the benefits linked with light sedation, there is a need to identify improvement targets to propose educational strategies to improve current practices.