Agitation during anaesthetic emergence: An observational study of adult cardiac surgery patients in two Australian intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Anaesthetic emergence agitation among adult patients being recovered after open cardiac and/or thoracic aorta surgery has not been described. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to characterise emergence agitation in terms of incidence, clinical features, and consequences in a cohort of cardiac surgery patients being recovered in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: A prospective, observational pilot study was implemented. Over a 5-week period, the study was conducted in two metropolitan hospitals in Victoria, Australia. The cohort comprised all patients admitted to the ICUs aged ≥18 years, who had undergone cardiac surgery via an open sternotomy with general anaesthetic, and whose emergence was directly observed. Emergence agitation was defined as a Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale score of ≥+2. RESULTS: Fifty patients were observed. Emergence agitation occurred in 24/50 (48%) of patients. Patients with emergence agitation experienced more clinical consequences than patients with calm emergence, including a significantly greater number of episodes of airway compromise (12/24, 50%, p < 0.001); ventilator dyssynchrony (23/24, 96%, p = 0.004); and hypertension (13/24, 54%, p = 0.004). Significant treatment interference (potentially dangerous patient movements such as pulling tubes) occurred with 23/24 patients (96%, p < 0.0001). Patients who underwent emergence agitation required significantly more interventions during anaesthetic emergence than patients who underwent a calm emergence. Interventions included extra nursing measures (16/24, 67%, p = 0.001) administration of sedative and/or opioid intravenous boluses (22/24, 92%, p = 0.001) and vasoactive agents (15/24, 63%, p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients recovering from cardiac surgery in the ICU, emergence agitation was clinically important. Immediate interventions were required to prevent and manage complications.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Very Elderly Patients Admitted to Intensive Care: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize and compare trends in ICU admission, hospital outcomes, and resource utilization for critically ill very elderly patients (≥ 80 yr old) compared with the younger cohort (16-79 yr old). DESIGN: A retrospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: One-hundred ninety-four ICUs contributing data to the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation Adult Patient Database between January 2006 and December 2018. PATIENTS: Adult (≥ 16 yr) patients admitted to Australian and New Zealand ICUs. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Very elderly patients with a mean ± sd age of 84.8 ± 3.7 years accounted for 14.8% (232,582/1,568,959) of all adult ICU admissions. They had higher comorbid disease burden and illness severity scores compared with the younger cohort. Hospital (15.4% vs 7.8%, p < 0.001) and ICU mortality (8.5% vs 5.2%, p < 0.001) were higher in the very elderly. They stayed fewer days in ICU, but longer in hospital and had more ICU readmissions. Among survivors, a lower proportion of very elderly was discharged home (65.2% vs 82.4%, p < 0.001), and a higher proportion was discharged to chronic care/nursing home facilities (20.1% vs 7.8%, p < 0.001). Although there was no change in the proportion of very elderly ICU admissions over the study period, they showed a greater decline in risk-adjusted mortality (6.3% [95% CI, 5.9%-6.7%] vs 4.0% [95% CI, 3.7%-4.2%] relative reduction per year, p < 0.001) compared with the younger cohort. The mortality of very elderly unplanned ICU admissions improved faster than the younger cohort ( p < 0.001), whereas improvements in mortality among elective surgical ICU admissions were similar in both groups ( p = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of ICU admissions greater than or equal to 80 years old did not change over the 13-year study period. Although their mortality was higher, they showed improved survivorship over time, especially in the unplanned ICU admission subgroup. A higher proportion of survivors were discharged to chronic care facilities.

Vasopressors to treat postoperative hypotension after adult noncardiac, non-obstetric surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative hypotension is common after major surgery and is associated with patient harm. Vasopressors are commonly used to treat hypotension without clear evidence of benefit. We conducted a systematic review to better understand the use, impact, and rationale for vasopressor administration after noncardiac, non-obstetric surgery in adults. METHODS: We conducted a prospectively registered systematic review. Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDBASE, and MEDLINE were searched for RCTs and cohort studies of adult patients receiving vasopressors after noncardiac, non-obstetric surgery. Study quality was critically appraised by two investigators. Findings from the review were synthesised, but formal meta-analysis was not performed because of significant variability in study populations and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 3201 articles were screened, of which seven RCTs, two prospective cohort studies, and 15 retrospective cohort studies were included in the analysis (24 in total). One study was graded as high quality, two as moderate quality, and the remaining 21 as low quality. Sixteen studies relied on clinical assessment alone to decide on therapeutic interventions. Vasodilation was the most common suggested physiological disturbance. The median proportion of patients receiving vasopressors was 42% (interquartile range: 11.5-74.7%). Norepinephrine was the most common vasopressor used. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supporting the use of vasopressors to treat postoperative hypotension is limited. Future research should focus on whether vasodilatation or other physiological disturbance is driving postoperative hypotension to allow rational decision-making.

Interrater reliability of the Clinical Frailty Scale in the anesthesia preadmission clinic.

PURPOSE: As many as 30% of patients with frailty die, are discharged to a nursing home, or have a new disability after surgery. The 2010 United Kingdom National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death recommended that frailty assessment be developed and included in the routine risk assessment of older surgical patients. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a simple, clinically-assessed frailty measure; however, few studies have investigated interrater reliability of the CFS in the surgical setting. The objective of this study was to determine the interrater reliability of frailty classification between anesthesiologists and perioperative nurses. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study assessing interrater reliability of the CFS between perioperative nurses and anesthesiologists for elective surgical patients aged ≥ 65 yr, admitted to a large regional university-affiliated hospital in Australia between July 2020 and February 2021. Agreement was measured via Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: Frailty assessment was conducted on 238 patients with a median [interquartile range] age of 74 [70-80] yr. Agreement was perfect between nursing and medical staff for CFS scores in 112 (47%) patients, with a further 99 (42%) differing by only one point. Interrater kappa was 0.70 (95% confidence interval, 0.63 to 0.77; P < 0.001), suggesting good agreement between anesthesiologists and perioperative nurses. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that CFS assessment by either anesthesiologists or nursing staff is reliable across a population of patients from a range of surgical specialities, with an acceptable degree of agreement. The CFS measurement should be included in the normal preanesthesia clinic workflow.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Jusqu'à 30 % de la patientèle fragilisée meurt, est envoyée dans un centre d'hébergement et de soins de longue durée, ou souffre d'une nouvelle invalidité après la chirurgie. L'enquête nationale confidentielle de 2010 du Royaume-Uni sur les Devenirs et les décès des patient·es (National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death) a recommandé que l'évaluation de la fragilité soit élaborée et incluse dans l'évaluation systématique du risque pour la patientèle chirurgicale âgée. L'échelle de fragilité clinique (EFC) est une mesure de la fragilité simple et évaluée cliniquement; cependant, peu d'études ont examiné la fiabilité interévaluateur·trice de cette échelle en milieu chirurgical. L'objectif de cette étude était de déterminer la fiabilité interévaluateur·trice de la classification de la fragilité entre les anesthésiologistes et le personnel infirmier périopératoire. MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude de cohorte évaluant la fiabilité interévaluateur·trice de l'EFC entre le personnel infirmier périopératoire et les anesthésiologistes pour la patientèle de chirurgie non urgente âgée de ≥ 65 ans et admise dans un grand hôpital universitaire régional affilié en Australie entre juillet 2020 et février 2021. La concordance a été mesurée via le coefficient Kappa de Cohen. RéSULTATS: Une évaluation de la fragilité a été réalisée pour 238 patient·es dont l'âge médian [écart interquartile] était de 74 ans [70-80]. La concordance dans les scores sur l'EFC était parfaite entre le personnel infirmier et médical pour 112 (47 %) patient·es, et ne différait que d'un point chez 99 autres (42 %) personnes. Le coefficient Kappa était de 0,70 (intervalle de confiance à 95 %, 0,63 à 0,77; P < 0,001), suggérant une bonne concordance entre les anesthésiologistes et le personnel infirmier périopératoire. CONCLUSION: Cette étude suggère que l'évaluation via l'EFC par des anesthésiologistes ou du personnel infirmier est fiable pour une population de patient·es pris·es en charge par diverses spécialités chirurgicales, avec un degré acceptable de concordance. Cette échelle de mesure devrait être incluse dans le flux de travail normal de la clinique de préanesthésie.

Anaesthetic emergence agitation after cardiac surgery: An intensive care staff survey.

BACKGROUND: Anecdotal reports suggest that during emergence from anaesthesia, some post-cardiac surgery patients exhibit signs of agitation with concerning clinical features, including hypoxaemia, ventilation dysynchrony, and haemodynamic instability. This clinical phenomenon has not been described in the published literature. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the perceptions and practice of intensive care unit staff members who have managed adult patients after cardiac surgery regarding emergence agitation, its clinical features, and treatment. METHODS: A descriptive survey was conducted from December 2020 to January 2021 in two metropolitan hospitals. Items included Likert scale, multiple-item selection, and free-text responses. RESULTS: There were 144 respondents (response rate: 55%). Post-cardiac surgery emergence agitation was witnessed by 143 respondents (99%). Fifty-seven (40%) reported encountering this clinical problem often. Clinical concerns included instabilities with airway or ventilation (347 items selected), cardiovascular system (189 items selected), and patient treatment interference, such as pulling tubes (229 items selected). Overall, 143 (99%) respondents re-sedated patients with emergence agitation, 138 (96%) added a narcotic bolus, and 121 respondents reported use of mechanical restraints (84%). Twenty-four respondents (2%) recalled receiving any formal anaesthetic emergence education, including after cardiac surgery. CONCLUSION: Anaesthetic emergence agitation following cardiac surgery is a concerning clinical problem. Clinical management of emergence agitation was influenced more by clinical experience than research evidence. Further observational research is required to investigate clinical characteristics and inform evidence-based management practices and education.

Defining ICD-10 surrogate variables to estimate the modified frailty index: a Delphi-based approach.

BACKGROUND: There are currently no validated globally and freely available tools to estimate the modified frailty index (mFI). The widely available and non-proprietary International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) coding could be used as a surrogate for the mFI. We aimed to establish an appropriate set of the ICD-10 codes for comorbidities to be used to estimate the eleven-variable mFI. METHODS: A three-stage, web-based, Delphi consensus-building process among a panel of intensivists and geriatricians using iterative rounds of an online survey, was conducted between March and July 2021. The consensus was set a priori at 75% overall agreement. Additionally, we assessed if survey responses differed between intensivists and geriatricians. Finally, we ascertained the level of agreement. RESULTS: A total of 21 clinicians participated in all 3 Delphi surveys. Most (86%, 18/21) had more than 5-years' experience as specialists. The agreement proportionately increased with every Delphi survey. After the third survey, the panel had reached 75% consensus in 87.5% (112/128) of ICD-10 codes. The initially included 128 ICD-10 variables were narrowed down to 54 at the end of the 3 surveys. The inter-rater agreements between intensivists and geriatricians were moderate for surveys 1 and 3 (κ = 0.728, κ = 0.780) respectively, and strong for survey 2 (κ = 0.811). CONCLUSIONS: This quantitative Delphi survey of a panel of experienced intensivists and geriatricians achieved consensus for appropriate ICD-10 codes to estimate the mFI. Future studies should focus on validating the mFI estimated from these ICD-10 codes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Interpretation of the four risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting in the Apfel simplified risk score: an analysis of published studies.

PURPOSE: The Apfel simplified risk score, developed in 1999, is the most widely used tool for risk stratification of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). It includes four risk factors: female sex, non-smoking status, history of PONV or motion sickness, and use of postoperative opioids. Nevertheless, there is considerable heterogeneity in the definition and application of these risk factors in PONV research. Our aim was to determine how these risk factors are implemented in studies employing the Apfel score. METHODS: Citations of the index Apfel score paper between 1 September 1999 and 1 September 2019 were identified in the Scopus database. Original full-text reports in English measuring all four risk factors were eligible for inclusion. Data collected included the definition, timing, and collection method of the four risk factors. RESULTS: Of the identified studies, 255 of the 535 reported all four risk factors, with calculated Apfel risk scores reported in 116 of the 255 (46%) papers. Smoking, PONV, motion sickness, and postoperative opioid use were defined in four (2%), zero (0%), one (0.4%), and seven (3%) papers, respectively. Postoperative opioid use was defined as "anticipated" in 138 (54%) studies and "actual" in 72 (18%) studies and was unclear in 45 (28%) studies. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variation exists in how the Apfel risk factors are defined and applied in PONV research, particularly with respect to postoperative opioid use. More guidance in the application of this tool may optimize risk estimation and PONV prophylaxis, and potentially improve research quality.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le score simplifié d'Apfel, mis au point en 1999, est l'outil le plus utilisé pour la stratification des risques de nausées et vomissements postopératoires (NVPO). Il comprend quatre facteurs de risque : le sexe féminin, un statut de non-fumeur, les antécédents de NVPO ou de mal des transports, et l'utilisation d'opioïdes postopératoires. Néanmoins, il existe une hétérogénéité considérable dans la définition et l'application de ces facteurs de risque dans la recherche sur les NVPO. Notre objectif était de déterminer comment ces facteurs de risque étaient appliqués dans les études utilisant le score Apfel. MéTHODE: Les citations comportant dans leur index une mention du score d'Apfel entre le 1er septembre 1999 et le 1er septembre 2019 ont été identifiées dans la base de données Scopus. Les comptes rendus originaux en texte intégral en anglais mesurant les quatre facteurs de risque ont été inclus dans notre analyse. Les données recueillies comprenaient la définition, le moment et la méthode de collecte des quatre facteurs de risque. RéSULTATS: Parmi les études identifiées, 255 sur 535 documentaient les quatre facteurs de risque, et les scores d'Apfel calculés ont été rapportés dans 116 des 255 (46 %) articles. Le tabagisme, les NVPO, le mal des transports et l'utilisation postopératoire d'opioïdes ont été définis dans quatre (2 %), zéro (0 %), un (0,4 %) et sept (3 %) articles, respectivement. La consommation postopératoire d'opioïdes a été définie comme « anticipée ¼ dans 138 (54 %) études et « réelle ¼ dans 72 (18 %) études, et n'était pas claire dans 45 (28 %) études. CONCLUSION: Il existe d'importantes variations dans la façon dont les facteurs de risque d'Apfel sont définis et appliqués dans la recherche sur les NVPO, particulièrement en ce qui concerne l'utilisation postopératoire d'opioïdes. Des recommandations plus claires pour l'application de cet outil pourraient optimiser l'estimation des risques et la prophylaxie pour les NVPO, et potentiellement améliorer la qualité de la recherche.

Research Trends in Anticoagulation Therapy over the Last 25 Years.

A large volume of literature has become available to practitioners prescribing anticoagulants. The aim of this study was to analyze the bibliometric characteristics of the top 100 most cited articles related to anticoagulation over the past 25 years, with special consideration to impact of direct or "nonvitamin K antagonist" oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared with vitamin K antagonists. A bibliometric analysis of the 100 most cited journal articles related to anticoagulants published between 1994 and 2019 was performed in April 2019. The top 100 articles by citation count were analyzed to extract bibliometric data related to journal title, impact factor, year of publication, place of publication, anticoagulant studied, indication for anticoagulation, study design, and conflicts of interest. The median (interquartile range) number of citations per article was 806 (621-1,085). The anticoagulant most frequently researched was warfarin (37%). NOAC publications (21%) grew at a relative rate of 3.4 times faster compared with all publications. The indication most commonly researched was venous thromboembolism (26%). Eighty articles constituted level I or II evidence, with randomized controlled trials the most common type of study (74). A financial conflict of interest was declared in 87% of articles with private, for-profit organizations the most common source of funding (26%). In summary, top research related to anticoagulation is highly impactful but may be at risk of sponsorship bias. High-level evidence for NOACs continues to expand across a range of indications with citation metrics likely to soon approach or surpass that of older drugs.

Frailty and outcomes from pneumonia in critical illness: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: A threshold Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) of 5 (indicating mild frailty) has been proposed to guide ICU admission for UK patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. However, the impact of frailty on mortality with (non-COVID-19) pneumonia in critical illness is unknown. We examined the triage utility of the CFS in patients with pneumonia requiring ICU. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted with pneumonia to 170 ICUs in Australia and New Zealand from January 1, 2018 to September 31, 2019. We classified patients as: non-frail (CFS 1-4) frail (CFS 5-8), mild/moderately frail (CFS 5-6),and severe/very severely frail (CFS 7-8). We evaluated mortality (primary outcome) adjusting for site, age, sex, mechanical ventilation, pneumonia type and illness severity. We also compared the proportion of ICU bed-days occupied between frailty categories. RESULTS: 1852/5607 (33%) patients were classified as frail, including1291/3056 (42%) of patients aged >65 yr, who would potentially be excluded from ICU admission under UK-based COVID-19 triage guidelines. Only severe/very severe frailty scores were associated with mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for CFS=7: 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-7.8; CFS=8 [aOR: 7.2; 95% CI: 2.6-20.0]). These patients accounted for 7% of ICU bed days. Vulnerability (CFS=4) and mild frailty (CFS=5) were associated with a similar mortality risk (CFS=4 [OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 0.7-3.8]; CFS=5 [OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 0.7-3.9]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe and very severe frailty account for relatively few ICU bed days as a result of pneumonia, whilst adjusted mortality analysis indicated little difference in risk between patients in vulnerable, mild, and moderate frailty categories. These data do not support CFS ≥5 to guide ICU admission for pneumonia.

Accuracy of the Clinical Frailty Scale for perioperative frailty screening: a prospective observational study.

PURPOSE: Perioperative frailty increases postoperative complications, mortality, and new functional dependence. Despite this, routine perioperative frailty screening is not widespread. We aimed to assess the accuracy of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) as a screening tool prior to anesthesia, and to determine which health domains are affected by frailty. METHODS: In a prospective, single-centre observational study, we enrolled 218 patients aged ≥ 65 yr undergoing elective and emergency surgery. The screening performance of the CFS was compared with the Edmonton Frail Scale, including the effect in individual frailty domains, and outcomes including discharge location and mortality. RESULTS: The median [interquartile range] age of the enrolled subjects was 74 [69-80] yr and 24% of the patients were frail. The CFS and Edmonton scales were highly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 0.86), and in substantial agreement (kappa coefficient, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.81), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86 to 0.94) indicating excellent discrimination for the CFS in predicting frailty status based on the Edmonton scale. Frail patients had higher 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 5.26; 95% CI, 1.28 to 21.62), and were less likely to be discharged home. Frail patients had poorer health throughout frailty domains, including functional dependence (42% of frail vs 4% of non-frail patients; P < 0.001), malnutrition (48% vs 19%, P < 0.001), and poor physical performance (47% vs 7%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The CFS is a valid and accurate tool to screen for perioperative frailty, which encompasses the spectrum of health-related domains.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La fragilité périopératoire augmente les complications postopératoires, la mortalité et une nouvelle dépendance fonctionnelle. Le dépistage de routine de la fragilité périopératoire n'est cependant pas une pratique répandue. Nous avions pour objectif d'évaluer la précision de l'échelle de mesure de fragilité CFS (pour Clinical Frailty Scale) comme outil de dépistage préanesthésique et de déterminer quels domaines de la santé étaient affectés par la fragilité. MéTHODE: Nous avons recruté 218 patients âgés de plus de 65 ans et subissant une chirurgie non urgente ou urgente dans notre étude observationnelle prospective et monocentrique. Les résultats du dépistage de la CFS ont été comparés à l'échelle de fragilité d'Edmonton (Edmonton Frail Scale), y compris en ce qui a trait à l'effet de la fragilité sur les domaines individuels de fragilité et aux résultats tels que la destination au congé et la mortalité. RéSULTATS: L'âge médian [écart interquartile] des patients recrutés était de 74 [69­80] ans et 24 % des patients étaient fragiles. Les échelles CFS et d'Edmonton avaient une forte corrélation (coefficient de corrélation de Spearman, 0,81; intervalle de confiance [IC] 95 %, 0,77 à 0,86) et étaient en accord substantiel (coefficient kappa, 0,76; IC 95 %, 0,70 à 0,81), avec une surface sous la courbe de fonction d'efficacité de l'observateur de 0,91 (IC 95 %, 0,86 à 0,94), indiquant une discrimination excellente de la CFS pour prédire l'état de fragilité fondé sur l'échelle d'Edmonton. Les patients fragiles souffraient d'une mortalité à 30 jours plus élevée (rapport de cotes, 5,26; IC 95 %, 1,28 à 21,62) et il était moins probable qu'ils reçoivent leur congé de l'hôpital à la maison. Les patients fragiles étaient en moins bonne santé dans tous les domaines de fragilité, notamment en dépendance fonctionnelle (42 % des patients fragiles vs 4 % des patients non fragiles; P < 0,001), en malnutrition (48 % vs 19 %, P < 0,001) et en mauvaise performance physique (47 % vs 7 %, P < 0,001). CONCLUSION: L'échelle CFS constitue un outil valable et précis pour dépister la fragilité périopératoire, qui englobe l'éventail des domaines liés à la santé.

A checklist for intrahospital transport of critically ill patients improves compliance with transportation safety guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: Critically ill patients are often transferred from the intensive care unit (ICU) to other locations around the hospital during which adverse events, some life threatening, are common. An intercollegiate guideline covering the transport of critically ill patients exists in Australasia; however, compliance with this guideline has previously been shown to be poor, and its role in improving safety in transportation of patients in the ICU is unknown. We performed a pre-post interventional study in a tertiary metropolitan ICU, assessing the impact of the introduction of a transport checklist on guideline compliance. METHODS: We performed a prospective, pre-post interventional study, including a total of 76 transfers of critically ill patients between August 2016 and April 2017. RESULTS: After introduction of the checklist, aggregate median (interquartile range) guideline compliance improved from 86.7% (80.0-92.9) to 90% (86.7-100) (p = 0.01). Significant improvements were found in notification of the transport destination (83.7% vs 100%, p = 0.010) and transporting doctors' knowledge of the Cormack-Lehane grade of laryngoscopy (60.5% vs. 84.2%, p = 0.021). There was, however, a reduction in the proportion of full oxygen cylinders taken on transports (100% vs. 76.3%, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that a checklist is useful in improving safety in the transport of a critically ill patient population.

Frailty in very old critically ill patients in Australia and New Zealand: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore associations between frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale score of 5 or more) in very old patients in intensive care units (ICUs) and their clinical outcomes (mortality, discharge destination). DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective population cohort analysis of Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Adult Patient Database data for all patients aged 80 years or more admitted to participating ICUs between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome: in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes: length of stay (hospital, ICU), re-admission to ICU during the same hospital admission, discharge destination (including new chronic care or nursing home admission). RESULTS: Frailty status data were available for 15 613 of 45 773 patients aged 80 years or more admitted to 178 ICUs (34%); 6203 of these patients (39.7%) were deemed frail. A smaller proportion of frail than non-frail patients were men (47% v 57%), the mean illness severity scores of frail patients were slightly higher than those of non-frail patients, and they were more frequently admitted from the emergency department (28% v 21%) or with sepsis (12% v 7%) or respiratory complications (16% v 12%). In-hospital mortality was higher for frail patients (17.6% v 8.2%; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.87 [95% CI, 1.65-2.11]). Median lengths of ICU and hospital stay were slightly longer for frail patients, and they were more frequently discharged to new nursing home or chronic care (4.9% v 2.8%; adjusted OR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.34-1.95]). CONCLUSIONS: Many very old critically ill patients in Australia and New Zealand are frail, and frailty is associated with considerably poorer health outcomes. Routine screening of older ICU patients for frailty could improve outcome prediction and inform intensive care and community health care planning.

Acute pulmonary embolism: a concise review of diagnosis and management.

An acute pulmonary embolism (aPE) is characterised by occlusion of one or more pulmonary arteries. Physiological disturbance may be minimal, but often cardiac output decreases as the right ventricle attempts to overcome increased afterload. Additionally, ventilation-perfusion mismatches can develop in affected vascular beds, reducing systemic oxygenation. Incidence is reported at 50-75 per 100 000 in Australia and New Zealand, with 30-day mortality rates ranging from 0.5% to over 20%. Incidence is likely to increase with the ageing population, increased survival of patients with comorbidities that are considered risk factors and improving sensitivity of imaging techniques. Use of clinical prediction scores, such as the Wells score, has assisted in clinical decision-making and decreased unnecessary radiological investigations. However, imaging (i.e. computed tomography pulmonary angiography or ventilation-perfusion scans) is still necessary for objective diagnosis. Anti-coagulation remains the foundation of PE management. Haemodynamically unstable patients require thrombolysis unless absolutely contraindicated, while stable patients with right ventricular dysfunction or ischaemia should be aggressively anti-coagulated. Stable patients with no right ventricular dysfunction can be discharged home early with anti-coagulation and review. However, treatment should be case dependent with full consideration of the patient's clinical state. Direct oral anti-coagulants have become an alternative to vitamin K antagonists and are facilitating shorter hospital admissions. Additionally, duration of anti-coagulation must be decided by considering any provoking factors, bleeding risk and comorbid state. Patients with truly unprovoked or idiopathic PE often require indefinite treatment, while in provoked cases it is typically 3 months with some patients requiring longer periods of 6-12 months.

Prewarming neurosurgical patients to minimize hypotension on induction of anesthesia: a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Prewarming prior to surgery is effective in preventing perioperative hypothermia. There is a paucity of evidence, however, regarding the hemodynamic effects of prewarming. We hypothesized that the nadir mean arterial pressure during anesthesia induction would be higher after prewarming than after no prewarming. METHODS: We randomized 32 patients prior to elective neurosurgery to receive either one hour of forced-air convective warming at 46°C or routine care (full body blanket with convective warmer attached but not turned on). All patients had invasive blood pressure, heart rate, and core temperature monitoring before and during warming and underwent a protocolized intravenous anesthetic induction with propofol and remifentanil target-controlled infusions. The primary endpoint was the nadir mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) during induction. Hypotension was defined as systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mmHg, MAP < 60 mmHg, or a reduction in either SBP or MAP > 20% from baseline values. RESULTS: No difference was found in the mean (SD) nadir MAP between the prewarmed group and the control group [64 (11) mmHg vs 68 (16) mmHg, respectively; mean difference, 5 mmHg; 95% confidence interval (CI), -6 to 15; P = 0.36]. Similarly, there was no difference between groups in the incidence of hypotension (100% of prewarmed vs 93% of control patients; relative risk, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.23; P = 0.32) or in the requirement for vasopressors during induction (four patients in each group required metaraminol; P = 1.00). CONCLUSION: Prewarming with convective forced air for one hour prior to intravenous anesthetic induction did not prevent hypotension during the induction period (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry [ANZCTR] ACTRN12615000431527).

Current ventilation practice during general anaesthesia: a prospective audit in Melbourne, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the use of low tidal volume ventilation with the application of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) may benefit patients at risk of respiratory complications during general anaesthesia. However current Australian practice in this area is unknown. METHODS: To describe current practice of intraoperative ventilation with regard to tidal volume and application of PEEP, we performed a multicentre audit in patients undergoing general anaesthesia across eight teaching hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. RESULTS: We obtained information including demographic characteristics, type of surgery, tidal volume and the use of PEEP in a consecutive cohort of 272 patients. The median age was 56 (IQR 42-69) years; 150 (55%) were male. Most common diagnostic groups were general surgery (31%), orthopaedic surgery (20%) and neurosurgery (9.6%). Mean FiO2 was 0.6 (IQR 0.5-0.7). Median tidal volume was 500 ml (IQR 450-550). PEEP was used in 54% of patients with a median value of 5.0 cmH2O (IQR 4.0-5.0) and median tidal volume corrected for predicted body weight was 9.5 ml/kg (IQR 8.5-10.4). Median peak inspiratory pressure was 18 cmH2O (IQR 15-22). In a cohort of patients considered at risk for respiratory complications, the median tidal volume was still 9.8 ml/kg (IQR 8.6-10.7) and PEEP was applied in 66% of patients with a median value of 5 cmH20 (IQR 4-5). On multivariate analyses positive predictors of tidal volume size included male sex (p < 0.01), height (p = 0.04) and weight (p < 0.001). Positive predictors of the use of PEEP included surgery in a tertiary hospital (OR = 3.11; 95% CI: 1.05 to 9.23) and expected prolonged duration of surgery (OR = 2.47; 95% CI: 1.04 to 5.84). CONCLUSION: In mechanically ventilated patients under general anaesthesia, tidal volume was high and PEEP was applied to the majority of patients, but at modest levels. The findings of our study suggest that the control groups of previous randomized controlled trials do not closely reflect the practice of mechanical ventilation in Australia.