Video versus Direct Laryngoscopy for Tracheal Intubation of Critically Ill Adults.

BACKGROUND: Whether video laryngoscopy as compared with direct laryngoscopy increases the likelihood of successful tracheal intubation on the first attempt among critically ill adults is uncertain. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized trial conducted at 17 emergency departments and intensive care units (ICUs), we randomly assigned critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation to the video-laryngoscope group or the direct-laryngoscope group. The primary outcome was successful intubation on the first attempt. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of severe complications during intubation; severe complications were defined as severe hypoxemia, severe hypotension, new or increased vasopressor use, cardiac arrest, or death. RESULTS: The trial was stopped for efficacy at the time of the single preplanned interim analysis. Among 1417 patients who were included in the final analysis (91.5% of whom underwent intubation that was performed by an emergency medicine resident or a critical care fellow), successful intubation on the first attempt occurred in 600 of the 705 patients (85.1%) in the video-laryngoscope group and in 504 of the 712 patients (70.8%) in the direct-laryngoscope group (absolute risk difference, 14.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.9 to 18.7; P<0.001). A total of 151 patients (21.4%) in the video-laryngoscope group and 149 patients (20.9%) in the direct-laryngoscope group had a severe complication during intubation (absolute risk difference, 0.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.9 to 4.9). Safety outcomes, including esophageal intubation, injury to the teeth, and aspiration, were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among critically ill adults undergoing tracheal intubation in an emergency department or ICU, the use of a video laryngoscope resulted in a higher incidence of successful intubation on the first attempt than the use of a direct laryngoscope. (Funded by the U.S. Department of Defense; DEVICE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05239195.).

Oxygen-Saturation Targets for Critically Ill Adults Receiving Mechanical Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mechanical ventilation in critically ill adults involves adjusting the fraction of inspired oxygen to maintain arterial oxygen saturation. The oxygen-saturation target that will optimize clinical outcomes in this patient population remains unknown. METHODS: In a pragmatic, cluster-randomized, cluster-crossover trial conducted in the emergency department and medical intensive care unit at an academic center, we assigned adults who were receiving mechanical ventilation to a lower target for oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (Spo2) (90%; goal range, 88 to 92%), an intermediate target (94%; goal range, 92 to 96%), or a higher target (98%; goal range, 96 to 100%). The primary outcome was the number of days alive and free of mechanical ventilation (ventilator-free days) through day 28. The secondary outcome was death by day 28, with data censored at hospital discharge. RESULTS: A total of 2541 patients were included in the primary analysis. The median number of ventilator-free days was 20 (interquartile range, 0 to 25) in the lower-target group, 21 (interquartile range, 0 to 25) in the intermediate-target group, and 21 (interquartile range, 0 to 26) in the higher-target group (P = 0.81). In-hospital death by day 28 occurred in 281 of the 808 patients (34.8%) in the lower-target group, 292 of the 859 patients (34.0%) in the intermediate-target group, and 290 of the 874 patients (33.2%) in the higher-target group. The incidences of cardiac arrest, arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, stroke, and pneumothorax were similar in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among critically ill adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, the number of ventilator-free days did not differ among groups in which a lower, intermediate, or higher Spo2 target was used. (Supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; PILOT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03537937.).

Protocolized Postextubation Respiratory Support to Prevent Reintubation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Respiratory support (noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula) applied at the time of extubation has been reported to reduce reintubation rates, but concerns regarding effectiveness have limited uptake into practice.Objectives: To determine if providing postextubation respiratory support to all patients undergoing extubation in a medical ICU would decrease the incidence of reintubation.Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, two-armed, cluster-crossover trial of adults undergoing extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation between October 1, 2017, and March 31, 2019, in the medical ICU of an academic medical center. Patients were assigned to either protocolized postextubation respiratory support (a respiratory therapist-driven protocol in which patients with suspected hypercapnia received noninvasive ventilation and patients without suspected hypercapnia received high-flow nasal cannula) or usual care (postextubation management at the discretion of treating clinicians). The primary outcome was reintubation within 96 hours of extubation.Measurements and Main Results: A total of 751 patients were enrolled. Of the 359 patients assigned to protocolized support, 331 (92.2%) received postextubation respiratory support compared with 66 of 392 patients (16.8%) assigned to usual care, a difference driven by differential use of high-flow nasal cannula (74.7% vs. 2.8%). A total of 57 patients (15.9%) in the protocolized support group experienced reintubation compared with 52 patients (13.3%) in the usual care group (odds ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.84; P = 0.32).Conclusions: Among a broad population of critically ill adults undergoing extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation at an academic medical center, protocolized postextubation respiratory support, primarily characterized by an increase in the use of high-flow nasal cannula, did not prevent reintubation compared with usual care.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT0328831).

The effect of adhesive tape versus endotracheal tube fastener in critically ill adults: the endotracheal tube securement (ETTS) randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal securement method of endotracheal tubes is unknown but should prevent dislodgement while minimizing complications. The use of an endotracheal tube fastener might reduce complications among critically ill adults undergoing endotracheal intubation. METHODS: In this pragmatic, single-center, randomized trial, critically ill adults admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) and expected to require invasive mechanical ventilation for greater than 24 h were randomized to adhesive tape or endotracheal tube fastener at the time of intubation. The primary endpoint was a composite of any of the following: presence of lip ulcer, endotracheal tube dislodgement (defined as moving at least 2 cm), ventilator-associated pneumonia, or facial skin tears anytime between randomization and the earlier of death or 48 h after extubation. Secondary endpoints included duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of 500 patients randomized over a 12-month period, 162 had a duration of mechanical ventilation less than 24 h and 40 had missing outcome data, leaving 153 evaluable patients randomized to tube fastener and 145 evaluable patients randomized to adhesive tape. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. The primary endpoint occurred 13 times in 12 (7.8%) patients in the tube fastener group and 30 times in 25 (17.2%) patients in the adhesive tape group (p = 0.014) for an overall incidence of 22.0 versus 52.6 per 1000 ventilator days, respectively (p = 0.020). Lip ulcers occurred in 4 (2.6%) versus 11 (7.3%) patients, or an incidence rate of 6.5 versus 19.5 per 1000 patient ventilator days (p = 0.053) in the fastener and tape groups, respectively. The endotracheal tube was dislodged 7 times in 6 (3.9%) patients in the tube fastener group and 16 times in 15 (10.3%) patients in the tape group (p = 0.03), reflecting incidences of 11.9 and 28.1 per 1000 ventilator days, respectively. Facial skin tears were similar between the groups. Mechanical ventilation duration and ICU and hospital mortality did not differ. CONCLUSION: The use of the endotracheal tube fastener to secure the endotracheal tubes reduces the rate of a composite outcome that included lip ulcers, facial skin tears, or endotracheal tube dislodgement compared to adhesive tape. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03760510. Retrospectively registered on November 30, 2018.

Impact of Mucorales and Other Invasive Molds on Clinical Outcomes of Polymicrobial Traumatic Wound Infections.

Combat trauma wounds with invasive fungal infections (IFIs) are often polymicrobial with fungal and bacterial growth, but the impact of the wound microbiology on clinical outcomes is uncertain. Our objectives were to compare the microbiological features between IFI and non-IFI wounds and evaluate whether clinical outcomes differed among IFI wounds based upon mold type. Data from U.S. military personnel injured in Afghanistan with IFI wounds were examined. Controls were matched by the pattern/severity of injury, including blood transfusion requirements. Wound closure timing was compared between IFI and non-IFI control wounds (with/without bacterial infections). IFI wound closure was also assessed according to mold species isolation. Eighty-two IFI wounds and 136 non-IFI wounds (63 with skin and soft tissue infections [SSTIs] and 73 without) were examined. The time to wound closure was longer for the IFI wounds (median, 16 days) than for the non-IFI controls with/without SSTIs (medians, 12 and 9 days, respectively; P < 0.001). The growth of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative rods was reported among 35% and 41% of the IFI and non-IFI wounds with SSTIs, respectively. Among the IFI wounds, times to wound closure were significantly longer for wounds with Mucorales growth than for wounds with non-Mucorales growth (median, 17 days versus 13 days; P < 0.01). When wounds with Mucorales and Aspergillus spp. growth were compared, there was no significant difference in wound closure timing. Trauma wounds with SSTIs were often polymicrobial, yet the presence of invasive molds (predominant types: order Mucorales, Aspergillus spp., and Fusarium spp.) significantly prolonged the time to wound closure. Overall, the times to wound closure were longest for the IFI wounds with Mucorales growth.

Additional standing balance circuit classes during inpatient rehabilitation improved balance outcomes: an assessor-blinded randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: to evaluate the impact on balance (postural control) of six 1-h circuit classes that targeted balance in addition to usual therapy for rehabilitation inpatients. DESIGN: a randomised controlled trial with 2-week and 3-month follow-up. PARTICIPANTS: one hundred and sixty-two general rehabilitation inpatients, Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital, Australia. INTERVENTION: intervention group participants received six 1-h circuit classes over a 2-week period in addition to usual therapy. Control group participants received usual therapy. RESULTS: standing balance performance (primary outcome) was better in the intervention group than in the control group at 2 weeks (between-group difference after adjusting for baseline values 3.3 s; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 5.7, P = 0.009), but the between-group difference was not statistically significant at 3 months (3.4 s; 95% CI -0.56 to 7.38, P = 0.092). Intervention group outcomes were significantly better than the control groups for mobility performance (Short Physical Performance Battery) at 2 weeks (1.19, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.87, P <0.01) and 3 months (1.00, 95% CI 0.00 to 2.00, P < 0.049) and self-reported functioning (AM-PAC) at 2 weeks (5.39, 95% CI 1.20 to 9.57, P = 0.012). The intervention group had a 4.1-day shorter rehabilitation unit stay (95% CI -8.3 to 0.16, P = 0.059) and a lower risk of readmission in the 3 months after randomisation (incidence rate ratio 0.70, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.18, P = 0.184), but these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: two weeks of standing balance circuit classes in addition to usual therapy improved balance in general rehabilitation inpatients at 2 weeks.

Phenotypic and genotypic changes over time and across facilities of serial colonizing and infecting Escherichia coli isolates recovered from injured service members.

Escherichia coli is the most common colonizing and infecting organism isolated from U.S. service members injured during deployment. Our objective was to evaluate the phenotypic and genotypic changes of infecting and colonizing E. coli organisms over time and across facilities to better understand their transmission patterns. E. coli isolates were collected via surveillance cultures and infection workups from U.S. military personnel injured during deployment (June 2009 to May 2011). The isolates underwent antimicrobial susceptibility testing, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, and multiplex PCR for phylotyping to determine their resistance profiles and clonality. A total of 343 colonizing and 136 infecting E. coli isolates were analyzed, of which 197 (57%) and 109 (80%) isolates, respectively, produced extended-spectrum ß-lactamases (ESBL). Phylogroup A was predominant among both colonizing (38%) and infecting isolates (43%). Although 188 unique pulsed-field types (PFTs) were identified from the colonizing isolates, and 54 PFTs were identified from the infecting isolates, there was a lack of PFT overlap between study years, combat zones, and military treatment facilities. On a per-subject basis, 26% and 32% of the patients with serial colonizing isolates and 10% and 21% with serial infecting isolates acquired changes in their phylogroup and PFT profiles, respectively, over time. The production of ESBL remained high over time and across facilities, with no substantial changes in antimicrobial susceptibilities. Overall, our results demonstrated an array of genotypic and phenotypic differences for the isolates without large clonal clusters; however, the same PFTs were occasionally observed in the colonizing and infecting isolates, suggesting that the source of infections may be endogenous host organisms.

The New South Wales Allied Health Workplace Learning Study: barriers and enablers to learning in the workplace.

BACKGROUND: Workplace learning refers to continuing professional development that is stimulated by and occurs through participation in workplace activities. Workplace learning is essential for staff development and high quality clinical care. The purpose of this study was to explore the barriers to and enablers of workplace learning for allied health professionals within NSW Health. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted with a purposively selected maximum variation sample (n =46) including 19 managers, 19 clinicians and eight educators from 10 allied health professions. Seven semi-structured interviews and nine focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed. The 'framework approach' was used to guide the interviews and analysis. Textual data were coded and charted using an evolving thematic framework. RESULTS: Key enablers of workplace learning included having access to peers, expertise and 'learning networks', protected learning time, supportive management and positive staff attitudes. The absence of these key enablers including heavy workload and insufficient staffing were important barriers to workplace learning. CONCLUSION: Attention to these barriers and enablers may help organisations to more effectively optimise allied health workplace learning. Ultimately better workplace learning may lead to improved patient, staff and organisational outcomes.

Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan for the Mode of Ventilation During Critical Illness (MODE) Trial.

BACKGROUND: For every critically ill adult receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, clinicians must select a mode of ventilation. The mode of ventilation determines whether the ventilator directly controls the tidal volume or the inspiratory pressure. Newer hybrid modes allow clinicians to set a target tidal volume; the ventilator controls and adjusts the inspiratory pressure. A strategy of low tidal volumes and low plateau pressure improves outcomes, but the optimal mode to achieve these targets is not known. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can a cluster-randomized trial design be used to assess whether the mode of mandatory ventilation affects the number of days alive and free of invasive mechanical ventilation among critically ill adults? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The Mode of Ventilation During Critical Illness (MODE) trial is a cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover pilot trial being conducted in the medical ICU at an academic center. The MODE trial compares the use of volume control, pressure control, and adaptive pressure control. The study ICU is assigned to a single-ventilator mode (volume control vs pressure control vs adaptive pressure control) for continuous mandatory ventilation during each 1-month study block. The assigned mode switches every month in a randomly generated sequence. The primary outcome is ventilator-free days to study day 28, defined as the number of days alive and free of invasive mechanical ventilation from the final receipt of mechanical ventilation to 28 days after enrollment. Enrollment began November 1, 2022, and will end on July 31, 2023. RESULTS: This manuscript describes the protocol and statistical analysis plan for the MODE trial of ventilator modes comparing volume control, pressure control, and adaptive pressure control. INTERPRETATION: Prespecifying the full statistical analysis plan prior to completion of enrollment increases rigor, reproducibility, and transparency of the trial results. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov on October 3, 2022, before initiation of patient enrollment on November 1, 2022 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05563779).

Evaluation for a novel methicillin resistance (mecC) homologue in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates obtained from injured military personnel.

A total of 102 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates collected from 50 injured service members (June 2009 to December 2011) at U.S. military treatment facilities were analyzed for the conventional mecA gene and mecC homologue by using standard PCR-based methods. The prevalence of the mecC homologue was zero.

Clinical presentation, diagnostic investigations, treatment protocols and outcomes of dogs diagnosed with tick-borne diseases living in the United Kingdom: 76 cases (2005-2019).

OBJECTIVES: To report the presence of tick-borne diseases in dogs living in the United Kingdom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dogs with a final diagnosis of tick-borne diseases made between January 2005 and August 2019 at seven referral institutions in the United Kingdom were included in the study. RESULTS: Seventy-six dogs were included: 25 were diagnosed with ehrlichiosis, 23 with babesiosis, eight with Lyme borreliosis and six with anaplasmosis. Fourteen dogs had co-infections with two or three pathogens. Except for those dogs with anaplasmosis and Lyme borreliosis, most dogs with tick-borne diseases had a history of travel to or from endemic countries. However, three dogs with ehrlichiosis, and one dog each infected with Babesia canis and Babesia vulpes did not have any history of travel. A variety of non-specific clinical signs and laboratory abnormalities were reported. Targeted treatment was successful at achieving clinical remission in 64 (84%) dogs. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Even in non-endemic areas, veterinary surgeons should consider tick-borne diseases in dogs with compatible clinical presentation and laboratory findings and especially where there is a history of travel. As autochthonous transmission of tick-borne-pathogens does occur, an absence of travel should not rule out tick-borne diseases. Specific diagnostic testing is required to confirm infection, and this enables prompt targeted treatment and often a positive outcome.

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Antibiotic Choice On ReNal outcomes (ACORN) randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Antibiotics are time-critical in the management of sepsis. When infectious organisms are unknown, patients are treated with empiric antibiotics to include coverage for gram-negative organisms, such as antipseudomonal cephalosporins and penicillins. However, in observational studies, some antipseudomonal cephalosporins (eg, cefepime) are associated with neurologic dysfunction while the most common antipseudomonal penicillin (piperacillin-tazobactam) is associated with acute kidney injury (AKI). No randomised control trials have compared these regimens. This manuscript describes the protocol and analysis plan for a trial designed to compare the effects of antipseudomonal cephalosporins and antipseudomonal penicillins among acutely ill patients receiving empiric antibiotics. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Antibiotic Choice On ReNal outcomes trial is a prospective, single-centre, non-blinded randomised trial being conducted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. The trial will enrol 2500 acutely ill adults receiving gram-negative coverage for treatment of infection. Eligible patients are randomised 1:1 to receive cefepime or piperacillin-tazobactam on first order entry of a broad-spectrum antibiotic covering gram-negative organisms. The primary outcome is the highest stage of AKI and death occurring between enrolment and 14 days after enrolment. This will be compared between patients randomised to cefepime and randomised to piperacillin-tazobactam using an unadjusted proportional odds regression model. The secondary outcomes are major adverse kidney events through day 14 and number of days alive and free of delirium and coma in 14 days after enrolment. Enrolment began on 10 November 2021 and is expected to be completed in December 2022. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial was approved by the Vanderbilt University Medical Center institutional review board (IRB#210591) with a waiver of informed consent. Results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05094154.

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Mode of Ventilation During Critical IllnEss (MODE) trial.

Introduction: For every critically ill adult receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, clinicians must select a mode of ventilation. The mode of ventilation determines whether the ventilator directly controls the tidal volume or the inspiratory pressure. Newer hybrid modes allow clinicians to set a target tidal volume, for which the ventilator controls and adjusts the inspiratory pressure. A strategy of low tidal volumes and low plateau pressure improves outcomes, but the optimal mode to achieve these targets is not known. Methods and analysis: The Mode of Ventilation During Critical Illness (MODE) trial is a cluster-randomized, multiple-crossover pilot trial being conducted in the medical intensive care unit (ICU) at an academic center. The MODE trial compares the use of volume control, pressure control, and adaptive pressure control. The study ICU is assigned to a single ventilator mode (volume control versus pressure control versus adaptive pressure control) for continuous mandatory ventilation during each 1-month study block. The assigned mode switches every month in a randomly generated sequence. The primary outcome is ventilator-free days (VFDs) to study day 28, defined as the number of days alive and free of invasive mechanical ventilation from the final receipt of mechanical ventilation to 28 days after enrollment. Enrollment began November 1, 2022 and will end on July 31, 2023. Ethics and dissemination: The trial was approved by the Vanderbilt University Medical Center institutional review board (IRB# 220446). Results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences. Trial registration number: The trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov on October 3, 2022, prior to initiation of patient enrollment on November 1, 2022 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05563779).

DirEct versus VIdeo LaryngosCopE (DEVICE): protocol and statistical analysis plan for a randomised clinical trial in critically ill adults undergoing emergency tracheal intubation.

INTRODUCTION: Among critically ill patients undergoing orotracheal intubation in the emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU), failure to visualise the vocal cords and intubate the trachea on the first attempt is associated with an increased risk of complications. Two types of laryngoscopes are commonly available: direct laryngoscopes and video laryngoscopes. For critically ill adults undergoing emergency tracheal intubation, it remains uncertain whether the use of a video laryngoscope increases the incidence of successful intubation on the first attempt compared with the use of a direct laryngoscope. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The DirEct versus VIdeo LaryngosCopE (DEVICE) trial is a prospective, multicentre, non-blinded, randomised trial being conducted in 7 EDs and 10 ICUs in the USA. The trial plans to enrol up to 2000 critically ill adults undergoing orotracheal intubation with a laryngoscope. Eligible patients are randomised 1:1 to the use of a video laryngoscope or a direct laryngoscope for the first intubation attempt. The primary outcome is successful intubation on the first attempt. The secondary outcome is the incidence of severe complications between induction and 2 min after intubation, defined as the occurrence of one or more of the following: severe hypoxaemia (lowest oxygen saturation <80%); severe hypotension (systolic blood pressure <65 mm Hg or new or increased vasopressor administration); cardiac arrest or death. Enrolment began on 19 March 2022 and is expected to be completed in 2023. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial protocol was approved with waiver of informed consent by the single institutional review board at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and the Human Research Protection Office of the Department of Defense. The results will be presented at scientific conferences and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05239195).

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the PREOXI trial of preoxygenation with noninvasive ventilation vs oxygen mask.

Background: Hypoxemia is a common and life-threatening complication during emergency tracheal intubation of critically ill adults. The administration of supplemental oxygen prior to the procedure ("preoxygenation") decreases the risk of hypoxemia during intubation. Research Question: Whether preoxygenation with noninvasive ventilation prevents hypoxemia during tracheal intubation of critically ill adults, compared to preoxygenation with oxygen mask, remains uncertain. Study Design and Methods: The PRagmatic trial Examining OXygenation prior to Intubation (PREOXI) is a prospective, multicenter, non-blinded randomized comparative effectiveness trial being conducted in 7 emergency departments and 17 intensive care units across the United States. The trial compares preoxygenation with noninvasive ventilation versus oxygen mask among 1300 critically ill adults undergoing emergency tracheal intubation. Eligible patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either noninvasive ventilation or an oxygen mask prior to induction. The primary outcome is the incidence of hypoxemia, defined as a peripheral oxygen saturation <85% between induction and 2 minutes after intubation. The secondary outcome is the lowest oxygen saturation between induction and 2 minutes after intubation. Enrollment began on 10 March 2022 and is expected to conclude in 2023. Interpretation: The PREOXI trial will provide important data on the effectiveness of noninvasive ventilation and oxygen mask preoxygenation for the prevention of hypoxemia during emergency tracheal intubation. Specifying the protocol and statistical analysis plan prior to the conclusion of enrollment increases the rigor, reproducibility, and interpretability of the trial. Clinical trial registration number: NCT05267652.

Invasive mold infections following combat-related injuries.

BACKGROUND: Major advances in combat casualty care have led to increased survival of patients with complex extremity trauma. Invasive fungal wound infections (IFIs) are an uncommon, but increasingly recognized, complication following trauma that require greater understanding of risk factors and clinical findings to reduce morbidity. METHODS: The patient population includes US military personnel injured during combat from June 2009 through December 2010. Case definition required wound necrosis on successive debridements with IFI evidence by histopathology and/or microbiology (Candida spp excluded). Case finding and data collected through the Trauma Infectious Disease Outcomes Study utilized trauma registry, hospital records or operative reports, and pathologist review of histopathology specimens. RESULTS: A total of 37 cases were identified: proven (angioinvasion, n=20), probable (nonvascular tissue invasion, n=4), and possible (positive fungal culture without histopathological evidence, n=13). In the last quarter surveyed, rates reached 3.5% of trauma admissions. Common findings include blast injury (100%) during foot patrol (92%) occurring in southern Afghanistan (94%) with lower extremity amputation (80%) and large volume blood transfusion (97.2%). Mold isolates were recovered in 83% of cases (order Mucorales, n=16; Aspergillus spp, n=16; Fusarium spp, n=9), commonly with multiple mold species among infected wounds (28%). Clinical outcomes included 3 related deaths (8.1%), frequent debridements (median, 11 cases), and amputation revisions (58%). CONCLUSIONS: IFIs are an emerging trauma-related infection leading to significant morbidity. Early identification, using common characteristics of patient injury profile and tissue-based diagnosis, should be accompanied by aggressive surgical and antifungal therapy (liposomal amphotericin B and a broad-spectrum triazole pending mycology results) among patients with suspicious wounds.

Antimicrobial prescribing practices following publication of guidelines for the prevention of infections associated with combat-related injuries.

BACKGROUND: Timely and limited antibiotic prophylaxis (postinjury antimicrobial therapy) targeting specific traumatic injuries is a well-recognized measure to lessen posttraumatic infection. Modern military combat injuries raise significant challenges because of complex multiple injuries and limited data derived directly from well-controlled trials to base recommendations. Expert consensus review of available evidence led to published guidance for selection and duration of antimicrobial therapy for combat-related trauma infection prevention. This analysis evaluates antibiotic-prescribing practices by military physicians in the operational theater relative to the published guidance. METHODS: Trauma history and infectious disease-specific inpatient care information is captured through the Joint Theater Trauma Registry along with a supplemental infectious disease module. Injury patterns are classified based on documented International Classification of Diseases-9th Revision codes with a composite assessment of each patient's injury pattern. Antimicrobial use categorized as prophylaxis is prescribed within the first 48 hours postinjury. Adherence to published guidance is reported along with patient characteristics and injury severity to assess for potential explanations of nonadherence. RESULTS: During June to November 2009, 75% of the 610 eligible trauma patients received antimicrobial prophylaxis. Adherence to the recommended antibiotic agent on the day of injury was in the range of 46% to 50% for the most common extremity injury patterns and <10% in penetrating abdominal injuries. Antibiotics were given in 39% of patients sustaining injuries that are recommendations to not receive antimicrobial prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: This first evaluation of combat trauma-related antibiotic prophylaxis shows adherence levels comparable or superior to reported rates in civilian settings despite the austere, frequently mass casualty environment. Areas for interval surveillance and education-based strategies for improved adherence to practice guidance are identified.

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Pragmatic Investigation of optimaL Oxygen Targets (PILOT) clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Mechanical ventilation of intensive care unit (ICU) patients universally involves titration of the fraction of inspired oxygen to maintain arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2). However, the optimal SpO2 target remains unknown. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Pragmatic Investigation of optimaL Oxygen Targets (PILOT) trial is a prospective, unblinded, pragmatic, cluster-crossover trial being conducted in the emergency department (ED) and medical ICU at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, USA. PILOT compares use of a lower SpO2 target (target 90% and goal range: 88%-92%), an intermediate SpO2 target (target 94% and goal range: 92%-96%) and a higher SpO2 target (target 98% and goal range: 96%-100%). The study units are assigned to a single SpO2 target (cluster-level allocation) for each 2-month study block, and the assigned SpO2 target switches every 2 months in a randomly generated sequence (cluster-level crossover). The primary outcome is ventilator-free days (VFDs) to study day 28, defined as the number of days alive and free of invasive mechanical ventilation from the final receipt of invasive mechanical ventilation through 28 days after enrolment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial was approved by the Vanderbilt Institutional Review Board. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The trial protocol was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 25 May 2018 prior to initiation of patient enrolment (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03537937).

After the Battlefield: Infectious Complications among Wounded Warriors in the Trauma Infectious Disease Outcomes Study.

INTRODUCTION: During recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, improved survivability in severe trauma corresponded with a rise in the proportion of trauma-related infections, including those associated with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). Significant morbidity was reported in association with the infections. There is also concern regarding potential long-term impacts of the trauma-related infectious complications. Therefore, to meet the critical need of prospective collection of standardized infection-related data to understand the disease burden and improve outcomes of wounded personnel, the Trauma Infectious Disease Outcomes Study (TIDOS) was developed. Herein, we review accomplishments and key peer-reviewed findings of TIDOS. METHODS: The TIDOS project is a multicenter observational study of short- and long-term infectious complications following deployment-related trauma. Wounded military personnel medevac'd to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center (LRMC; Germany) before transfer to a participating US military hospital between June 2009 and December 2014 were eligible for inclusion. An infectious disease module to supplement the Department of Defense Trauma Registry by collecting infection-related data from all trauma patients admitted to participating hospitals was developed. Specimens from trauma patients were also collected and retained in a microbiological isolate repository. During the initial hospitalization, patients were given the opportunity to enroll in a prospective follow-up cohort study. Patients who received Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) care were also given the opportunity to consent to ongoing VA follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 2,699 patients transferred to participating military hospitals in the USA, of which 1,359 (50%) patients enrolled in the TIDOS follow-up cohort. In addition, 638 enrolled in the TIDOS-VA cohort (52% of TIDOS enrollees who entered VA healthcare). More than 8,000 isolates were collected from infection control surveillance and diagnostic evaluations and retained in the TIDOS Microbiological Repository. Approximately 34% of the 2,699 patients at US hospitals developed a trauma-related infection during their initial hospitalization with skin and soft-tissue infections being predominant. After discharge from the US hospitals, approximately one-third of TIDOS cohort enrollees developed a new trauma-related infection during follow-up and extremity wound infections (skin and soft-tissue infections and osteomyelitis) continued to be the majority. Among TIDOS cohort enrollees who received VA healthcare, 38% developed a new trauma-related infection with the incident infection being diagnosed a median of 88 days (interquartile range: 19-351 days) following hospital discharge. Data from TIDOS have been used to support the development of Joint Trauma System clinical practice guidelines for the prevention of combat-related infections, as well as the management of invasive fungal wound infections. Lastly, due to the increasing proportion of infections associated with MDROs, TIDOS investigators have collaborated with investigators across military laboratories as part of the Multidrug-Resistant and Virulent Organisms Trauma Infections Initiative with the objective of improving the understanding of the complex wound microbiology in order to develop novel infectious disease countermeasures. CONCLUSIONS: The TIDOS project has focused research on four initiatives: (1) blast-related wound infection epidemiology and clinical management; (2) DoD-VA outcomes research; (3) Multidrug- Resistant and other Virulent Organisms Trauma Infections Initiative; and (4) Joint Trauma System clinical practice guidelines and antibiotic stewardship. There is a continuing need for longitudinal data platforms to support battlefield wound research and clinical practice guideline recommendation refinement, particularly to improve care for future conflicts. As such, maintaining a research platform, such as TIDOS, would negate the lengthy time needed to initiate data collection and analysis.

Protocolized Post-Extubation Respiratory Support to prevent reintubation: protocol and statistical analysis plan for a clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Following extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation, nearly one in seven critically ill adults requires reintubation. Reintubation is independently associated with increased mortality. Postextubation respiratory support (non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula applied at the time of extubation) has been reported in small-to-moderate-sized trials to reduce reintubation rates among hypercapnic patients, high-risk patients without hypercapnia and low-risk patients without hypercapnia. It is unknown whether protocolised provision of postextubation respiratory support to every patient undergoing extubation would reduce the overall reintubation rate, compared with usual care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Protocolized Post-Extubation Respiratory Support (PROPER) trial is a pragmatic, cluster cross-over trial being conducted between 1 October 2017 and 31 March 2019 in the medical intensive care unit of Vanderbilt University Medical Center. PROPER compares usual care versus protocolized post-extubation respiratory support (a respiratory therapist-driven protocol that advises the provision of non-invasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula based on patient characteristics). For the duration of the trial, the unit is divided into two clusters. One cluster receives protocolised support and the other receives usual care. Each cluster crosses over between treatment group assignments every 3 months. All adults undergoing extubation from invasive mechanical ventilation are enrolled except those who received less than 12 hours of mechanical ventilation, have 'Do Not Intubate' orders, or have been previously reintubated during the hospitalisation. The anticipated enrolment is approximately 630 patients. The primary outcome is reintubation within 96 hours of extubation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial was approved by the Vanderbilt Institutional Review Board. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03288311.