Inotrope versus placebo therapy in cardiogenic shock: Rationale and study design of the CAPITAL DOREMI2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a state of end-organ hypoperfusion related to cardiac dysfunction. Current guidelines recommend consideration of inotrope therapy in patients with CS, however no robust data support their use. The purpose of the CAPITAL DOREMI2 trial is to examine the efficacy and safety of inotrope therapy against placebo in the initial resuscitation of patients with CS. METHODS AND DESIGN: This is a multi-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comparing single-agent inotrope therapy to placebo in patients with CS. A total of 346 participants with Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions class C or D CS will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to inotrope or placebo therapy, which will be administered over a 12-hour period. After this period, participants will continue open-label therapies at the discretion of the treating team. The primary outcome is a composite of all-cause in-hospital death, and, as measured during the 12-hour intervention period, any of: sustained hypotension or high dose vasopressor requirements, lactate greater than 3.5 mmol/L at 6 hours or thereafter, need for mechanical circulatory support, arrhythmia leading to emergent electrical cardioversion, and resuscitated cardiac arrest. All participants will be followed for the duration of their hospitalization, and secondary outcomes will be assessed at the time of discharge. IMPLICATION: This trial will be the first to establish the safety and efficacy of inotrope therapy against placebo in a population of patients with CS and has the potential to alter the standard care provided to this group of patients.

The Syncopal Sarcoma: A Rare Case of Primary Cardiac Synovial Sarcoma.

Primary cardiac synovial sarcomas are very rare, representing <1% of all primary cardiac tumors. We report the case of a 19-year-old man with syncope and dynamic obstructive shock caused by a large right-sided intracardiac tumor. (Level of Difficulty: Beginner .).

Acceptance of intradermal inactivated influenza vaccines among hospital staff following 2 seasonal vaccination campaigns.

After a Canadian hospital's official influenza vaccination campaign concluded in the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 influenza seasons, study nurses provided additional vaccination mobile cart hours and the added choice of an intradermal injection. An additional 2.1% of staff in the first and 1.4% in the second season were vaccinated during the study with 90-99% preferring the intradermal injection or having no preference. All 13 staff who attempted self-injection with the intradermal vaccine in 2012-2013 were successful on their first attempt. Offering alternatives to intramuscular vaccines may increase rates of vaccination.

Rate of healthcare worker-patient interaction and hand hygiene opportunities in an acute care setting.

OBJECTIVE: Identify factors affecting the rate of hand hygiene opportunities in an acute care hospital. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Medical and surgical in-patient units, medical-surgical intensive care unit (MSICU), neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and emergency department (ED) of an academic acute care hospital from May to August, 2012. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare workers. METHODS: One-hour patient-based observations measured patient interactions and hand hygiene opportunities as defined by the "Four Moments for Hand Hygiene." Rates of patient interactions and hand hygiene opportunities per patient-hour were calculated, examining variation by room type, healthcare worker type, and time of day. RESULTS: During 257 hours of observation, 948 healthcare worker-patient interactions and 1,605 hand hygiene opportunities were identified. Moments 1, 2, 3, and 4 comprised 42%, 10%, 9%, and 39% of hand hygiene opportunities. Nurses contributed 77% of opportunities, physicians contributed 8%, other healthcare workers contributed 11%, and housekeeping contributed 4%. The mean rate of hand hygiene opportunities per patient-hour was 4.2 for surgical units, 4.5 for medical units, 5.2 for ED, 10.4 for NICU, and 13.2 for MSICU (P < .001). In non-ICU settings, rates of hand hygiene opportunities decreased over the course of the day. Patients with transmission-based precautions had approximately half as many interactions (rate ratio [RR], 0.55 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37-0.80]) and hand hygiene opportunities per hour (RR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.29-0.77]) as did patients without precautions. CONCLUSIONS: Measuring hand hygiene opportunities across clinical settings lays the groundwork for product use-based hand hygiene measurement. Additional work is needed to assess factors affecting rates in other hospitals and health care settings.