Early Physician Gestalt Versus Usual Screening Tools for the Prediction of Sepsis in Critically Ill Emergency Patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Compare physician gestalt to existing screening tools for identifying sepsis in the initial minutes of presentation when time-sensitive treatments must be initiated. METHODS: This prospective observational study conducted with consecutive encounter sampling took place in the emergency department (ED) of an academic, urban, safety net hospital between September 2020 and May 2022. The study population included ED patients who were critically ill, excluding traumas, transfers, and self-evident diagnoses. Emergency physician gestalt was measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 to 100 at 15 and 60 minutes after patient arrival. The primary outcome was an explicit sepsis hospital discharge diagnosis. Clinical data were recorded for up to 3 hours to compare Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), quick SOFA (qSOFA), Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), and a logistic regression machine learning model using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) for variable selection. The screening tools were compared using receiver operating characteristic analysis and area under the curve calculation (AUC). RESULTS: A total of 2,484 patient-physician encounters involving 59 attending physicians were analyzed. Two hundred seventy-five patients (11%) received an explicit sepsis discharge diagnosis. When limited to available data at 15 minutes, initial VAS (AUC 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88, 0.92) outperformed all tools including LASSO (0.84; 95% CI 0.82 to 0.87), qSOFA (0.67; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.71), SIRS (0.67; 95% 0.64 to 0.70), SOFA (0.67; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.70), and MEWS (0.66; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.69). Expanding to data available at 60 minutes did not meaningfully change results. CONCLUSION: Among adults presenting to an ED with an undifferentiated critical illness, physician gestalt in the first 15 minutes of the encounter outperformed other screening methods in identifying sepsis.

Physicians' perceptions of intensive care patients' 1-year prognoses compared to realistic prognoses.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether physicians treating critically ill patients have realistic perceptions of their patients' prognoses. METHODS: We sent a survey by email to Finnish anesthesiologists to investigate their ability to estimate the probability of 1-year survival of intensive care unit (ICU) patients based on data available at the beginning of intensive care. We presented 12 fictional but real-life-based patient cases and asked the respondent to estimate the probability of 1-year survival in each case by choosing one of the alternatives 5%, 10%-90% in 10% intervals and 95%. We compared the physicians' estimates to registry data-based realistic prognoses of comparable patients treated in the ICU. Based on the difference between the estimate and the realistic prognosis, we categorized the estimates into three groups: (1) difference less than 10 percentage points, (2) difference between 10 and 20 percentage points, and (3) difference over 20 percentage points. RESULTS: We received 210 responses (totally 2520 estimates). Of the respondents, 43 (20.5%) were specialists working mainly in the ICU, 81 (38.6%) were specialists working occasionally in the ICU, 47 (22.4%) were specialists not working in the ICU, and 39 (18.6%) were doctors in training. The difference between the estimate and the realistic prognosis was less than 10 percentage points for 1083 (43.0%) estimates, between 10 and 20 percentage points for 645 (25.6%) estimates, and over 20 percentage points for 792 (31.4%) estimates, out of which 612 (24.3% of all estimates) underestimated and 180 (7.1%) overestimated the likelihood of survival. The median error (the median of the differences between the estimate and the realistic prognosis) for all estimates was -8.8 [interquartile range (IQR), -20.0 to -0.2], which means that the most typical response underestimated the likelihood of survival by 9 percentage points. Based on the 12 estimates, we calculated the median error for each respondent. The median (IQR) of these median errors was -8.6 (-12.6 to -5.0) for specialists working mainly in the ICU, -8.1 (-13.0 to -5.2) for specialists working occasionally in the ICU, -9.7 (-17.7 to -6.3) for specialists not working in the ICU, and -9.1 (-14.5 to -5.1) for doctors in training (p = .29). CONCLUSION: Finnish anesthesiologists commonly misestimate the long-term prognoses of ICU patients, more often underestimating than overestimating the likelihood of 1-year survival. More education about critically ill patients' prognoses and better prediction tools are needed.

Truth-telling to the seriously ill child - Nurses' experiences, attitudes, and beliefs.

BACKGROUND: Nurses play an integral role in the care of children hospitalised with a serious illness. Although information about diagnostics, treatments, and prognosis are generally conveyed to parents and caregivers of seriously ill children by physicians, nurses spend a significant amount of time at the child's bedside and have an acknowledged role in helping patients and families understand the information that they have been given by a doctor. Hence, the ethical role of the nurse in truth disclosure to children is worth exploring. METHODS: A systematic academic database and grey literature search strategy was conducted using CINAHL, Medline Psych Info, and Google Scholar. Keywords used included truth, children, nurse, disclosure, serious illness, and communication. A total of 17 publications of varying types were included in the final data set. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: As this was a review of the literature, there were no direct human participants. Empirical studies included in the review had received ethics approval. RESULTS: Of the 17 articles included in the review, only one directly reported on the experiences of nurses asked to withhold the truth from patients. Empirical studies were limited to HIV-positive children and children diagnosed with cancer and the dying child. CONCLUSION: A paucity of literature exploring the experiences, attitudes, and beliefs of nurses with regard to truth-telling to seriously ill children is evident. Little consideration has been given to the role nurses play in communicating medical information to children in a hospital setting. The 17 articles included in the review focused on cancer, and HIV, diagnosis, and end-of-life care. Further research should be undertaken to explore the experiences and attitudes of nurses to clinical information sharing to children hospitalised with a wide range of serious illnesses and in diverse clinical scenarios.

Intrahospital transport of critically ill patients: Nurse anaesthetists' and specialist ICU nurses' experiences.

BACKGROUND: Intrahospital transport (IHT) is often performed by nurse anaesthetists and specialist intensive care nurses. Studies have shown that IHT increases the risk of mortality and morbidity, with up to 71% negative incidents. Using checklists when preparing for an IHT is important. Several international guidelines exist to ensure IHT safety and reduce the risk of complications. However, existing guidelines are often problematic in clinical practice. AIM: This study aimed to describe the experiences of nurse anaesthetists and specialized intensive care nurses during the IHT of adult patients with critical illnesses. STUDY DESIGN: This study adopted a mixed-methods approach. METHODS: Data were collected through a questionnaire completed by 66 nurses with specialist education in anaesthesia or intensive care. The data were analysed with qualitative content analysis, and the quantitative data were analysed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Two categories with two subcategories each emerged from the analysis of the responses of nurse anaesthetists and specialist intensive care nurses regarding their IHT experiences: creating good circumstances (subcategories: being risk-conscious and the importance of meticulous preparations) and the importance of routines and education (subcategories: following guidelines and having adequate training). CONCLUSION: IHT was described as a high risk for patient safety and complications. Routines with good compliance and education can positively impact patient safety during IHT. Checklists and scenario training can better prepare nurse anaesthetists and specialist intensive care nurses to manage complications that may arise during IHT, resulting in safer patient care. RELEVANCE FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: The findings underscore the importance of written guidelines for IHT, emphasizing awareness and adherence by the entire team. Careful pre-IHT preparations, coupled with an understanding of potential risks, are vital for ensuring patient safety. Clinical training and discussions following incidents during IHT play a crucial role in raising the collective awareness of patient safety within the entire team. Written guidelines about IHT are of utmost importance, and everyone in the team should be aware of and follow the guidelines. It is important to make careful preparations before IHT and to be aware of the possible risks to patient safety. Clinical training and discussions about IHT where patient safety has been impaired are important to increase the whole team's awareness of patient safety during IHT.

A randomised controlled trial of a nurse facilitator to promote communication for family members of critically ill patients.

PURPOSE: Suboptimal communication with clinicians, fragmented care and failure to align with patients' preferences are determinants of post intensive care unit (ICU) burden in family members. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of a nurse facilitator on family psychological burden. METHODS: We carried out a randomised controlled trial in five ICUs in France comparing standard communication by ICU clinicians to additional communication and support by nurse facilitators. We included patients > 18 years, with expected ICU length of stay > 2 days, chronic life-limiting illness, and their family members. Facilitators were trained to help families to secure care in line with patient's goals, beginning in ICU and continuing for 3 months. Assessments were made at baseline and 1, 3 and 6 months post-randomisation. Primary outcome was the evolution of family symptoms of depression over 6 months using a linear mixed effects model on the depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Secondary outcomes included HADS-Anxiety, Impact of Event Scale-6, goal-concordant care and experience of serious illness (QUAL-E). RESULTS: 385 patients and family members were enrolled. Follow-up at 1-, 3- and 6-month was completed by 284 (74%), 264 (68.6%) and 260 (67.5%) family members respectively. The intervention was associated with significantly more formal meetings between the ICU team and the family (1 [1-3] vs 2 [1-4]; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups in evolution of symptoms of depression over 6 months (p = 0.91), nor in symptoms of depression at 6 months [0.53 95% CI (- 0.48; 1.55)]. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study does not support the use of facilitators for family members of ICU patients.

Are Safety-Net Primary Care Physicians Prepared to Engage in Serious Illness Conversations?

BACKGROUND: Advance Care Planning (ACP) has not reliably improved care for patients at end-of-life. Serious Illness Conversations when patients are in the late stages of chronic illness might be more effective to address patients' goals. The Serious Illness Conversation (SIC) Guide has been helpful but was not developed for use in safety-net settings serving racial and ethnic minority populations. METHODS: Physicians were recruited to complete a needs assessment survey prior to training in the use of the SIC Guide. RESULTS: Of the 44 physician participants, most were female (82%) and white, non-Hispanic (62%). Less than half of respondents rated themselves as skilled or very skilled in basic serious illness communication related tasks such as setting up goals of care discussions (44%), assessing informational preferences (42%), sharing prognosis (38%), exploring goals for future care (49%) and managing family dynamics (44%). Respondents reported lower skill levels in conducting goals of care conversations via telehealth and establishing trust in racially discordant provider/patient pairs. CONCLUSIONS: Most participants expressed the need for further training in critical end-of-life communications skills, including help with encounters with racial and/or language discordance. This may help to explain the failure of ACP discussions to reliably result in appropriate end-of-life care.

Monitorización de la glucemia en el paciente crítico adulto: tipo de muestra y método de análisis. Revisión sistemática y metanálisis / Blood glucose monitoring in critically ill adult patients: Type of sample and method of analysis. Systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroducciónLa guía clínica para el manejo de la sepsis recomienda usar muestras de sangre arterial para el control glucémico. Un estudio multicéntrico en 86 unidades de cuidados intensivos españolas reveló que el 85,4% de estas utilizaban punción capilar.ObjetivoAnalizar la fiabilidad de la glucemia comparando diferentes muestras sanguíneas (arterial, venosa, capilar) e instrumentos (glucómetros, gasómetros, laboratorio central). Secundariamente, estimar el efecto de variables confusoras y el rendimiento de los instrumentos de medición determinados por las diferentes normas de calidad.MetodologíaRevisión sistemática y metanálisis con búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed, CINAHL y Embase en septiembre-2021 y septiembre-2022, sin límites temporales ni idiomáticos. Fuentes de literatura gris: DART-Europe, OpenGrey y Google Académico. Resultados resumidos mediante síntesis cualitativa (descripción de resultados, características de los estudios) y cuantitativa (metanálisis para evaluar la diferencia de medias estandarizadas). Calidad metodológica de artículos evaluada con Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Protocolo: https://osf.io/ DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8KYP.ResultadosSe incluyeron un total de 32 artículos y 5.451 pacientes. No se obtuvieron discrepancias entre muestras arteriales con glucómetro vs. laboratorio (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,01 [−0,12 a 0,14] mg/dL). En cambio, muestras arteriales con gasómetro sí sobreestimaron de forma significativa (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,12 [0,01 a 0,24] mg/dL). La misma tendencia presentan capilares con glucómetro, aunque no de forma significativa (sesgo [IC95%]: 0,07 [−0,02 a 0,15] mg/dL). Hay discrepancia entre los estudios sobre el efecto del hematocrito y el equilibrio ácido-base. El mayor consenso se da en la poca concordancia del glucómetro con muestras capilares vs. laboratorio en presencia de shock y soporte vasopresor, situación de fallo renal o durante el tratamiento con vitamina C.Conclusiones... (AU)

IntroductionThe clinical guideline for the management of sepsis recommends using arterial blood samples for glycaemic control. A multicentre study in 86 Spanish intensive care units revealed that 85.4% of these used capillary puncture.ObjectiveTo analyse the reliability of glycaemia by comparing different blood samples (arterial, venous, capillary) and instruments (glucometers, gasometers, central laboratory). Secondarily, to estimate the effect of confounding variables and the performance of measuring instruments as determined by different quality standards.MethodologySystematic review and meta-analysis with search in PubMed, CINAHL and Embase databases in September-2021 and September-2022, with no time or language limits. Grey literature sources: DART-Europe, OpenGrey and Google Scholar. Results summarised by qualitative (description of results, study characteristics) and quantitative (meta-analysis to assess standardised mean difference) synthesis. Methodological quality of articles assessed with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Protocol: https://osf.io/ DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/T8KYP.ResultsA total of 32 articles and 5451 patients were included. No discrepancies were obtained between arterial glucometer vs. laboratory samples (bias [95%CI]: 0.01 [−0.12 to 0.14] mg/dL). In contrast, arterial samples with a gasometer did significantly overestimate (bias [95%CI]: 0.12 [0.01 to 0.24] mg/dL). The same trend is seen in capillaries with a glucometer, although not significantly (bias [95%CI]: 0.07 [−0.02 to 0.15] mg/dL). There is discrepancy between studies on the effect of haematocrit and acid-base balance. The greatest consensus is on the poor agreement of glucometer with capillary vs. laboratory samples in the presence of shock and vasopressor support, renal failure or during vitamin C treatment.Conclusions... (AU)