Geo-economic Influence on the Effect of Fluid Volume for Sepsis Resuscitation: A Meta-Analysis.

Rationale: Sepsis management relies on fluid resuscitation avoiding fluid overload and its related organ congestion. Objectives: To explore the influence of country income group on risk-benefit balance of fluid management strategies in sepsis. Methods: We searched e-databases for all randomized controlled trials on fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis or septic shock up to January 2023, excluding studies on hypertonic fluids, colloids, and depletion-based interventions. The effect of fluid strategies (higher versus lower volumes) on mortality was analyzed per income group (i.e., low- and middle-income countries [LMICs] or high-income countries [HICs]). Measurements and Main Results: Twenty-nine studies (11,798 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. There was a numerically higher mortality in studies of LMICs as compared with those of HICs: median, 37% (interquartile range [IQR]: 26-41) versus 29% (IQR: 17-38; P = 0.06). Income group significantly interacted with the effect of fluid volume on mortality: Higher fluid volume was associated with higher mortality in LMICs but not in HICs: odds ratio (OR), 1.47; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.14-1.90 versus 1.00 (95% CI: 0.87-1.16), P = 0.01 for subgroup differences. Higher fluid volume was associated with increased need for mechanical ventilation in LMICs (OR, 1.24 [95% CI: 1.08-1.43]) but not in HICs (OR, 1.02 [95% CI: 0.80-1.29]). Self-reported access to mechanical ventilation also significantly influenced the effect of fluid volume on mortality, which increased with higher volumes only in settings with limited access to mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.09-1.93] vs. 1.09 [95% CI: 0.93-1.28], P = 0.02 for subgroup differences). Conclusions: In sepsis trials, the effect of fluid resuscitation approach differed by setting, with higher volume of fluid resuscitation associated with increased mortality in LMICs and in settings with restricted access to mechanical ventilation. The precise reason for these differences is unclear and may be attributable in part to resource constraints, participant variation between trials, or other unmeasured factors.

Higher versus lower oxygenation targets in adult ICU patients: A rapid practice guideline.

The aim of this Intensive Care Medicine Rapid Practice Guideline (ICM-RPG) was to provide evidence-based clinical guidance about the use of higher versus lower oxygenation targets for adult patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). The guideline panel comprised 27 international panelists, including content experts, ICU clinicians, methodologists, and patient representatives. We adhered to the methodology for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines, including the use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty of evidence, and used the Evidence-to-Decision framework to generate recommendations. A recently published updated systematic review and meta-analysis constituted the evidence base. Through teleconferences and web-based discussions, the panel provided input on the balance and magnitude of the desirable and undesirable effects, the certainty of evidence, patients' values and preferences, costs and resources, equity, feasibility, acceptability, and research priorities. The updated systematic review and meta-analysis included data from 17 randomized clinical trials with 10,248 participants. There was little to no difference between the use of higher versus lower oxygenation targets for all outcomes with available data, including all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, stroke, functional outcomes, cognition, and health-related quality of life (very low certainty of evidence). The panel felt that values and preferences, costs and resources, and equity favored the use of lower oxygenation targets. The ICM-RPG panel issued one conditional recommendation against the use of higher oxygenation targets: "We suggest against the routine use of higher oxygenation targets in adult ICU patients (conditional recommendation, very low certainty of evidence). Remark: an oxygenation target of SpO2 88%-92% or PaO2 8 kPa/60 mmHg is relevant and safe for most adult ICU patients."

Perspectives of patients, family members, health professionals and the public on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has seen a global surge in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and stress. AIMS: This study aimed to describe the perspectives of patients with COVID-19, their family, health professionals, and the general public on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health. METHODS: A secondary thematic analysis was conducted using data from the COVID-19 COS project. We extracted data on the perceived causes and impact of COVID-19 on mental health from an international survey and seven online consensus workshops. RESULTS: We identified four themes (with subthemes in parenthesis): anxiety amidst uncertainty (always on high alert, ebb and flow of recovery); anguish of a threatened future (intense frustration of a changed normality, facing loss of livelihood, trauma of ventilation, a troubling prognosis, confronting death); bearing responsibility for transmission (fear of spreading COVID-19 in public; overwhelming guilt of infecting a loved one); and suffering in isolation (severe solitude of quarantine, sick and alone, separation exacerbating grief). CONCLUSION: We found that the unpredictability of COVID-19, the fear of long-term health consequences, burden of guilt, and suffering in isolation profoundly impacted mental health. Clinical and public health interventions are needed to manage the psychological consequences arising from this pandemic.

HIV Infection as Risk Factor for Death among Hospitalized Persons with Candidemia, South Africa, 2012-2017.

We determined the effect of HIV infection on deaths among persons >18 months of age with culture-confirmed candidemia at 29 sentinel hospitals in South Africa during 2012-2017. Of 1,040 case-patients with documented HIV status and in-hospital survival data, 426 (41%) were HIV-seropositive. The in-hospital case-fatality rate was 54% (228/426) for HIV-seropositive participants and 37% (230/614) for HIV-seronegative participants (crude odds ratio [OR] 1.92, 95% CI 1.50-2.47; p<0.001). After adjusting for relevant confounders (n = 907), mortality rates were 1.89 (95% CI 1.38-2.60) times higher among HIV-seropositive participants than HIV-seronegative participants (p<0.001). Compared with HIV-seronegative persons, the stratum-specific adjusted mortality OR was higher among HIV-seropositive persons not managed in intensive care units (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.47-3.52; p<0.001) than among persons who were (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.00-2.43; p = 0.05). Outcomes among HIV-seropositive persons with candidemia might be improved with intensive care.

Core Outcome Measures for Trials in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Respiratory Failure, Multiorgan Failure, Shortness of Breath, and Recovery.

OBJECTIVES: Respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, recovery, and mortality have been identified as critically important core outcomes by more than 9300 patients, health professionals, and the public from 111 countries in the global coronavirus disease 2019 core outcome set initiative. The aim of this project was to establish the core outcome measures for these domains for trials in coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Three online consensus workshops were convened to establish outcome measures for the four core domains of respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery. SETTING: International. PATIENTS: About 130 participants (patients, public, and health professionals) from 17 countries attended the three workshops. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Respiratory failure, assessed by the need for respiratory support based on the World Health Organization Clinical Progression Scale, was considered pragmatic, objective, and with broad applicability to various clinical scenarios. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment was recommended for multiple organ failure, because it was routinely used in trials and clinical care, well validated, and feasible. The Modified Medical Research Council measure for shortness of breath, with minor adaptations (recall period of 24 hr to capture daily fluctuations and inclusion of activities to ensure relevance and to capture the extreme severity of shortness of breath in people with coronavirus disease 2019), was regarded as fit for purpose for this indication. The recovery measure was developed de novo and defined as the absence of symptoms, resumption of usual daily activities, and return to the previous state of health prior to the illness, using a 5-point Likert scale, and was endorsed. CONCLUSIONS: The coronavirus disease 2019 core outcome set recommended core outcome measures have content validity and are considered the most feasible and acceptable among existing measures. Implementation of the core outcome measures in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 will ensure consistency and relevance of the evidence to inform decision-making and care of patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. METHODS: Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable). RESULTS: Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. CONCLUSION: Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

COVID-19 and Sepsis

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a major alteration in the medical literature including the sepsis discussion. From the outset of the pandemic, various reports have indicated that although there are some unique features pertinent to COVID-19, many of its acute manifestations are similar to sepsis caused by other pathogens. As a consequence, the old definitions now require consideration of this new etiologic agent, namely SARS-CoV-2. Although the pathogenesis of COVID-19 has not been fully explained, the data obtained so far in hospitalized patients has revealed that serum cytokine and chemokine levels are high in severe COVID-19 patients, similar to those found with sepsis. COVID-19 may involve multiple organ systems. In addition to the lungs, the virus has been isolated from blood, urine, faeces, liver, and gallbladder. Results from autopsy series in COVID-19 patients have demonstrated a wide range of findings, including vascular involvement, congestion, consolidation, and hemorrhage as well as diffuse alveolar damage in lung tissue consistent with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The presence of viral cytopathic-like changes, infiltration of inflammatory cells (mononuclear cells and macrophages), and viral particles in histopathological samples are considered a consequence of both direct viral infection and immune hyperactivation. Thromboembolism and hyper-coagulopathy are other components in the pathogenesis of severe COVID-19. Although the pathogenesis of hypercoagulability is not fully understood, it has been pointed out that all three components of Virchow's triad (endothelial injury, stasis, and hypercoagulable state) play a major role in contributing to clot formation in severe COVID-19 infection. In severe COVID-19 cases, laboratory parameters such as hematological findings, coagulation tests, liver function tests, D-dimer, ferritin, and acute phase reactants such as CRP show marked alterations, which are suggestive of a cytokine storm. Another key element of COVID-19 pathogenesis in severe cases is its similarity or association with hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH). SARS-CoV-2 induced cytokine storm has significant clinical and laboratory findings overlapping with HLH. Viral sepsis has some similarities but also some differences when compared to bacterial sepsis. In bacterial sepsis, systemic inflammation affecting multiple organs is more dominant than in COVID-19 sepsis. While bacterial sepsis causes an early and sudden onset clinical deterioration, viral diseases may exhibit a relatively late onset and chronic course. Consideration of severe COVID-19 disease as a sepsis syndrome has relevance and may assist in terms of determining treatments that will modulate the immune response, limit intrinsic damage to tissue and organs, and potentially improve outcome.

International Survey to Establish Prioritized Outcomes for Trials in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: There are over 4,000 trials conducted in people with coronavirus disease 2019. However, the variability of outcomes and the omission of patient-centered outcomes may diminish the impact of these trials on decision-making. The aim of this study was to generate a consensus-based, prioritized list of outcomes for coronavirus disease 2019 trials. DESIGN: In an online survey conducted in English, Chinese, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish languages, adults with coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, health professionals, and the general public rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (7-9, critical importance) and completed a Best-Worst Scale to estimate relative importance. Participant comments were analyzed thematically. SETTING: International. SUBJECTS: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public, and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, and researchers). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: None. MAIN RESULTS: In total, 9,289 participants from 111 countries (776 people with coronavirus disease 2019 or family members, 4,882 health professionals, and 3,631 members of the public) completed the survey. The four outcomes of highest priority for all three groups were: mortality, respiratory failure, pneumonia, and organ failure. Lung function, lung scarring, sepsis, shortness of breath, and oxygen level in the blood were common to the top 10 outcomes across all three groups (mean > 7.5, median ≥ 8, and > 70% of respondents rated the outcome as critically important). Patients/family members rated fatigue, anxiety, chest pain, muscle pain, gastrointestinal problems, and cardiovascular disease higher than health professionals. Four themes underpinned prioritization: fear of life-threatening, debilitating, and permanent consequences; addressing knowledge gaps; enabling preparedness and planning; and tolerable or infrequent outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Life-threatening respiratory and other organ outcomes were consistently highly prioritized by all stakeholder groups. Patients/family members gave higher priority to many patient-reported outcomes compared with health professionals.

Core Outcomes Set for Trials in People With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: The outcomes reported in trials in coronavirus disease 2019 are extremely heterogeneous and of uncertain patient relevance, limiting their applicability for clinical decision-making. The aim of this workshop was to establish a core outcomes set for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Four international online multistakeholder consensus workshops were convened to discuss proposed core outcomes for trials in people with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019, informed by a survey involving 9,289 respondents from 111 countries. The transcripts were analyzed thematically. The workshop recommendations were used to finalize the core outcomes set. SETTING: International. SUBJECTS: Adults 18 years old and over with confirmed or suspected coronavirus disease 2019, their family members, members of the general public and health professionals (including clinicians, policy makers, regulators, funders, researchers). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: None. MAIN RESULTS: Six themes were identified. "Responding to the critical and acute health crisis" reflected the immediate focus on saving lives and preventing life-threatening complications that underpinned the high prioritization of mortality, respiratory failure, and multiple organ failure. "Capturing different settings of care" highlighted the need to minimize the burden on hospitals and to acknowledge outcomes in community settings. "Encompassing the full trajectory and severity of disease" was addressing longer term impacts and the full spectrum of illness (e.g. shortness of breath and recovery). "Distinguishing overlap, correlation and collinearity" meant recognizing that symptoms such as shortness of breath had distinct value and minimizing overlap (e.g. lung function and pneumonia were on the continuum toward respiratory failure). "Recognizing adverse events" refers to the potential harms of new and evolving interventions. "Being cognizant of family and psychosocial wellbeing" reflected the pervasive impacts of coronavirus disease 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality, respiratory failure, multiple organ failure, shortness of breath, and recovery are critically important outcomes to be consistently reported in coronavirus disease 2019 trials.

Perceived differences between intensivists and infectious diseases consultants facing antimicrobial resistance: a global cross-sectional survey.

To identify differences in perception on multi-drug-resistant (MDR) organisms and their management at intensive care units (ICU). A cross-sectional survey was conducted. A proposal addressing a pathogen priority list (PPL) for ICU, arising from the TOTEM study, was compared with a sample of global experts in infections in critically ill patients. The survey was responded by 129 experts. Globally, ESBL Enterobacteriaceae, followed by carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae, were the main concerns. Some differences in opinion were identified between 63 (49%) ICU physicians (ICU/anesthesiology) and 43 (33%) infectious disease consultants (ID physicians/microbiologists). The pathogens most concerning in the ICU for intensivists were ESBL Enterobacteriaceae (38%) versus carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii (48.3%) for ID consultants, (p < 0.05). Increasing number of ID consultants over intensivists (26% vs 14%) reported difficulty in choosing initial therapy for carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii. For intensivists, the urgent measures to limit development of antibiotic resistance were headed by cohort measures (26.3%) versus increasing nurse/patient ratio (32.5%) for ID consultants, (p < 0.05). Regarding effectiveness to prevent MDR development and spread, education programs (42.4%) were the priority for intensivists versus external consultation (35.7%) for ID consultants. Finally, both groups agreed that carbapenem resistance was the most pressing concern (> 70%) regarding emerging resistance. Differences in priorities regarding organisms, infection control practices, and educational priorities were visualized between ID/clinical microbiologists and ICU/anesthesiologists. Multi-disciplinary collaboration is required to achieve best care for ICU patients with severe infections.

A review of -multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae in a neonatal unit in Johannesburg, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Multi-drug resistant organisms are an increasingly important cause of neonatal sepsis. AIM: This study aimed to review neonatal sepsis caused by multi-drug resistant Enterobacteriaceae (MDRE) in neonates in Johannesburg, South Africa. METHODS: This was a cross sectional retrospective review of MDRE in neonates admitted to a tertiary neonatal unit between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2015. RESULTS: There were 465 infections in 291 neonates. 68.6% were very low birth weight (< 1500 g). The median age of infection was 14.0 days. Risk factors for MDRE included prematurity (p = 0.01), lower birth weight (p = 0.04), maternal HIV infection (p = 0.02) and oxygen on day 28 (p < 0.001). The most common isolate was Klebsiella pneumoniae (66.2%). Total MDRE isolates increased from 0.39 per 1000 neonatal admissions in 2013 to 1.4 per 1000 neonatal admissions in 2015 (p < 0.001). There was an increase in carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) from 2.6% in 2013 to 8.9% in 2015 (p = 0.06). Most of the CRE were New Delhi metallo-ß lactamase- (NDM) producers. The all-cause mortality rate was 33.3%. Birth weight (p = 0.003), necrotising enterocolitis (p < 0.001) and mechanical ventilation (p = 0.007) were significantly associated with mortality. Serratia marcescens was isolated in 55.2% of neonates that died. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant increase in MDRE in neonatal sepsis during the study period, with the emergence of CRE. This confirms the urgent need to intensify antimicrobial stewardship efforts and address infection control and prevention in neonatal units in LMICs. Overuse of broad- spectrum antibiotics should be prevented.

Increasing Evidence-Based Interventions in Patients with Acute Infections in a Resource-Limited Setting: A Before-and-After Feasibility Trial in Gitwe, Rwanda.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether a focused education program and implementation of a treatment bundle increases the rate of early evidence-based interventions in patients with acute infections. DESIGN: Single-center, prospective, before-and-after feasibility trial. SETTING: Emergency department of a sub-Saharan African district hospital. PATIENTS: Patients > 28 days of life admitted to the study hospital for an acute infection. INTERVENTIONS: The trial had three phases (each of four months). Interventions took place during the second (educational program followed by implementation of the treatment bundle) and third (provision of resources to implement treatment bundle) phases. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected at study enrollment; 24, 48, and 72 hours after hospital admission; and at discharge. A total of 1,594 patients were enrolled (pre-intervention, n = 661; intervention I, n = 531; intervention II, n = 402). The rate of early evidence-based interventions per patient during Intervention Phase I was greater than during the pre-intervention phase (74 ± 17 vs. 79 ± 15%, p < 0.001). No difference was detected when data were compared between Intervention Phases I and II (79 ± 15 vs. 80 ± 15%, p = 0.58). No differences in the incidence of blood transfusion (pre-intervention, 6%; intervention I, 7%; intervention II, 7%) or severe adverse events in the first 24 hours (allergic reactions: pre-intervention, 0.2%; intervention I, 0%; intervention II, 0%; respiratory failure: pre-intervention, 2%; intervention I, 2%; intervention II, 2%; acute renal failure: pre-intervention, 2%; intervention I, 2%; intervention II, 1%) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that a focused education program and implementation of an infection treatment bundle in clinical practice increased the rate of early evidence-based interventions in patients with acute infections (mostly malaria) admitted to a sub-Saharan African district hospital. Provision of material resources did not further increase this rate. While no safety issues were detected, this could be related to the very low disease severity of the enrolled patient population (www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02697513).

Hemoglobin glutamer-250 (bovine) in South Africa: consensus usage guidelines from clinician experts who have treated patients.

Hemopure (hemoglobin glutamer-250 [bovine]; HBOC-201) is a hemoglobin (Hb)-based oxygen carrier registered with the Medicines Control Council of South Africa. It is indicated for the treatment of adult patients who are acutely anemic, for the purpose of maintaining tissue oxygen delivery thus eliminating, delaying, or reducing the need for allogeneic red blood cells (RBCs). Hemopure is a volume expander, and circulatory volume must be carefully monitored for signs of fluid overload. Hemopure is not as effective as RBCs for restoring Hb content and concentration, but in cases of severe anemia where allogeneic blood is not an option or is unavailable, it may offer an immediate alternative for improving oxygen transport. This document provides clinical recommendations on the safe and effective use of Hemopure based on the postmarketing experience in South Africa as well as a better understanding of Hemopure properties reflected in recent publications.

Physical outcomes of patients infected with HIV requiring intensive care unit admission for mechanical ventilation at one South African hospital: a pilot study.

Patients with life-threatening illnesses in intensive care receive management that improves their chances for survival. The physical outcomes of individuals infected with HIV who survive an intensive care unit (ICU) stay are not well known. The purpose was to describe the physical outcomes of ICU survivors in a high HIV prevalent area and highlight challenges as it relates to study feasibility. A pilot study at a tertiary-care university-affiliated hospital was done. Participants were assessed at ICU and ward admission, hospital discharge, three and six months following discharge. The profile and physical function, assessed with the ICU Mobility Scale, Karnofsky Performance Status Scale and six-minute walk test, of participants was determined. The EQ-5D-3 L provides information on participants' health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The pilot study consists of five patients (n = 173 screened). All were independently mobile and on antiretroviral therapy prior to hospital admission. Respiratory and peripheral muscle weakness were present with variable performance in physical function across participants. Improvement in function occurred over time but participants still had physical dysfunction at six months. Pain/physical discomfort and anxiety/depression were common complaints influencing HRQOL. ICU survivors, who are HIV-positive, present with significant physical dysfunction who require rehabilitation to reduce disability.

Critical Care Pandemic Preparation: Considerations and Lessons Learned from COVID-19.

Pandemics, increases in disease incidence that affect multiple regions of the world, present huge challenges to health care systems and in particular to policymakers, public health authorities, clinicians, and all health care workers (HCWs). The recent COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in millions of severely ill patients, many of whom who have required hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The discipline of critical care is a vital and integral component of pandemic preparedness. Safe and effective critical care has the potential to improve outcomes, motivate individuals to seek timely medical attention, and attenuate the devastating sequelae of a severe pandemic. To achieve this, suitable critical care planning and preparation are essential.

Infection control in the intensive care unit: expert consensus statements for SARS-CoV-2 using a Delphi method.

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers and uninfected patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at risk of being infected with SARS-CoV-2 as a result of transmission from infected patients and health-care workers. In the absence of high-quality evidence on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, clinical practice of infection control and prevention in ICUs varies widely. Using a Delphi process, international experts in intensive care, infectious diseases, and infection control developed consensus statements on infection control for SARS-CoV-2 in an ICU. Consensus was achieved for 31 (94%) of 33 statements, from which 25 clinical practice statements were issued. These statements include guidance on ICU design and engineering, health-care worker safety, visiting policy, personal protective equipment, patients and procedures, disinfection, and sterilisation. Consensus was not reached on optimal return to work criteria for health-care workers who were infected with SARS-CoV-2 or the acceptable disinfection strategy for heat-sensitive instruments used for airway management of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Well designed studies are needed to assess the effects of these practice statements and address the remaining uncertainties.