ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU. DESIGN: The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. INTERVENTIONS: In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.
Subject(s)
Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure , Adult , Humans , Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure/therapy , Infectious Disease Medicine , Intensive Care Units , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Evidence-Based PracticeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute or acute on chronic liver failure in the ICU. DESIGN: The guideline panel comprised 29 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure and/or methodology. The Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy were followed throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. SETTING: The panel was divided into nine subgroups: cardiovascular, hematology, pulmonary, renal, endocrine and nutrition, gastrointestinal, infection, perioperative, and neurology. INTERVENTIONS: We developed and selected population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes question, we conducted a systematic review aiming to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence whenever applicable, and assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In this article, we report 29 recommendations (from 30 population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes questions) on the management acute or acute on chronic liver failure in the ICU, related to five groups (cardiovascular, hematology, pulmonary, renal, and endocrine). Overall, six were strong recommendations, 19 were conditional recommendations, four were best-practice statements, and in two instances, the panel did not issue a recommendation due to insufficient evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary international experts were able to formulate evidence-based recommendations for the management acute or acute on chronic liver failure in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low-quality indirect evidence.
Subject(s)
Liver Failure, Acute/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Acute Kidney Injury/epidemiology , Acute Kidney Injury/therapy , Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure/epidemiology , Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure/therapy , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Adult , Amino Acids, Branched-Chain/administration & dosage , Anticoagulants/classification , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Blood Glucose , Blood Pressure , Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury/diagnosis , Dietary Proteins/administration & dosage , Enteral Nutrition/methods , Evidence-Based Practice , Fluid Therapy/methods , Hemodynamics , Hemoglobins/analysis , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Hepatopulmonary Syndrome/epidemiology , Hepatopulmonary Syndrome/therapy , Humans , Hypoxia/epidemiology , Hypoxia/therapy , Intensive Care Units , Liver Failure, Acute/epidemiology , Liver Transplantation/methods , Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic/methods , Renal Replacement Therapy/methods , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Thrombelastography/methods , Vasoconstrictor Agents/therapeutic use , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Venous Thromboembolism/prevention & controlSubject(s)
Liver Failure, Acute/therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Acute-On-Chronic Liver Failure/therapy , Adult , Anticoagulants/classification , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Blood Glucose , Evidence-Based Practice , Fluid Therapy/methods , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Thrombelastography/methods , Vasoconstrictor Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Fever is frequently encountered in ICU. It is unclear if targeted temperature control is beneficial in critically ill patients with suspected or confirmed infection. We conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis to answer this question. METHODS: We systematically reviewed major databases before January 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared antipyretic with placebo for temperature control in non-neurocritical ill adult patients with suspected or confirmed infection. Outcomes of interest were 28-day mortality, temperature level, hospital mortality, length of stay, shock reversal, and patient comfort. RESULT: 13 RCTs enrolling 1963 patients were included. No difference in 28-day mortality between antipyretic compared with placebo (risk ratio [RR] 1.03; 95% CI 0.79-1.35). Lower temperature levels were achieved in the antipyretic group (MD [mean difference] -0.41; 95% CI -0.66 to -0.16). Antipyretic use did not affect the risk of hospital mortality (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.73-1.30), ICU length of stay (MD -0.07; 95% CI -0.70 to 0.56), or shock reversal (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.76-1.62). CONCLUSION: Antipyretic therapy effectively reduces temperature in non-neurocritical ill patients but does not reduce mortality or impact other outcomes.
Subject(s)
Antipyretics , Critical Illness , Adult , Antipyretics/therapeutic use , Fever/drug therapy , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , TemperatureABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is commonly prescribed in the intensive care unit. However, data from systematic reviews and conventional meta-analyses are limited by imprecision and restricted to direct comparisons. We conducted a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to examine the safety and efficacy of drugs available for SUP in critically ill patients. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials through April 2017 for randomized controlled trials that examined the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs), and sucralfate for SUP in critically ill patients. No date or language restrictions were applied. Data on study characteristics, methods, outcomes, and risk of bias were abstracted by two reviewers. RESULTS: Of 96 potentially eligible studies, we included 57 trials enrolling 7293 patients. The results showed that PPIs are probably more effective for preventing clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding (CIB) than H2RAs [odds ratio (OR) 0.38; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.20, 0.73], sucralfate (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.13, 0.69), and placebo (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.10, 0.60) (all moderate quality evidence). There were no convincing differences among H2RA, sucralfate, and placebo. PPIs probably increase the risk of developing pneumonia compared with H2RAs (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.96, 1.68), sucralfate (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.20, 2.27), and placebo (OR 1.52; 95% CI 0.95, 2.42) (all moderate quality). Mortality is probably similar across interventions (moderate quality). Estimates of baseline risks of bleeding varied significantly across studies, and only one study reported on Clostridium difficile infection. Definitions of pneumonia varied considerably. Most studies on sucralfate predate pneumonia prevention strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide moderate quality evidence that PPIs are the most effective agents in preventing CIB, but they may increase the risk of pneumonia. The balance of benefits and harms leaves the routine use of SUP open to question.
Subject(s)
Critical Illness , Stomach Ulcer , Adult , Histamine H2 Antagonists , Humans , Network Meta-Analysis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Stomach Ulcer/prevention & controlABSTRACT
Owing to an oversight by the authors, all the figures in the last column of Table 2 (upper section: Number needed to treat; lower section: Number needed to harm) in this article were given without the final digit 0 and are thus 10 times too small.
ABSTRACT
To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU. The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development. In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements. We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence. Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.
Subject(s)
Humans , Adult , Liver Failure, Acute/complications , Liver Failure, Acute/drug therapy , Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Hyperammonemia/blood , Saline Solution, Hypertonic/therapeutic use , Albumins/therapeutic useABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To determine the impact of using sucralfate versus H2RAs for SUP on patient important outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, ACPJC, clinical trials registries, and conference proceedings through June 2016 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing sucralfate to H2RAs for SUP in adult critically ill patients. RESULTS: 21 RCTs enrolling 3121 patients met inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference between sucralfate compared to H2RAs in the risk of clinically important GI bleeding (risk ratio [RR] 1.19; 95% CI [confidence interval] 0.79, 1.80; P=0.42; I2=0%; low quality evidence). However, there was a statistically significant lower risk of ICU acquired pneumonia with sucralfate compared to H2RAs (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.72, 0.98; P=0.03; I2=0%; moderate quality evidence). Sucralfate did not significantly affect the risk of death (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.82, 1.10; P=0.51; I2=0%; high quality evidence), or duration of ICU stay in days (mean difference-0.39; 95% CI [-1.12, 0.34]; P=0.29; I2=0%; moderate quality evidence). Trial sequential analysis adjusted estimates were consistent with conventional estimates. CONCLUSION: Moderate quality evidence suggests that sucralfate reduced ICU acquired pneumonia compared to H2RAs in adult critically ill patients, with no significant impact on GI bleeding or death.
Subject(s)
Anti-Ulcer Agents/therapeutic use , Critical Illness , Histamine H2 Antagonists/therapeutic use , Pneumonia/prevention & control , Stomach Ulcer/prevention & control , Sucralfate/therapeutic use , Adult , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Canadian Emergency Department Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) is an integral part of the Canadian emergency medicine triaging system. There is growing interest and implementation of CTAS worldwide. However, little is known about its reliability outside Canada. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability agreement of CTAS in a tertiary care emergency center in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Ten triage nurses (five senior and five junior nurses) utilized CTAS guidelines to independently assign a triage level for 160 real case-based scenarios. Quadratic weighted kappa statistics were used to measure raters' agreements. RESULTS: Raters provided 1600 triage category assignments to case scenarios for analysis. Intra-rater agreement was similar for both senior and junior nurses; for senior nurses (SN1) kappa 0.871 95 % CI (0.840-0.897), and for junior nurses (SN2) kappa 0.871 95 % CI (0.839-0.898). Inter-rater agreement for the SN1 versus SN2 nurses had statistically meaningful agreement across different triage levels (weighted kappa = 0.770) 95 % CI (0.742-0.797). CONCLUSIONS: CTAS has good reliability among emergency department (ED) triage nurses in King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC), Saudi Arabia. The findings suggest that CTAS might be a reliable instrument when applied in countries outside Canada.
ABSTRACT
CONTEXT: "Off-service" clinical rotations are part of the necessary requirements for many residency training programs. Because these rotations are off-service, little attention is given to their structure and quality of training. This often leads to suboptimal educational experience for the residents on these rotations. AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess medical residents' perceptions, opinions, and levels of satisfaction with their "off-service" rotations at a major residency training site in Saudi Arabia. It was also to evaluate the reliability and validity of a questionnaire used for quality assurance in these rotations. Improved reliability and validity of this questionnaire may help to improve the educational experience of residents in their "off-service" rotations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A close-ended questionnaire was developed, Pilot tested and distributed to 110 off-service residents in training programs of different specializations at King Fahad Naitonal Guard Hospital and King Abdulziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, between September 2011 and December 2011. RESULTS: A total of 80 out of 110 residents completed and returned the questionnaire. Only 33% of these residents had a clear set of goals and educational learning objectives before the beginning of their off-service rotations to direct their training. Surgical specializations had low satisfaction mean scores of 57.2 (11.9) compared to emergency medicine, which had 70.7 (16.2), P value (0.03). The reliability of the questionnaire was Cronbach's alpha 0.57. The factor analysis yielded a 4-factor solution (educational environment, educational balance, educational goals and objectives, and learning ability); thus, accounting for 51% variance in the data. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that there were significant weaknesses in the curriculum for off-service clinical rotations in KAMC and that residents were not completely satisfied with their training.