Needs Assessment Survey Identifying Research Processes Which may be Improved by Automation or Artificial Intelligence: ICU Community Modeling and Artificial Intelligence to Improve Efficiency (ICU-Comma).

BACKGROUND: Critical care research in Canada is conducted primarily in academically-affiliated intensive care units with established research infrastructure, including research coordinators (RCs). Recently, efforts have been made to engage community hospital ICUs in research albeit with barriers. Automation or artificial intelligence (AI) could aid the performance of routine research tasks. It is unclear which research study processes might be improved through AI automation. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of Canadian ICU research personnel. The survey contained items characterizing opinions regarding research processes that may be amenable to AI automation. We distributed the questionnaire via email distribution lists of 3 Canadian research societies. Open-ended questions were analyzed using a thematic content analysis approach. RESULTS: A total of 49 survey responses were received (response rate: 8%). Tasks that respondents felt were time-consuming/tedious/tiresome included: screening for potentially eligible patients (74%), inputting data into case report forms (65%), and preparing internal tracking logs (53%). Tasks that respondents felt could be performed by AI automation included: screening for eligible patients (59%), inputting data into case report forms (55%), preparing internal tracking logs (51%), and randomizing patients into studies (45%). Open-ended questions identified enthusiasm for AI automation to improve information accuracy and efficiency while freeing up RCs to perform tasks that require human interaction. This enthusiasm was tempered by the need for proper AI education and oversight. CONCLUSIONS: There were balanced supportive (increased efficiency and re-allocation of tasks) and challenges (informational accuracy and oversight) with regards to AI automation in ICU research.

Patient and family engagement in patient care and research in Canadian intensive care units: a national survey.

PURPOSE: While patient and family engagement may improve clinical care and research, current practices for engagement in Canadian intensive care units (ICUs) are unknown. METHODS: We developed and administered a cross-sectional questionnaire to ICU leaders of current engagement practices, facilitators, and barriers to engagement, and whether engagement was a priority, using to an ordinal Likert scale from 1 to 10. RESULTS: The response rate was 53.4% (124/232). Respondents were from 11 provinces and territories, mainly from medical surgical ICUs (76%) and community hospitals (70%). Engagement in patient care included bedside care (84%) and bedside rounds (66%), presence during procedures/crises (65%), and survey completion (77%). Research engagement included ethics committees (36%), protocol review (31%), and knowledge translation (30%). Facilitators of engagement in patient care included family meetings (87%), open visitation policies (81%), and engagement as an institutional priority (74%). Support from departmental (43%) and hospital (33%) leadership was facilitator of research engagement. Time was the main barrier to engagement in any capacity. Engagement was a higher priority in patient care vs research (median [interquartile range], 8 [7-9] vs 3 [1-7]; P < 0.001) and in pediatric vs adult ICUs (10 [9-10] vs 8 [7-9]; P = 0.003). Research engagement was significantly higher in academic vs other ICUs (7 [5-8] vs 2 [1-4]; P < 0.001), and pediatric vs adult ICUs (7 [5-8] vs 3 [1-6]; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Organizational strategies and institutional support were key facilitators of engagement. Engagement in patient care was a higher priority than engagement in research.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Bien que l'engagement des patients et des familles puisse améliorer les soins cliniques et la recherche, les pratiques actuelles en matière d'engagement dans les unités de soins intensifs (USI) canadiennes sont inconnues. MéTHODE: Nous avons élaboré et administré un questionnaire transversal à l'intention des dirigeants des USI portant sur les pratiques d'engagement actuelles, les facilitateurs et les obstacles à l'engagement, ainsi que la priorisation de l'engagement, en utilisant une échelle de Likert ordinale de 1 à 10. RéSULTATS: Le taux de réponse était de 53,4 % (124/232). Les répondants provenaient de 11 provinces et territoires, principalement d'USI médico-chirurgicales (76%) et d'hôpitaux communautaires (70%). L'engagement dans les soins aux patients comprenait les soins au chevet du patient (84%) et les tournées au chevet (66%), la présence pendant les interventions ou les crises (65%), et la complétion des questionnaires (77%). La participation à la recherche comprenait les comités d'éthique (36%), l'examen des protocoles (31%) et le transfert des connaissances (30%). Les facilitateurs à l'engagement dans les soins aux patients comprenaient les réunions familiales (87%), les politiques de visites ouvertes (81%) et l'engagement en tant que priorité institutionnelle (74%). Le soutien des directions de département (43%) et d'hôpital (33%) a été un facilitateur de l'engagement en recherche. Le temps était le principal obstacle à l'engagement à quelque titre que ce soit. L'engagement était une priorité plus élevée dans les soins aux patients qu'en recherche (médiane [écart interquartile], 8 [7­9] vs 3 [1­7]; P < 0,001) et dans les USI pédiatriques vs adultes (10 [9­10] vs 8 [7­9]; P = 0,003). L'engagement en matière de recherche était significativement plus élevé dans les USI universitaires vs autres (7 [5­8] vs 2 [1­4]; P < 0,001), et pédiatriques vs pour adultes (7 [5­8] vs 3 [1­6]; P = 0,01). CONCLUSION: Les stratégies organisationnelles et le soutien institutionnel ont été des facilitateurs clés de l'engagement. L'engagement dans les soins aux patients était une priorité plus élevée que l'engagement dans la recherche.

Chlorhexidine (di)gluconate locking device for central line infection prevention in intensive care unit patients: a multi-unit, pilot randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are at risk for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) with significant attributable mortality and increased hospital length of stay, readmissions, and costs. Chlorhexidine (di)gluconate (CHG) is used as a disinfectant for central line insertion; however, the feasibility and efficacy of using CHG as a locking solution is unknown. METHODS: Patients with a central venous access device (CVAD) in situ were randomized to standard care or a CHG lock solution (CHGLS) within 72 hours of ICU admission. The CHG solution was instilled in the lumen of venous catheters not actively infusing. CVAD blood cultures were taken at baseline and every 48 hours. The primary outcome was feasibility including recruitment rate, consent rate, protocol adherence, and staff uptake. Secondary outcomes included CVAD colonization, bacteraemia, and clinical endpoints. RESULTS: Of 3,848 patients screened, 122 were eligible for the study and consent was obtained from 82.0% of the patients or substitute decision makers approached. Fifty participants were allocated to each group. Tracking logs indicated that the CHGLS was used per protocol 408 times. Most nurses felt comfortable using the CHGLS. The proportion of central line colonization was significantly higher in the standard care group with 40 (29%) versus 26 (18.7%) in the CHGLS group (P=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Using a device that delivers CHG into CVADs was feasible in the ICU. Findings from this trial will inform a full-scale randomized controlled trial and provide preliminary data on the effectiveness of CHGLS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03309137, registered on October 13, 2017.

Data initiatives supporting critical care research and quality improvement in Canada: an environmental scan and narrative review.

PURPOSE: Collection and analysis of health data are crucial to achieving high-quality clinical care, research, and quality improvement. This review explores existing hospital, regional, provincial and national data platforms in Canada to identify gaps and barriers, and recommend improvements for data science. SOURCE: The Canadian Critical Care Trials Group and the Canadian Critical Care Translational Biology Group undertook an environmental survey using list-identified names and keywords in PubMed and the grey literature, from the Canadian context. Findings were grouped into sections, corresponding to geography, purpose, and patient sub-group initiatives, using a narrative qualitative approach. Emerging themes, impressions, and recommendations towards improving data initiatives were generated. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In Canada, the Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database contains high-level clinical data on every adult and child discharged from acute care facilities; however, it does not contain data from Quebec, critical care-specific severity of illness risk-adjustment scores, physiologic data, or data pertaining to medication use. Provincially mandated critical care platforms in four provinces contain more granular data, and can be used to risk adjust and link to within-province data sets; however, no inter-provincial collaborative mechanism exists. There is very limited infrastructure to collect and link biological samples from critically ill patients nationally. Comprehensive international clinical data sets may inform future Canadian initiatives. CONCLUSION: Clinical and biological data collection among critically ill patients in Canada is not sufficiently coordinated, and lags behind other jurisdictions. An integrated and inclusive critical care data platform is a key clinical and scientific priority in Canada.

Microbial dysbiosis and mortality during mechanical ventilation: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Host-associated microbial communities have important roles in tissue homeostasis and overall health. Severe perturbations can occur within these microbial communities during critical illness due to underlying diseases and clinical interventions, potentially influencing patient outcomes. We sought to profile the microbial composition of critically ill mechanically ventilated patients, and to determine whether microbial diversity is associated with illness severity and mortality. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of mechanically ventilated critically ill patients with a high incidence of pneumonia in 2 intensive care units (ICUs) in Hamilton, Canada, nested within a randomized trial for the prevention of healthcare-associated infections. The microbial profiles of specimens from 3 anatomical sites (respiratory, and upper and lower gastrointestinal tracts) were characterized using 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing. RESULTS: We collected 65 specimens from 34 ICU patients enrolled in the trial (29 endotracheal aspirates, 26 gastric aspirates and 10 stool specimens). Specimens were collected at a median time of 3 days (lower respiratory tract and gastric aspirates; interquartile range [IQR] 2-4) and 6 days (stool; IQR 4.25-6.75) following ICU admission. We observed a loss of biogeographical distinction between the lower respiratory tract and gastrointestinal tract microbiota during critical illness. Moreover, microbial diversity in the respiratory tract was inversely correlated with APACHE II score (r = - 0.46, p = 0.013) and was associated with hospital mortality (Median Shannon index: Discharged alive; 1.964 vs. Deceased; 1.348, p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: The composition of the host-associated microbial communities is severely perturbed during critical illness. Reduced microbial diversity reflects high illness severity and is associated with mortality. Microbial diversity may be a biomarker of prognostic value in mechanically ventilated patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01782755 . Registered February 4 2013.

Hypoglycemia and risk of death in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Whether hypoglycemia leads to death in critically ill patients is unclear. METHODS: We examined the associations between moderate and severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose, 41 to 70 mg per deciliter [2.3 to 3.9 mmol per liter] and ≤40 mg per deciliter [2.2 mmol per liter], respectively) and death among 6026 critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICUs). Patients were randomly assigned to intensive or conventional glucose control. We used Cox regression analysis with adjustment for treatment assignment and for baseline and postrandomization covariates. RESULTS: Follow-up data were available for 6026 patients: 2714 (45.0%) had moderate hypoglycemia, 2237 of whom (82.4%) were in the intensive-control group (i.e., 74.2% of the 3013 patients in the group), and 223 patients (3.7%) had severe hypoglycemia, 208 of whom (93.3%) were in the intensive-control group (i.e., 6.9% of the patients in this group). Of the 3089 patients who did not have hypoglycemia, 726 (23.5%) died, as compared with 774 of the 2714 with moderate hypoglycemia (28.5%) and 79 of the 223 with severe hypoglycemia (35.4%). The adjusted hazard ratios for death among patients with moderate or severe hypoglycemia, as compared with those without hypoglycemia, were 1.41 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21 to 1.62; P<0.001) and 2.10 (95% CI, 1.59 to 2.77; P<0.001), respectively. The association with death was increased among patients who had moderate hypoglycemia on more than 1 day (>1 day vs. 1 day, P=0.01), those who died from distributive (vasodilated) shock (P<0.001), and those who had severe hypoglycemia in the absence of insulin treatment (hazard ratio, 3.84; 95% CI, 2.37 to 6.23; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients, intensive glucose control leads to moderate and severe hypoglycemia, both of which are associated with an increased risk of death. The association exhibits a dose-response relationship and is strongest for death from distributive shock. However, these data cannot prove a causal relationship. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; NICE-SUGAR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00220987.).

Research recruitment practices and critically ill patients. A multicenter, cross-sectional study (the Consent Study).

RATIONALE: Limited cross-sectional data exist to characterize the challenges of enrolling critically ill patients into research studies. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe recruitment practices, document factors that impact recruitment, and identify factors that may enhance future research feasibility. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study of all critically ill adults eligible to participate in research studies at 23 Canadian intensive care units. We characterized eligibility events into one of five consent outcomes, identified reasons why opportunities to recruit were missed or infeasible, and documented decision maker's rationale for providing or declining consent. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients made decisions for themselves in 8.9% of encounters. In 452 eligibility events, consent was not required in 14 (3.1%), missed in 130 (28.8%), infeasible due to operational reasons in 129 (28.5%), obtained in 140 (31.0%), and declined in 39 (8.6%). More than half (57.3%) of all opportunities to recruit patients were missed or infeasible, largely because of research team workload, limited availability, narrow time windows for inclusion, difficulties in contacting families, nonexistent substitute decision makers (SDMs), physician refusals, and protocols prohibiting coenrollment. The rationale for providing consent differed between patients and SDMs. Greater research coordinator experience and site research volume and broader time windows for inclusion were significant predictors of fewer declined consents. CONCLUSIONS: A large gap exists between eligibility and the frequency with which consent encounters occur in intensive care unit research. Recruitment is susceptible to design and procedural inefficiencies that hinder recruitment and to personnel availability, given the need to interact with SDMs. Current enrollment practices may underrepresent potential study populations.

Co-enrollment of critically ill patients into multiple studies: patterns, predictors and consequences.

INTRODUCTION: Research on co-enrollment practices and their impact are limited in the ICU setting. The objectives of this study were: 1) to describe patterns and predictors of co-enrollment of patients in a thromboprophylaxis trial, and 2) to examine the consequences of co-enrollment on clinical and trial outcomes. METHODS: In an observational analysis of an international thromboprophylaxis trial in 67 ICUs, we examined the co-enrollment of critically ill medical-surgical patients into more than one study, and examined the clinical and trial outcomes among co-enrolled and non-co-enrolled patients. RESULTS: Among 3,746 patients enrolled in PROTECT (Prophylaxis for ThromboEmbolism in Critical Care Trial), 713 (19.0%) were co-enrolled in at least one other study (53.6% in a randomized trial, 37.0% in an observational study and 9.4% in both). Six factors independently associated with co-enrollment (all P < 0.001) were illness severity (odds ratio (OR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.53 for each 10-point Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score increase), substitute decision-makers providing consent, rather than patients (OR 3.31, 2.03 to 5.41), experience of persons inviting consent (OR 2.67, 1.74 to 4.11 for persons with > 10 years' experience compared to persons with none), center size (all ORs > 10 for ICUs with > 15 beds), affiliation with trials groups (OR 5.59, 3.49 to 8.95), and main trial rather than pilot phase (all ORs > 8 for recruitment year beyond the pilot). Co-enrollment did not influence clinical or trial outcomes or risk of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Co-enrollment was strongly associated with features of the patients, research personnel, setting and study. Co-enrollment had no impact on trial results, and appeared safe, acceptable and feasible. Transparent reporting, scholarly discourse, ethical analysis and further research are needed on the complex topic of co-enrollment during critical illness.

Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: The optimal target range for blood glucose in critically ill patients remains unclear. METHODS: Within 24 hours after admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), adults who were expected to require treatment in the ICU on 3 or more consecutive days were randomly assigned to undergo either intensive glucose control, with a target blood glucose range of 81 to 108 mg per deciliter (4.5 to 6.0 mmol per liter), or conventional glucose control, with a target of 180 mg or less per deciliter (10.0 mmol or less per liter). We defined the primary end point as death from any cause within 90 days after randomization. RESULTS: Of the 6104 patients who underwent randomization, 3054 were assigned to undergo intensive control and 3050 to undergo conventional control; data with regard to the primary outcome at day 90 were available for 3010 and 3012 patients, respectively. The two groups had similar characteristics at baseline. A total of 829 patients (27.5%) in the intensive-control group and 751 (24.9%) in the conventional-control group died (odds ratio for intensive control, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.28; P=0.02). The treatment effect did not differ significantly between operative (surgical) patients and nonoperative (medical) patients (odds ratio for death in the intensive-control group, 1.31 and 1.07, respectively; P=0.10). Severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose level, < or = 40 mg per deciliter [2.2 mmol per liter]) was reported in 206 of 3016 patients (6.8%) in the intensive-control group and 15 of 3014 (0.5%) in the conventional-control group (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in the median number of days in the ICU (P=0.84) or hospital (P=0.86) or the median number of days of mechanical ventilation (P=0.56) or renal-replacement therapy (P=0.39). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, international, randomized trial, we found that intensive glucose control increased mortality among adults in the ICU: a blood glucose target of 180 mg or less per deciliter resulted in lower mortality than did a target of 81 to 108 mg per deciliter. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00220987.)

CardiO Cycle: a pilot feasibility study of in-bed cycling in critically ill patients post cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: In-bed cycling is a novel modality for the initiation of early mobilization in the intensive care unit. No study has investigated its use in the critically ill, off-track post cardiac surgery population. Before conducting an effectiveness trial, feasibility data are needed. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of in-bed cycling in a population of off-track cardiac surgery patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective feasibility study in a 16-bed adult cardiac surgery intensive care unit in Ontario, Canada. Previously ambulatory adults (≥ 18 years) who were mechanically ventilated for ≥ 72 h were enrolled within 3 to 7 days post cardiac surgery. Twenty minutes of in-bed cycling was delivered by ICU physiotherapists 5 days/week. The primary outcome, feasibility, was the percent of patient-cycling sessions that occurred when cycling was appropriate. The secondary outcome was cycling safety, measured as cycling discontinuation due to predetermined adverse events. RESULTS: We screened 2074 patients, 29 met eligibility criteria, and 23 (92%) consented. Patients were male (78.26%) with a median [IQR] age of 76 [11] years, underwent isolated coronary bypass (39.1%), and had a median EuroScore II of 5.4 [7.8]. The mean (SD) time post-surgery to start of cycling was 5.9 (1.4) days. Patients were cycled on 80.5% (136/169) of eligible days, with limited physiotherapy staffing accounting for 48.5% of the missed patient-cycling sessions. During 136 sessions of cycling, 3 adverse events occurred in 3 individual patients. The incidence of an adverse event was 2.2 per 100 patient-cycling sessions (95% CI 0.50, 6.4). CONCLUSIONS: In-bed cycling with critically ill cardiac surgery patients is feasible with adequate physiotherapy staffing and appears to be safe. Future studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of this intervention in a larger sample. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02976415 ). Registered November 29, 2016.

National Preclinical Sepsis Platform: developing a framework for accelerating innovation in Canadian sepsis research.

Despite decades of preclinical research, no experimentally derived therapies for sepsis have been successfully adopted into routine clinical practice. Factors that contribute to this crisis of translation include poor representation by preclinical models of the complex human condition of sepsis, bias in preclinical studies, as well as limitations of single-laboratory methodology. To overcome some of these shortcomings, multicentre preclinical studies-defined as a research experiment conducted in two or more research laboratories with a common protocol and analysis-are expected to maximize transparency, improve reproducibility, and enhance generalizability. The ultimate objective is to increase the efficiency and efficacy of bench-to-bedside translation for preclinical sepsis research and improve outcomes for patients with life-threatening infection. To this end, we organized the first meeting of the National Preclinical Sepsis Platform (NPSP). This multicentre preclinical  research collaboration of Canadian sepsis researchers and stakeholders was established to study the pathophysiology of sepsis and accelerate movement of promising therapeutics into early phase clinical trials. Integrated knowledge translation and shared decision-making were emphasized to ensure the goals of the platform align with clinical researchers and patient partners. 29 participants from 10 independent labs attended and discussed four main topics: (1) objectives of the platform; (2) animal models of sepsis; (3) multicentre methodology and (4) outcomes for evaluation. A PIRO model (predisposition, insult, response, organ dysfunction) for experimental design was proposed to strengthen linkages with interdisciplinary researchers and key stakeholders. This platform represents an important resource for maximizing translational impact of preclinical sepsis research.

Chlorhexidine locking device for central line infection prevention in ICU patients: protocol for an open-label pilot and feasibility randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) are at risk for central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) with an incidence up to 6.9 per 1000 catheter days. CLABSI has a significant attributable mortality and increases in-hospital length of stay, readmissions, and costs. Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG), a broad-spectrum biocide, has been shown to effectively reduce infections including CLABSI; however, few trials have utilized CHG for prevention of central line infections. Our preclinical work has demonstrated a device that diffuses CHG into the intravenous lock solution of central venous catheters and decreases bacterial growth on the catheter lumen. We designed a clinical trial to test the feasibility of using a CHG device in an ICU patient population. METHODS: The proposed pilot trial will be a single centre, open-label, two-arm, parallel group feasibility randomized controlled trial (RCT). Participants will have a central line in situ and will be enrolled within 72 h of admittance to 3 ICUs at a single academic hospital. Exclusion criteria will include suspected infection, chronic indwelling catheters, and CHG allergy. Informed consent will be obtained from eligible participants or their substitute decision maker prior to randomization. Participants will be randomized to receive either usual care or the CHG locking device. Blood cultures will be drawn from all participants every 48 h. The primary objective of this study will be to determine the feasibility of using this protocol to conduct a larger trial. Feasibility will be assessed through the following outcomes: (1) consent rate, (2) recruitment rate, (3) protocol adherence, and (4) comfort level with the device. The secondary objective of this study will be to establish the preliminary efficacy of the device. DISCUSSION: This study will be the first human RCT to investigate a CHG locking device for the prevention of central line infections. Findings from this trial will inform the feasibility of conducting a large RCT and provide preliminary data on the efficacy of a CHG locking device. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03309137, registered on October 13, 2017.

Potential Risk Factors Contributing to Development of Venous Thromboembolism for Total Knee Replacements Patients Prophylaxed With Rivaroxaban: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

Rivaroxaban after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is used to prevent postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE); however, despite thromboprophylaxis, some patients still develop postoperative VTE. To determine whether tourniquet time, time to initiate rivaroxaban (TTIRIV), or Body Mass Index (BMI) was associated with postoperative VTE. A retrospective case-control study was conducted. Those patients that developed VTE despite prophylaxis (cases) were compared to controls (no VTE). A univariate analysis was conducted (p < 0.05 statistically significant). Seven VTE cases were identified from 234 TKA-patients. Patients with and without VTE had BMI of 40.1 ± 9.1 and 32.8 ± 7.5, respectively (p = 0.064). TTIRIV in VTE and control group was 28.2 ± 4.7 hours and 26.4 ± 4.2 hours, respectively (p = 0.39). Mean tourniquet time in VTE and control group was 65.0 ± 8.7 minutes and 49 ± 8.8 minutes, respectively (p = 0.0007). Statistically significant differences in tourniquet times were noted between VTE and non-VTE group but not for TTIRIV and BMI. Prolonged tourniquet use could pose a potential risk factor for postoperative VTE. Thromboprophylaxis management may need to be adjusted, based on patient-specific factors that could include increasing doses of oral anticoagulants and/or mechanical prophylaxis. However, further large-scale studies are required to establish pathophysiology.

Role Incongruence and Psychological Stress Symptoms in Substitute Decision Makers of Intensive Care Patients.

BACKGROUND: Most intensive care patients require substitute decision makers (SDMs) to make decisions. The SDMs may prefer an active, shared, or passive decision-making role. Role incongruence is when preferred and actual roles differ. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of decision-making role preferences and role incongruence on psychological distress symptoms in SDMs. METHODS: A multicenter, interviewer-administered survey was conducted among SDMs of critically ill adults. The Control Preferences Scale was used to evaluate role preferences. Psychological distress was defined as anxiety, depression, or posttraumatic stress symptoms with predefined cut points on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (score > 10 on the anxiety or the depression subscale) and Impact of Events Scale (score > 30). RESULTS: One hundred eighty SDMs were recruited; 64% responded. Most were white (71%) and female (65%); 46% were spouses. Role preferences varied: active, 24%; shared, 44%; and passive, 31%. Almost half (49%) reported incongruence. Symptom prevalence was 50% for posttraumatic stress, 32% for anxiety, and 16% for depression. Most (56%) reported some psychological distress. In multivariable logistic regression, the composite outcome of psychological distress was independently associated with patient death (odds ratio, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.08-8.02; P = .03), female sex of SDM (odds ratio, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.49-5.89; P = .002), and incongruence (odds ratio, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.67-6.36; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Adverse psychological symptoms are prevalent in SDMs of critically ill patients and are related to role incongruence.

Motivators and Stressors for Canadian Research Coordinators in Critical Care: The MOTIVATE Survey.

BACKGROUND: Critical care research coordinators implement study protocols in intensive care units, yet little is known about their experiences. OBJECTIVE: To identify the responsibilities, stressors, motivators, and job satisfaction of critical care research coordinators in Canada. METHODS: Responses to a self-administered survey were collected in order to identify and understand factors that motivate and stress research coordinators and enhance their job satisfaction. Items were generated in 5 domains (demographics, job responsibilities, stressors, motivators, and satisfaction). Face validity pretesting was conducted and clinical sensibility was evaluated. Items were rated on 5-point Likert scales. Descriptive analyses were used to report results. RESULTS: The response rate was 78% (66 of 85). Most critical care research coordinators (71%) were employed full time; they were engaged in 9 studies (7 academic, 2 industry); and 49% were nurses. Of 30 work responsibilities, the most frequently cited were submitting ethics applications (89%), performing data entry (89%), and attending meetings (87%). Highest-rated stressors were unrealistic workload and weekend/holiday screening; highest-rated motivators were a positive work environment and team spirit. Overall, 26% were "very satisfied" and 53% were "satisfied" with their jobs. CONCLUSIONS: Critical care research coordinators in Canada indicate that, despite significant work responsibilities, they are satisfied with their jobs thanks to positive work environments and team spirit.

Comparison of pain and ecchymosis with low-molecular-weight heparin vs. unfractionated heparin in patients requiring bridging anticoagulation after warfarin interruption: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous (SC) low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH) are safe and efficacious for bridging anticoagulation after warfarin interruption. Although LMWH and UFH are self-administered by >90% of patients, factors that may be important to patients such as differences in pain and ecchymosis have not been explored. METHODS: We randomized 24 patients to receive SC LMWH or SC UFH twice-daily during the perioperative period. Injection associated pain was recorded using a visual analogue scale and area of ecchymosis was measured by digital photography of the injection site on the day of the procedure. RESULTS: The area of ecchymosis was 2-fold higher with UFH than LMWH (19.4 cm(2) vs. 8.98 cm(2); P = 0.33) and pain was similar with both treatments (115 mm vs. 171 mm; P = 0.25), though neither finding attained statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study was underpowered to detect differences between the groups. Further studies are needed to reliably compare pain and ecchymosis in LMWH vs. UFH.

Increasing reliability of APACHE II scores in a medical-surgical intensive care unit: a quality improvement study.

BACKGROUND: Given their clinical, research, and administrative purposes, scores on the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II should be reliable, whether calculated by health care personnel or a clinical information system. OBJECTIVE: To determine reliability of APACHE II scores calculated by a clinical information system and by health care personnel before and after a multifaceted quality improvement intervention. METHODS: APACHE II scores of 37 consecutive patients admitted to a closed, 15-bed, university-affiliated intensive care unit were collected by a research coordinator, a database clerk, and a clinical information system. After a quality improvement intervention focused on health care personnel and the clinical information system, the same methods were used to collect data on 32 consecutive patients. The research coordinator and the clerk did not know each other's scores or the information system's score. The data analyst did not know the source of the scores until analysis was complete. RESULTS: APACHE II scores obtained by the clerk and the research coordinator were highly reliable (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.88 before vs 0.80 after intervention; P = .25). No significant changes were detected after the intervention; however, compared with scores of the research coordinator, the overall reliability of APACHE II scores calculated by the clinical information system improved (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.24 before intervention vs 0.91 after intervention, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: After completion of a quality improvement intervention, health care personnel and a computerized clinical information system calculated sufficiently reliable APACHE II scores for clinical, research, and administrative purposes.

Comparison of the source and prognostic utility of cfDNA in trauma and sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) may contribute to the pathophysiology of post-injury inflammation and coagulation in trauma. However, the source and mechanism of release of cfDNA in trauma is not well understood. One potential source of cfDNA is from Neutrophil Extracellular Traps (NETs), released by activated neutrophils during the process of NETosis. The primary objective of our study was to determine if cfDNA has prognostic utility in trauma. The secondary objective of this study was to determine the source of cfDNA in trauma compared to sepsis. METHODS: We studied trauma patients from two prospective observational cohort studies: the DNA as a Prognostic Marker in ICU Patients (DYNAMICS) study and the Endotoxin in Polytrauma (ENPOLY) study. We also studied septic patients from the DYNAMICS study. Citrated plasma samples were collected longitudinally from the patients (days 1 to 7). The following molecules were measured in the plasma samples: cfDNA, protein C (PC), myeloperoxidase (MPO) (a marker of neutrophil activation), citrullinated Histone H3 (H3Cit, a marker of NETosis), cyclophilin A (a marker of necrosis), and caspase-cleaved K18 (a marker of apoptosis). RESULTS: A total of 77 trauma patients were included (n = 38 from DYNAMICS and n = 39 from ENPOLY). The median age was 49 years; 27.3% were female, and mortality was 16.9% at 28 days. Levels of cfDNA were elevated compared to healthy values but not significantly different between survivors and non-survivors. There was a positive correlation between MPO and cfDNA in septic patients (r = 0.424, p < 0.001). In contrast, there was no correlation between MPO and cfDNA in trauma patients (r = - 0.192, p = 0.115). Levels of H3Cit, a marker of NETosis, were significantly elevated in septic patients compared to trauma patients (p < 0.01) while apoptosis and necrosis markers did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Our studies suggest that the source and mechanism of release of cfDNA differ between trauma and sepsis patients. In sepsis, cfDNA is likely primarily released by activated neutrophils via the process of NETosis. In contrast, cfDNA in trauma appears to originate mainly from injured or necrotic cells. Although cfDNA is elevated in trauma and sepsis patients compared to healthy controls, cfDNA does not appear to have prognostic utility in trauma patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01355042 . Registered May 17, 2011.

Mortality Risk Profiles for Sepsis: A Novel Longitudinal and Multivariable Approach.

To determine if a set of time-varying biological indicators can be used to: 1) predict the sepsis mortality risk over time and 2) generate mortality risk profiles. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Nine Canadian ICUs. SUBJECTS: Three-hundred fifty-six septic patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Clinical data and plasma levels of biomarkers were collected longitudinally. We used a complementary log-log model to account for the daily mortality risk of each patient until death in ICU/hospital, discharge, or 28 days after admission. The model, which is a versatile version of the Cox model for gaining longitudinal insights, created a composite indicator (the daily hazard of dying) from the "day 1" and "change" variables of six time-varying biological indicators (cell-free DNA, protein C, platelet count, creatinine, Glasgow Coma Scale score, and lactate) and a set of contextual variables (age, presence of chronic lung disease or previous brain injury, and duration of stay), achieving a high predictive power (conventional area under the curve, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94). Including change variables avoided misleading inferences about the effects of day 1 variables, signifying the importance of the longitudinal approach. We then generated mortality risk profiles that highlight the relative contributions among the time-varying biological indicators to overall mortality risk. The tool was validated in 28 nonseptic patients from the same ICUs who became septic later and was subject to 10-fold cross-validation, achieving similarly high area under the curve. CONCLUSIONS: Using a novel version of the Cox model, we created a prognostic tool for septic patients that yields not only a predicted probability of dying but also a mortality risk profile that reveals how six time-varying biological indicators differentially and longitudinally account for the patient's overall daily mortality risk.

A randomized trial of daily awakening in critically ill patients managed with a sedation protocol: a pilot trial.

OBJECTIVE: Protocolized sedation (PS) and daily sedative interruption (DI) in critically ill patients have both been shown to shorten the durations of mechanical ventilation (MV) and intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Our objective was to determine the safety and feasibility of a randomized trial to determine whether adults managed with both PS + DI have a shorter duration of MV than patients managed with PS alone. DESIGN: Prospective randomized, concealed, unblinded, multicenter, pilot trial. SETTING: Three university-affiliated medical-surgical ICUs. PATIENTS: Sixty-five adults anticipated to require MV >48 hrs and receiving sedative/analgesic infusions. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to PS alone, or PS + DI. PS was implemented by bedside nurses; sedatives/analgesics were titrated to achieve Sedation Agitation Score (SAS) 3-4. The PS + DI group also had infusions interrupted daily until the patients awoke. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Diagnosis, age [mean +/- SD] (53 +/- 18.3 vs. 62.1 +/- 16.7 yrs) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (27.7 +/- 8.4 vs. 26.6 +/- 8.4) were similar in the PS and PS + DI groups, respectively. The median duration of MV in the PS and PS + DI groups was 8.0 vs. 10.5 days, and ICU stay was 10.0 vs. 13.0 days, respectively. The SAS was within target range (3-4) in 59% of 9,611 measurements, and within an acceptable range (2-5) in 86% of measurements. Self-assessed nursing and respiratory therapist workload was low in the majority of the cohort. Adverse events were similar in both groups. Patient recruitment was slower than projected (1.5 patients/mo). CONCLUSION: This pilot trial comparing PS vs. PS + DI confirmed the safety and acceptability of the sedation protocol and DI, and guided important modifications to the protocol, thus enhancing the feasibility of a future multicenter trial. This trial was not designed to detect small but significant differences in clinically important outcomes.