Alpha 2 agonists for sedation to produce better outcomes from critical illness (A2B trial): protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: An association between deep sedation and adverse short-term outcomes has been demonstrated although this evidence has been inconsistent. The A2B (alpha-2 agonists for sedation in critical care) sedation trial is designed to determine whether the alpha-2 agonists clonidine and dexmedetomidine, compared with usual care, are clinically and cost-effective. The A2B intervention is a complex intervention conducted in 39 intensive care units (ICUs) in the UK. Multicentre organisational factors, variable cultures, perceptions and practices and the involvement of multiple members of the healthcare team add to the complexity of the A2B trial. From our pretrial contextual exploration it was apparent that routine practices such as type and frequency of pain, agitation and delirium assessment, as well as the common sedative agents used, varied widely across the UK. Anticipated challenges in implementing A2B focused on the impact of usual practice, perceptions of risk, ICU culture, structure and the presence of equipoise. Given this complexity, a process evaluation has been embedded in the A2B trial to uncover factors that could impact successful delivery and explore their impact on intervention delivery and interpretation of outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed-methods process evaluation guided by the A2B intervention logic model. It includes two phases of data collection conducted during and at the end of trial. Data will be collected using a combination of questionnaires, stakeholder interviews and routinely collected trial data. A framework approach will be used to analyse qualitative data with synthesis of data within and across the phases. The nature of the relationship between delivery of the A2B intervention and the trial primary and secondary outcomes will be explored. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All elements of the A2B trial, including the process evaluation, are approved by Scotland A Research Ethics Committee (Ref. 18/SS/0085). Dissemination will be via publications, presentations and media engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03653832.

Critical care pharmacy service provision and workforce in adult extracorporeal membrane oxygenation centres: a multicentre cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: There is good evidence describing pharmacy workforce and service provision in general critical care units. However, no data exist from adult extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) centres. AIM: To describe workforce characteristics, pharmacy service provision, and pharmaceutical care activities in critical care units (CCUs) providing an adult ECMO service in the United Kingdom (UK) and compare to national staffing standards for CCUs. METHOD: We conducted a multicentre, cross-sectional electronic survey inviting one pharmacy professional response per UK ECMO centre. We collated information on workforce, service provision, and pharmaceutical care activities provided by pharmacy teams in adult CCUs with an ECMO service. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 90.9%: representatives of 10/11 tertiary hospitals providing ECMO services responded. Median critical care pharmacist to critical care bed was 1:12.1 (IQR: 1:9.4-1:14.9). Most centres (90.0%) did not meet national standards for pharmacy professionals to critical care bed staffing ratios for weekday services. Total critical care beds covered by the critical care pharmacy team varied across the UK: median (IQR) - 45 (37-80) beds. Two centres funded pharmacist time for ECMO activity, and one centre funded a pharmacy technician post. Median peak ECMO activity was 4 ECMO patients in a single day (IQR: 3-5). Most respondents reported reduced pharmacy service at weekends compared to weekday, with limited on-site support. CONCLUSION: Most responding ECMO centres in the UK reported pharmacy staffing ratios below nationally agreed critical care standards. There was high variability in clinical pharmacy services to ECMO patients over 7 days.

Whole blood thiamine, intravenous thiamine supplementation and delirium occurrence in the intensive care unit: retrospective cohort analyses.

BACKGROUND: Thiamine di-phosphate is an essential cofactor in glucose metabolism, glutamate transformation and acetylcholinesterase activity, pathways associated with delirium occurrence. We hypothesised that a deficiency in whole blood thiamine and intravenous thiamine supplementation could impact delirium occurrence. AIM: To establish whether a deficiency in whole blood thiamine and/or intravenous thiamine supplementation within 72 h of intensive care admission is associated with delirium occurrence. METHOD: The first dataset was secondary analysis of a previous study in an intensive care unit in the Netherlands, reported in 2017. The second dataset contained consecutive intensive care admissions 2 years before (period 1: October 2014 to October 2016) and after (period 2: April 2017 to April 2019) routine thiamine supplementation was introduced within 72 h of admission. Delirium was defined as a positive Confusion Assessment Method-Intensive Care Unit score(s) in 24 h. RESULTS: Analysis of the first dataset (n = 57) using logistic regression showed no relationship between delirium and sepsis or whole blood thiamine, but a significant association with age (p = 0.014). In the second dataset (n = 3074), 15.1% received IV thiamine in period 1 and 62.6% during period 2. Hierarchical regression analysis reported reduction in delirium occurrence in the second period; this did not reach statistical significance, OR = 0.81 (95% CI 0.652-1.002); p = 0.052. CONCLUSION: No relationship was detected between whole blood thiamine and delirium occurrence on admission, at 24 and 48 h. It remains unclear whether routine intravenous thiamine supplementation during intensive care admission impacts delirium occurrence. Further prospective randomised clinical trials are needed.

Position Paper on the Reporting of Norepinephrine Formulations in Critical Care from the Society of Critical Care Medicine and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Joint Task Force.

OBJECTIVES: To provide guidance on the reporting of norepinephrine formulation labeling, reporting in publications, and use in clinical practice. DESIGN: Review and task force position statements with necessary guidance. SETTING: A series of group conference calls were conducted from August 2023 to October 2023, along with a review of the available evidence and scope of the problem. SUBJECTS: A task force of multinational and multidisciplinary critical care experts assembled by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. INTERVENTIONS: The implications of a variation in norepinephrine labeled as conjugated salt (i.e., bitartrate or tartrate) or base drug in terms of effective concentration of norepinephrine were examined, and guidance was provided. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were significant implications for clinical care, dose calculations for enrollment in clinical trials, and results of datasets reporting maximal norepinephrine equivalents. These differences were especially important in the setting of collaborative efforts across countries with reported differences. CONCLUSIONS: A joint task force position statement was created outlining the scope of norepinephrine-dose formulation variations, and implications for research, patient safety, and clinical care. The task force advocated for a uniform norepinephrine-base formulation for global use, and offered advice aimed at appropriate stakeholders.