Use of actigraphy for monitoring agitation and rest-activity cycles in patients with acute traumatic brain injury in the ICU.

BACKGROUND: In traumatic brain injury patients (TBI) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), agitation can lead to accidental removal of catheters, devices as well as self-extubation and falls. Actigraphy could be a potential tool to continuously monitor agitation. The objectives of this study were to assess the feasibility of monitoring agitation with actigraphs and to compare activity levels in agitated and non-agitated critically ill TBI patients. METHODS: Actigraphs were placed on patients' wrists; 24-hour monitoring was continued until ICU discharge or limitation of therapeutic efforts. Feasibility was assessed by actigraphy recording duration and missing activity count per day. RESULTS: Data from 25 patients were analyzed. The mean number of completed day of actigraphy per patient was 6.5 ± 5.1. The mean missing activity count was 20.3 minutes (±81.7) per day. The mean level of activity measured by raw actigraphy counts per minute over 24 hours was higher in participants with agitation than without agitation. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the feasibility of actigraphy use in TBI patients in the ICU. In the acute phase of TBI, agitated patients have higher levels of activity, confirming the potential of actigraphy to monitor agitation.

Cognitive and Motor Function Effects of Antipsychotics in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Pre-Clinical Studies.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) survivors often suffer from agitated behaviors and will most likely receive pharmacological treatments. Choosing an optimal and safe treatment that will not interfere with neurological recovery remains controversial. By interfering with dopaminergic circuits, antipsychotics may impede processes important to cognitive recovery. Despite their frequent use, there have been no large randomized controlled studies of antipsychotics for the management of agitated behaviors during the acute TBI recovery period. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of pre-clinical studies evaluating the effects of antipsychotics post-TBI on both cognitive and motor recovery. MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched up to August 2, 2023. Pre-clinical studies evaluating the effects of antipsychotics on cognitive and motor functions post-TBI were considered. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) tool. We identified 15 studies including a total of 1188 rodents, mostly conducted in male Sprague-Dawley rats using cortical impact injury. The analysis revealed no consistent effect of haloperidol on motor functions, but risperidone was associated with a significant impairment in motor function on day 5 post-injury (7.05 sec; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.47, 12.62; I2 = 92%). Other atypical antipsychotics did not result in impaired motor function. When evaluating cognitive function, haloperidol- (23.00 sec; 95% CI: 17.42-28.59; I2 = 7%) and risperidone-treated rats (24.27 sec; 95% CI: 16.18-32.36; I2 = 0%) were consistently impaired when compared to controls. In studies evaluating atypical antipsychotics, no impairments were observed. Clinicians should avoid the regular use of haloperidol and risperidone, and future human studies should be conducted with atypical antipsychotics.

Intensive care unit interventions to promote sleep and circadian biology in reducing incident delirium: a scoping review.

RATIONALE/OBJECTIVES: Despite plausible pathophysiological mechanisms, research is needed to confirm the relationship between sleep, circadian rhythm and delirium in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). The objective of this review is to summarise existing studies promoting, in whole or in part, the normalisation of sleep and circadian biology and their impact on the incidence, prevalence, duration and/or severity of delirium in ICU. METHODS: A sensitive search of electronic databases and conference proceedings was completed in March 2023. Inclusion criteria were English-language studies of any design that evaluated in-ICU non-pharmacological, pharmacological or mixed intervention strategies for promoting sleep or circadian biology and their association with delirium, as assessed at least daily. Data were extracted and independently verified. RESULTS: Of 7886 citations, we included 50 articles. Commonly evaluated interventions include care bundles (n=20), regulation or administration of light therapy (n=5), eye masks and/or earplugs (n=5), one nursing care-focused intervention and pharmacological intervention (eg, melatonin and ramelteon; n=19). The association between these interventions and incident delirium or severity of delirium was mixed. As multiple interventions were incorporated in included studies of care bundles and given that there was variable reporting of compliance with individual elements, identifying which components might have an impact on delirium is challenging. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review summarises the existing literature as it relates to ICU sleep and circadian disruption (SCD) and delirium in ICU. Further studies are needed to better understand the role of ICU SCD promotion interventions in delirium mitigation.

Does pain optimisation impact delirium outcomes in critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

BACKGROUND: Untreated pain is associated with short-term and long-term consequences, including post-traumatic stress disorder and insomnia. Side effects of some analgesic medications include dysphoria, hallucinations and delirium. Therefore, both untreated pain and analgesic medications may be risk factors for delirium. Delirium is associated with longer length of stay or cognitive impairment. Our systematic review and meta-analysis will examine the relationship between pain or analgesic medications with delirium occurrence, duration and severity among critically ill adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials and a review of recent conference abstracts will be searched without restriction from inception to 15 May 2023. Study inclusion criteria are: (1) age≥18 years admitted to intensive care; (2) report a measure of pain, analgesic medications and delirium; (3) study design-randomised controlled trial, quasiexperimental designs and observational cohort and case-control studies excluding case reports. Study exclusion criteria are: (1) alcohol withdrawal delirium or delirium tremens; or (2) general anaesthetic emergence delirium; or (3) lab or animal studies. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Risk of Bias V.2 and risk of bias in non-randomised studies tools. There is no language restriction. Occurrence estimates will be transformed using the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine. Point estimates will be pooled using Hartung-Knapp Sidik-Jonkman random effects meta-analysis to estimate a pooled risk ratio. Statistical heterogeneity will be estimated with the I2 statistic. Risk of small study effects will be assessed using funnel plots and Egger test. Studies will be analysed for time-varying and unmeasured confounding using E values. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this is an analysis of published aggregated data. We will share our findings at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: The finalised protocol was submitted to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022367715).

Venous thromboembolism in critically ill adult patients with hematologic malignancy: a population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to describe the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and major bleeding among hospitalized patients with hematologic malignancy, assessing its association with critical illness and other baseline characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of hospitalized adults with a new diagnosis of hematologic malignancy in Ontario, Canada, between 2006 and 2017. The primary outcome was VTE (pulmonary embolism or deep venous thrombosis). Secondary outcomes were major bleeding and in-hospital mortality. We compared the incidence of VTE between intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICU patients and described the association of other baseline characteristics and VTE. RESULTS: Among 76,803 eligible patients (mean age 67 years [standard deviation, SD, 15]), 20,524 had at least one ICU admission. The incidence of VTE was 3.7% in ICU patients compared to 1.2% in non-ICU patients (odds ratio [OR] 3.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.77-3.42). The incidence of major bleeding was 7.6% and 2.4% (OR 3.33; 95% CI 3.09-3.58), respectively. The association of critical illness and VTE remained significant after adjusting for potential confounders (OR 2.92; 95% CI 2.62-3.25). We observed a higher incidence of VTE among specific subtypes of hematologic malignancy and patients with prior VTE (OR 6.64; 95% CI 5.42-8.14). Admission more than 1 year after diagnosis of hematologic malignancy (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.56-0.74) and platelet count ≤ 50 × 109/L at the time of hospitalization (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.48-0.84) were associated with a lower incidence of VTE. CONCLUSION: Among patients with hematologic malignancy, critical illness and certain baseline characteristics were associated with a higher incidence of VTE.

Pharmacological agents for procedural sedation and analgesia in the emergency department and intensive care unit: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of various i.v. pharmacologic agents used for procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) in the emergency department (ED) and ICU. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to enable direct and indirect comparisons between available medications. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed from inception to 2 March 2023 for RCTs comparing two or more procedural sedation and analgesia medications in all patients (adults and children >30 days of age) requiring emergent procedures in the ED or ICU. We focused on the outcomes of sedation recovery time, patient satisfaction, and adverse events (AEs). We performed frequentist random-effects model network meta-analysis and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate certainty in estimates. RESULTS: We included 82 RCTs (8105 patients, 78 conducted in the ED and four in the ICU) of which 52 studies included adults, 23 included children, and seven included both. Compared with midazolam-opioids, recovery time was shorter with propofol (mean difference 16.3 min, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.4-24.3 fewer minutes; high certainty), and patient satisfaction was better with ketamine-propofol (mean difference 1.5 points, 95% CI 0.3-2.6 points, high certainty). Regarding AEs, compared with midazolam-opioids, respiratory AEs were less frequent with ketamine (relative risk [RR] 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.96; high certainty), gastrointestinal AEs were more common with ketamine-midazolam (RR 3.08, 95% CI 1.15-8.27; high certainty), and neurological AEs were more common with ketamine-propofol (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.08-12.53; high certainty). CONCLUSION: When considering procedural sedation and analgesia in the ED and ICU, compared with midazolam-opioids, sedation recovery time is shorter with propofol, patient satisfaction is better with ketamine-propofol, and respiratory adverse events are less common with ketamine.

Ketamine sedation in the intensive care unit: a survey of Canadian intensivists.

PURPOSE: We sought to understand the beliefs and practices of Canadian intensivists regarding their use of ketamine as a sedative in critically ill patients and to gauge their interest in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) examining its use in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We designed and validated an electronic self-administered survey examining the use of ketamine as a sedative infusion for ICU patients. We surveyed 400 physician members of the Canadian Critical Care Society (CCCS) via email between February and April 2022 and sent three reminders at two-week intervals. The survey was redistributed in January 2023 to improve the response rate. RESULTS: We received 87/400 (22%) completed questionnaires. Most respondents reported they rarely use ketamine as a continuous infusion for sedation or analgesia in the ICU (52/87, 58%). Physicians reported the following conditions would make them more likely to use ketamine: asthma exacerbation (73/87, 82%), tolerance to opioids (68/87, 77%), status epilepticus (44/87, 50%), and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (33/87, 38%). Concern for side-effects that limited respondents' use of ketamine include adverse psychotropic effects (61/87, 69%) and delirium (47/87, 53%). The majority of respondents agreed there is need for an RCT to evaluate ketamine as a sedative infusion in the ICU (62/87, 71%). CONCLUSION: This survey of Canadian intensivists illustrates that use of ketamine as a continuous infusion for sedation is limited, and is at least partly driven by concerns of adverse psychotropic effects. Canadian physicians endorse the need for a trial investigating the safety and efficacy of ketamine as a sedative for critically ill patients.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Nous avons cherché à comprendre les croyances et les pratiques des intensivistes pratiquant au Canada concernant leur utilisation de la kétamine comme sédatif chez la patientèle gravement malade et à évaluer leur intérêt pour une étude randomisée contrôlée (ERC) examinant son utilisation à l'unité de soins intensifs (USI). MéTHODE: Nous avons mis au point et validé un sondage électronique auto-administré examinant l'utilisation de la kétamine comme perfusion sédative pour les patient·es aux soins intensifs. Nous avons envoyé le sondage à 400 médecins membres de la Société canadienne de soins intensifs (SCCC) par courriel entre février et avril 2022 et envoyé trois rappels à intervalles de deux semaines. Le sondage a été redistribué en janvier 2023 afin d'améliorer le taux de réponse. RéSULTATS: Nous avons reçu 87 questionnaires remplis sur 400 (22 %). La plupart des personnes répondantes ont déclaré qu'elles utilisaient rarement la kétamine en perfusion continue pour la sédation ou l'analgésie à l'USI (52/87, 58 %). Les médecins ont déclaré que les conditions suivantes les rendraient plus susceptibles d'utiliser de la kétamine : une exacerbation de l'asthme (73/87, 82 %), une tolérance aux opioïdes (68/87, 77 %), un état de mal épileptique (44/87, 50 %) et un syndrome de détresse respiratoire aigu (33/87, 38 %). Les inquiétudes quant aux effets secondaires qui ont limité l'utilisation de la kétamine par les répondant·es comprennent les effets psychotropes indésirables (61/87, 69 %) et le delirium (47/87, 53 %). La majorité des personnes répondantes étaient d'accord qu'une ERC est nécessaire pour évaluer la kétamine en tant que perfusion sédative à l'USI (62/87, 71 %). CONCLUSION: Cette enquête menée auprès d'intensivistes au Canada montre que l'utilisation de la kétamine comme perfusion continue pour la sédation est limitée, au moins en partie en raison d'inquiétudes liées aux effets psychotropes indésirables. Les médecins pratiquant au Canada reconnaissent la nécessité d'une étude sur l'innocuité et l'efficacité de la kétamine comme sédatif pour la patientèle gravement malade.

An Update on Management of Adult Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline.

Background: This document updates previously published Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), incorporating new evidence addressing the use of corticosteroids, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, neuromuscular blocking agents, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). Methods: We summarized evidence addressing four "PICO questions" (patient, intervention, comparison, and outcome). A multidisciplinary panel with expertise in ARDS used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework to develop clinical recommendations. Results: We suggest the use of: 1) corticosteroids for patients with ARDS (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty of evidence), 2) venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in selected patients with severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence), 3) neuromuscular blockers in patients with early severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low certainty of evidence), and 4) higher PEEP without lung recruitment maneuvers as opposed to lower PEEP in patients with moderate to severe ARDS (conditional recommendation, low to moderate certainty), and 5) we recommend against using prolonged lung recruitment maneuvers in patients with moderate to severe ARDS (strong recommendation, moderate certainty). Conclusions: We provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the management of ARDS. Individual patient and illness characteristics should be factored into clinical decision making and implementation of these recommendations while additional evidence is generated from much-needed clinical trials.

Association between Patient Race and Ethnicity and Use of Invasive Ventilation in the United States.

Rationale: Outcomes for people with respiratory failure in the United States vary by patient race and ethnicity. Invasive ventilation is an important treatment initiated based on expert opinion. It is unknown whether the use of invasive ventilation varies by patient race and ethnicity. Objectives: To measure 1) the association between patient race and ethnicity and the use of invasive ventilation; and 2) the change in 28-day mortality mediated by any association. Methods: We performed a multicenter cohort study of nonintubated adults receiving oxygen within 24 hours of intensive care admission using the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV, 2008-2019) and Phillips eICU (eICU, 2014-2015) databases from the United States. We modeled the association between patient race and ethnicity (Asian, Black, Hispanic, White) and invasive ventilation rate using a Bayesian multistate model that adjusted for baseline and time-varying covariates, calculated hazard ratios (HRs), and estimated 28-day hospital mortality changes mediated by differential invasive ventilation use. We reported posterior means and 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Results: We studied 38,258 patients, 52% (20,032) from MIMIC-IV and 48% (18,226) from eICU: 2% Asian (892), 11% Black (4,289), 5% Hispanic (1,964), and 81% White (31,113). Invasive ventilation occurred in 9.2% (3,511), and 7.5% (2,869) died. The adjusted rate of invasive ventilation was lower in Asian (HR, 0.82; CrI, 0.70-0.95), Black (HR, 0.78; CrI, 0.71-0.86), and Hispanic (HR, 0.70; CrI, 0.61-0.79) patients compared with White patients. For the average patient, lower rates of invasive ventilation did not mediate differences in 28-day mortality. For a patient on high-flow nasal cannula with inspired oxygen fraction of 1.0, the odds ratios for mortality if invasive ventilation rates were equal to the rate for White patients were 0.97 (CrI, 0.91-1.03) for Asian patients, 0.96 (CrI, 0.91-1.03) for Black patients, and 0.94 (CrI, 0.89-1.01) for Hispanic patients. Conclusions: Asian, Black, and Hispanic patients had lower rates of invasive ventilation than White patients. These decreases did not mediate harm for the average patient, but we could not rule out harm for patients with more severe hypoxemia.

New antipsychotic prescription and recurrent infections among adult sepsis survivors: A population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: Antipsychotic agents, which may increase the risk of infection through dopaminergic dysregulation, are prescribed to a fraction of patients following critical illness. We compared the rate of recurrent sepsis among patients who filled a prescription for antipsychotics with high- or low-D2 affinity. METHODS: Population-based cohort with active comparator design. We included sepsis survivors older than 65 years with intensive care unit admission and new prescription of antipsychotics in Ontario 2008-2019. The primary outcome were recurrent sepsis episodes within 1 year of follow-up. Patients who filled a prescription within 30 days of hospital discharge for high-D2 affinity antipsychotics (e.g., haloperidol) were compared with patients who filled a prescription within 30 days of hospital discharge for low-D2 affinity antipsychotics (e.g., quetiapine). Multivariable zero-inflated Poisson regression models with robust standard errors adjusting for confounding at baseline were used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Overall, 1879 patients filled a prescription for a high-D2, and 1446 patients filled a prescription for a low-D2 affinity antipsychotic. Patients who filled a prescription for a high-D2 affinity antipsychotic did not present a higher rate of recurrent sepsis during 1 year of follow-up, compared with patients who filled a prescription for a low-D2 affinity antipsychotic (IRR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.35). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find conclusive evidence of a higher rate of recurrent sepsis associated with the prescription of high-D2 affinity antipsychotics (compared with low-D2 affinity antipsychotics) by 1 year of follow-up in adult sepsis survivors with intensive care unit admission.

Physicians' beliefs and perceived importance of traumatic brain injury-associated agitation in critically ill patients: a survey of Canadian intensivists.

PURPOSE: Agitation is a common behavioural problem following traumatic brain injury (TBI). Intensive care unit (ICU) physicians' perspectives regarding TBI-associated agitation are unknown. Our objective was to describe physicians' beliefs and perceived importance of TBI-associated agitation in critically ill patients. METHODS: Following current standard guidance, we built an electronic, self-administrated, 42-item survey, pretested it for reliability and validity, and distributed it to 219 physicians working in 18 ICU level-1 trauma centres in Canada. We report the results using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 93/219 (42%), and 76/93 (82%) respondents completed the full survey. Most respondents were men with ten or more years of experience. Respondents believed that pre-existing dementia (90%) and regular recreational drug use (86%) are risk factors for agitation. Concerning management, 91% believed that the use of physical restraints could worsen agitation, 90% believed that having family at the bedside reduces agitation, and 72% believed that alpha-2 adrenergic agonists are efficacious for managing TBI agitation. Variability was observed in beliefs on epidemiology, sex, gender, age, socioeconomic status, and other pharmacologic options. Respondents considered TBI agitation frequent enough to justify the implementation of management protocols (87%), perceived the current level of clinical evidence on TBI agitation management to be insufficient (84%), and expressed concerns about acute and long-term detrimental outcomes and burden to patients, health care professionals, and relatives (85%). CONCLUSION: Traumatic brain injury-associated agitation in critically ill patients was perceived as an important issue for most ICU physicians. Physicians agreed on multiple approaches to manage TBI-associated agitation although agreement on epidemiology and risk factors was variable.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'agitation est un problème de comportement courant à la suite d'un traumatisme crânien (TC). Le point de vue des médecins des unités de soins intensifs (USI) sur l'agitation associée aux traumatismes crâniens est inconnu. Notre objectif était de décrire les croyances et l'importance perçue par les médecins de l'agitation associée aux traumatismes crâniens chez les patient·es gravement malades. MéTHODE: Conformément aux lignes directrices standard actuelles, nous avons élaboré un sondage électronique auto-administré de 42 questions, l'avons testé au préalable pour en vérifier la fiabilité et la validité, et l'avons distribué à 219 médecins travaillant dans les USI de 18 centres de traumatologie de niveau 1 au Canada. Les résultats sont présentés à l'aide de statistiques descriptives. RéSULTATS: Le taux de réponse global a été de 93 sur 219 (42 %) et 76 sur 93 (82 %) personnes interrogées ont répondu à l'ensemble du sondage. La plupart des répondant·es étaient des hommes comptant dix ans ou plus d'expérience. Les répondant·es sont d'avis que la démence préexistante (90 %) et la consommation régulière de drogues à des fins récréatives (86 %) sont des facteurs de risque d'agitation. En ce qui concerne la prise en charge, 91 % des répondant·es estiment que l'utilisation de contentions physiques peut aggraver l'agitation, 90 % croient que le fait d'avoir de la famille au chevet du patient ou de la patiente réduit l'agitation et 72 % pensent que les agonistes alpha-2 adrénergiques sont efficaces pour gérer l'agitation causée par les traumatismes crâniens. Une variabilité a été observée dans les croyances concernant l'épidémiologie, le sexe, le genre, l'âge, le statut socio-économique et d'autres options pharmacologiques. Les répondant·es considéraient que l'agitation liée aux traumatismes crâniens était suffisamment fréquente pour justifier la mise en œuvre de protocoles de prise en charge (87 %), estimaient que le niveau actuel de données probantes cliniques sur la prise en charge de l'agitation causée par un traumatisme crânien était insuffisant (84 %), et se sont dit·es préoccupé·es par les conséquences préjudiciables aiguës et à long terme et par le fardeau pour les patient·es, les professionnel·les de la santé et les proches (85 %). CONCLUSION: L'agitation associée à un traumatisme crânien chez les patient·es gravement malades était perçue comme un problème important pour la plupart des médecins des soins intensifs. Les médecins s'entendaient sur plusieurs approches pour gérer l'agitation associée aux traumatismes crâniens, bien que l'accord sur l'épidémiologie et les facteurs de risque était variable.

Early observations of Tier-3 drug shortages on purchasing trends across Canada: A cross-sectional analysis of 3 case-example drugs.

BACKGROUND: To curb the growing impact of drug shortages, Health Canada developed the Tiered Notification and Communication Framework which assigns potential shortages a corresponding tiered status. Tier-3 is assigned to shortages with the greatest potential impact on the healthcare system. This study aims to describe drug purchasing trends in response to Tier-3 shortages using three case-examples. METHODS: We conducted a time-series analysis of monthly purchasing data for three out of 17 Tier-3 drug shortages (hydralazine, sarilumab, and medroxyprogesterone acetate) with publicly available reports in July 2021 and available IQVIA MIDAS data from January 2016 to December 2021. We assessed percent changes in purchasing at 1-, 3-, and 6-months after the onset of each Tier-3 drug shortage and interventional ARIMA modelling was used to assess the statistical significance. RESULTS: Medroxyprogesterone acetate experienced a significant shift (p = 0.0370) in purchasing following its shortage, and the 1-, 3-, and 6-month percent changes were +14.9%, +6.8% and -3.1%, respectively. Hydralazine and sarilumab did not show a significant shift. The 1-, 3-, and 6-month percent changes for hydralazine were +15.5%, +10.2%, and +9.6% respectively and +25.2%, +45.1% and +39.2 for sarilumab. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that drugs assigned a Tier-3 status may not show declines in purchasing in the months following status assignment, which may be due to policy responses following the assignment. However, more insight is needed into the mechanisms through which these policy measures impact shortages and whether they are functioning as intended.

Intravenous vitamin C therapy in adult patients with sepsis: A rapid practice guideline.

BACKGROUND: This Rapid Practice Guideline provides an evidence-based recommendation to address the question: in adults with sepsis or septic shock, should we recommend using or not using intravenous vitamin C therapy? METHODS: The panel included 21 experts from 16 countries and used a strict policy for potential financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the Guidelines in Intensive Care, Development, and Evaluation (GUIDE) group. Based on an updated systematic review, and the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation approach, we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework. We conducted an electronic vote, requiring >80% agreement among the panel for a recommendation to be adopted. RESULTS: At longest follow-up, 90 days, intravenous vitamin C probably does not substantially impact (relative risk 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 1.17; absolute risk difference 1.8%, 95% CI -2.2 to 6.2; 6 trials, n = 2148, moderate certainty). Effects of vitamin C on mortality at earlier timepoints was of low or very low certainty due to risk of bias of the included studies and significant heterogeneity between study results. Few adverse events were reported with the use of vitamin C. The panel did not identify any major differences in other outcomes, including duration of mechanical ventilation, ventilator free days, hospital or intensive care unit length of stay, acute kidney injury, need for renal replacement therapy. Vitamin C may result in a slight reduction in duration of vasopressor support (MD -18.9 h, 95% CI -26.5 to -11.4; 21 trials, n = 2661, low certainty); but may not reduce sequential organ failure assessment scores (MD -0.69, 95% CI -1.55 to 0.71; 24 trials, n = 4002, low certainty). The panel judged the undesirable consequences of using IV vitamin C to probably outweigh the desirable consequences, and therefore issued a conditional recommendation against using IV vitamin C therapy in sepsis. CONCLUSIONS: The panel suggests against use of intravenous vitamin C in adult patients with sepsis, beyond that of standard nutritional supplementation. Small and single center trials on this topic should be discouraged.

International Analgesia and Sedation Weaning and Withdrawal Practices in Critically Ill Adults: The Adult Iatrogenic Withdrawal Study in the ICU.

OBJECTIVES: Iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome (IWS) associated with opioid and sedative use for medical purposes has a reported high prevalence and associated morbidity. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, utilization, and characteristics of opioid and sedative weaning and IWS policies/protocols in the adult ICU population. DESIGN: International, multicenter, observational, point prevalence study. SETTING: Adult ICUs. PATIENTS: All patients aged 18 years and older in the ICU on the date of data collection who received parenteral opioids or sedatives in the previous 24 hours. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: ICUs selected 1 day for data collection between June 1 and September 30, 2021. Patient demographic data, opioid and sedative medication use, and weaning and IWS assessment data were collected for the previous 24 hours. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients weaned from opioids and sedatives using an institutional policy/protocol on the data collection day. There were 2,402 patients in 229 ICUs from 11 countries screened for opioid and sedative use; 1,506 (63%) patients received parenteral opioids, and/or sedatives in the previous 24 hours. There were 90 (39%) ICUs with a weaning policy/protocol which was used in 176 (12%) patients, and 23 (10%) ICUs with an IWS policy/protocol which was used in 9 (0.6%) patients. The weaning policy/protocol for 47 (52%) ICUs did not define when to initiate weaning, and the policy/protocol for 24 (27%) ICUs did not specify the degree of weaning. A weaning policy/protocol was used in 34% (176/521) and IWS policy/protocol in 9% (9/97) of patients admitted to an ICU with such a policy/protocol. Among 485 patients eligible for weaning policy/protocol utilization based on duration of opioid/sedative use initiation criterion within individual ICU policies/protocols 176 (36%) had it used, and among 54 patients on opioids and/or sedatives ≥ 72 hours, 9 (17%) had an IWS policy/protocol used by the data collection day. CONCLUSIONS: This international observational study found that a small proportion of ICUs use policies/protocols for opioid and sedative weaning or IWS, and even when these policies/protocols are in place, they are implemented in a small percentage of patients.

Impacts of antipsychotic medication prescribing practices in critically ill adult patients on health resource utilization and new psychoactive medication prescriptions.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic medications are commonly prescribed to critically ill adult patients and initiation of new antipsychotic prescriptions in the intensive care unit (ICU) increases the proportion of patients discharged home on antipsychotics. Critically ill adult patients are also frequently exposed to multiple psychoactive medications during ICU admission and hospitalization including benzodiazepines and opioid medications which may increase the risk of psychoactive polypharmacy following hospital discharge. The associated impact on health resource utilization and risk of new benzodiazepine and opioid prescriptions is unknown. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the burden of health resource utilization and odds of new prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids up to 1-year post-hospital discharge in critically ill patients with new antipsychotic prescriptions at hospital discharge? STUDY DESIGN & METHODS: We completed a multi-center, propensity-score matched retrospective cohort study of critically ill adult patients. The primary exposure was administration of ≥1 dose of an antipsychotic while the patient was admitted in the ICU and ward with continuation at hospital discharge and a filled outpatient prescription within 1-year following hospital discharge. The control group was defined as no doses of antipsychotics administered in the ICU and hospital ward and no filled outpatient prescriptions for antipsychotics within 1-year following hospital discharge. The primary outcome was health resource utilization (72-hour ICU readmission, 30-day hospital readmission, 30-day emergency room visitation, 30-day mortality). Secondary outcomes were administration of benzodiazepines and/or opioids in-hospital and following hospital discharge in patients receiving antipsychotics. RESULTS: 1,388 propensity-score matched patients were included who did and did not receive antipsychotics in ICU and survived to hospital discharge. New antipsychotic prescriptions were not associated with increased health resource utilization or 30-day mortality following hospital discharge. There was increased odds of new prescriptions of benzodiazepines (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.61 [95%CI 1.19-2.19]) and opioids (aOR 1.82 [95%CI 1.38-2.40]) up to 1-year following hospital discharge in patients continuing antipsychotics at hospital discharge. INTERPRETATION: New antipsychotic prescriptions at hospital discharge are significantly associated with additional prescriptions of benzodiazepines and opioids in-hospital and up to 1-year following hospital discharge.

A Core Outcome Set for Interventions to Prevent and/or Treat Delirium in Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Delirium is a serious neurocognitive syndrome which is highly prevalent in people approaching the end of life. Existing trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium in adults receiving palliative care report heterogeneous outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To undertake an international consensus process to develop a core outcome set for trials of interventions, designed to prevent and/or treat delirium, for adults receiving palliative care. METHODS: The core outcome set development process included a systematic review, qualitative interviews, modified Delphi method and virtual consensus meetings using nominal group technique (Registration http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/796). Participants included family members, clinicians, and researchers with experience of delirium in palliative care. RESULTS: Forty outcomes were generated from the systematic review and interviews informing the Delphi Round one survey. The international Delphi panel comprised 92 participants including clinicians (n = 71, 77%), researchers (n = 13, 14%), and family members (n = 8, 9%). Delphi Round two was completed by 77 (84%) participants from Round one. Following the consensus meetings, four outcomes were selected for the core outcome set: 1) delirium occurrence (incidence and prevalence); 2) duration of delirium until resolution defined as either no further delirium in this episode of care or death; 3) overall delirium symptom profile (agitation, delusions or hallucinations, delirium symptoms and delirium severity); 4) distress due to delirium (person with delirium, and/or family and/or carers [including healthcare professionals]). CONCLUSION: Using a rigorous consensus process, we developed a core outcome set comprising four delirium-specific outcomes for inclusion in future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in palliative care.

Effect of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sedation of critically ill patients with inhaled anaesthetics may reduce lung inflammation, time to extubation, and ICU length of stay compared with intravenous (i.v.) sedatives. However, the impact of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in this population is unclear. In this systematic review, we aimed to summarise the effect of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adults. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO for case series, retrospective, and prospective studies in critically ill adults sedated with inhaled anaesthetics. Outcomes included delirium, psychomotor and neurological recovery, long-term cognitive dysfunction, ICU memories, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and instruments used for assessment. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in distinct populations of post-cardiac arrest survivors (n=4), postoperative noncardiac patients (n=3), postoperative cardiac patients (n=2), and mixed medical-surgical patients (n=4). Eight studies reported delirium incidence, two neurological recovery, and two ICU memories. One study reported on psychomotor recovery, long-term cognitive dysfunction, anxiety, depression, and PTSD. A meta-analysis of five trials found no difference in delirium incidence between inhaled and i.v. sedatives (relative risk 0.95 [95% confidence interval: 0.59-1.54]). Compared with i.v. sedatives, inhaled anaesthetics were associated with fewer hallucinations and faster psychomotor recovery but no differences in other outcomes. There was heterogeneity in the instruments used and timing of these assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the limited evidence available, there is no difference in cognitive and psychiatric outcomes between adults exposed to volatile sedation or intravenous sedation in the ICU. Future studies should incorporate outcome assessment with validated tools during and after hospital stay. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42021236455.