Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
Crit Care Clin ; 40(3): 507-522, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38796224

ABSTRACT

Intermediate care (IC) is used for patients who do not require the human and technological support of the intensive care unit (ICU) yet require more care and monitoring than can be provided on general wards. Though prevalent in many countries, there is marked variability in models of organization and staffing, as well as monitoring and interventions provided. In this article, the authors will discuss the historical background of IC, review the impact of IC on ICU and IC patient outcomes, and highlight where future studies can shed light on how to optimize IC organization and outcomes.


Subject(s)
Critical Care , Critical Illness , Intensive Care Units , Humans , Critical Care/organization & administration , Critical Care/standards , Critical Illness/therapy , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration
2.
ATS Sch ; 5(1): 206-217, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38633516

ABSTRACT

Background: Survey research is well suited to measuring the knowledge, behavior, and attitudes of study participants and has been widely used in medical education and pulmonary and critical care medicine research. Although the ease of survey administration via electronic platforms has led to an increased volume of survey publications, improving the quality of this work remains an important challenge. Objective: To provide an overview of key steps for rigorous survey design and conduct. Methods: Narrative review. Results: Conducting survey research begins with a clearly defined research question pertaining to a specified population that is accessible for sampling. Survey investigators may choose to adapt relevant preexisting survey instruments, an approach with the potential for conducting more valid, generalizable, and comparable studies. If a new survey tool is used, more extensive piloting and psychometric analysis of the survey instruments may be needed to assess if they accurately measure the concepts of interest. When administering the survey, the use of appropriate methods for sample recruitment maximizes the chances of a high response rate in a generalizable study population. Finally, when writing up and disseminating survey research, careful attention to reporting guidelines can increase the clarity of survey reports and assist readers in interpreting the results and conclusions. Conclusion: With careful attention to study design and conduct, the quality of survey research can be improved and lead to higher impact and more generalizable studies in the fields of medical education and pulmonary and critical care medicine.

3.
CHEST Crit Care ; 1(2)2023 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37810258

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prone positioning was widely adopted for use in patients with ARDS from COVID-19. However, proning was also delivered in ways that differed from historical evidence and practice. In implementation research, these changes are referred to as adaptations, and they occur constantly as evidence-based interventions are used in real-world practice. Adaptations can alter the delivered intervention, impacting patient and implementation outcomes. RESEARCH QUESTION: How have clinicians adapted prone positioning to COVID-19 ARDS, and what uncertainties remain regarding optimal proning use? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with ICU clinicians from two hospitals in Baltimore, MD, from February to July 2021. We interviewed physicians (MDs), registered nurses (RNs), respiratory therapists (RTs), advanced practice providers (APPs), and physical therapists (PTs) involved with proning mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS. We used thematic analysis of interviews to classify proning adaptations and clinician uncertainties about best practice for prone positioning. RESULTS: Forty ICU clinicians (12 MDs, 4 APPs, 12 RNs, 7 RTs, and 5 PTs) were interviewed. Clinicians described several adaptations to the practice of prone positioning, including earlier proning initiation, extended duration of proning sessions, and less use of concomitant neuromuscular blockade. Clinicians expressed uncertainty regarding the optimal timing of initiation and duration of prone positioning. This uncertainty was viewed as a driver of practice variation. Although prescribers intended to use less deep sedation and paralysis in proned patients compared with historical evidence and practice, this raised concerns regarding patient comfort and safety amongst RNs and RTs. INTERPRETATION: Prone positioning in patients with COVID-19 ARDS has been adapted from historically described practice. Understanding the impact of these adaptations on patient and implementation outcomes and addressing clinician uncertainties are priority areas for future research to optimize the use of prone positioning.

4.
Crit Care Med ; 51(11): 1547-1551, 2023 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37294144

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Prone positioning for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has historically been underused, but was widely adopted for COVID-19-associated ARDS early in the pandemic. Whether this successful implementation has been sustained over the first 3 years of the COVID-19 pandemic is unknown. In this study, we characterized proning use in patients with COVID-19 ARDS from March 2020 to December 2022. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective observational study. SETTING: Five-hospital health system in Maryland, USA. PATIENTS: Adults with COVID-19 supported with invasive mechanical ventilation and with a P ao2 /F io2 ratio of less than or equal to 150 mm Hg while receiving F io2 of greater than or equal to 0.6 within 72 hours of intubation. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: We extracted demographic, clinical, and positioning data from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was the initiation of proning within 48 hours of meeting criteria. We compared proning use by year with univariate and multivariate relative risk (RR) regression. Additionally, we evaluated the association of treatment during a COVID-19 surge period and receipt of prone positioning. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 656 qualifying patients; 341 from 2020, 224 from 2021, and 91 from 2022. More than half (53%) met severe ARDS criteria. Early proning occurred in 56.2% of patients in 2020, 56.7% in 2021, and 27.5% in 2022. This translated to a 51% reduction in use of prone positioning among patients treated in 2022 versus 2020 (RR = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.33-0.72; p < 0.001). This reduction remained significant in adjusted models (adjusted RR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.42-0.82; p = 0.002). Treatment during COVID-19 surge periods was associated with a 7% increase in proning use (adjusted RR = 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.13; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The use of prone positioning for COVID-19 ARDS is declining. Interventions to increase and sustain appropriate use of this evidence-based therapy are warranted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Humans , COVID-19/therapy , Prone Position , Pandemics , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Patient Positioning
5.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(1): e2250401, 2023 01 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36626168

ABSTRACT

Importance: Early observations suggested that COVID-19 pneumonia had a higher mortality rate than other causes of pneumonia. Objective: To compare outcomes between mechanically ventilated patients with pneumonia due to COVID-19 (March 2020 to June 2021) and other etiologies (July 2016 to December 2019). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Johns Hopkins Healthcare System among adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with pneumonia who required mechanical ventilation in the first 2 weeks of hospitalization. Clinical, laboratory, and mechanical ventilation data were extracted from admission to hospital discharge or death. Exposures: Pneumonia due to COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 90-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were time to liberation from mechanical ventilation, hospital length of stay, static respiratory system compliance, and ventilatory ratio. Unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted logistic regression, proportional hazards regression, and doubly robust regression were used in propensity score-matched sets to compare clinical outcomes. Results: Overall, 719 patients (mean [SD] age, 61.8 [15.3] years; 442 [61.5%] were male; 460 [64.0%] belonged to a minoritized racial group and 253 [35.2%] were White) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and 1127 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.9 [15.8] years; 586 [52.0%] were male; 459 [40.7%] belonged to a minoritized racial group and 655 [58.1%] were White) with severe non-COVID-19 pneumonia. In unadjusted analyses, patients with COVID-19 pneumonia had higher 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.41), longer time on mechanical ventilation (subdistribution hazard ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.63-0.81), and lower compliance (32.0 vs 28.4 mL/kg PBW/cm H2O; P < .001) when compared with those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia. In propensity score-matched analyses, patients with COVID-19 pneumonia were equally likely to die within 90 days as those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia (odds ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.35; P = .85), had similar respiratory system compliance (mean difference, 1.82 mL/cm H2O; 95% CI, -1.53 to 5.17 mL/cm H2O; P = .28) and ventilatory ratio (mean difference, -0.05; 95% CI, -0.22 to 0.11; P = .52), but had lower rates of liberation from mechanical ventilation (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.00) when compared with those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia had somewhat lower rates of being discharged from the hospital alive at 90 days (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.01) than those with non-COVID-19 pneumonia; however, this was not statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, mechanically ventilated patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia had similar mortality rates as patients with other causes of severe pneumonia but longer times to liberation from mechanical ventilation. Mechanical ventilation use in COVID-19 pneumonia should follow the same evidence-based guidelines as for any pneumonia.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , Humans , Male , Adolescent , Middle Aged , Female , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/complications , Respiration, Artificial , Retrospective Studies , Respiratory Insufficiency/epidemiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy
6.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 20(1): 83-93, 2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35947776

ABSTRACT

Rationale: The adoption of prone positioning for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has historically been poor. However, in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) ARDS, proning has increased. Understanding the factors influencing this change is important for further expanding and sustaining the use of prone positioning in appropriate clinical settings. Objectives: To characterize factors influencing the implementation of prone positioning in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 ARDS. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with 40 intensive care unit (ICU) team members (physicians, nurses, advanced practice providers, respiratory therapists, and physical therapists) working at two academic hospitals. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, a widely used implementation science framework outlining important features of implementation, to structure the interview guide and thematic analysis of interviews. Results: ICU clinicians reported that during the COVID-19 pandemic, proning was viewed as standard early therapy for COVID-19 ARDS rather than salvage therapy for refractory hypoxemia. By caring for large volumes of proned patients, clinicians gained increased comfort with proning and now view proning as a low-risk, high-benefit intervention. Within ICUs, adequate numbers of trained staff members, increased team agreement around proning, and the availability of specific equipment (e.g., to limit pressure injuries) facilitated greater proning use. Hospital-level supports included proning teams, centralized educational resources specific to the management of COVID-19 (including a recommendation for prone positioning), and an electronic medical record proning order. Important implementation processes included informal dissemination of best practices through on-the-job learning and team interactions during routine bedside care. Conclusions: The implementation of prone positioning for COVID-19 ARDS took place in the context of evolving clinician viewpoints and ICU team cultures. Proning was facilitated by hospital support and buy-in and leadership from bedside clinicians. The successful implementation of prone positioning during the COVID-19 pandemic may serve as a model for the implementation of other evidence-based therapies in critical care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , Pandemics , Prone Position , Patient Positioning , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy
7.
NEJM Evid ; 2(5): EVIDe2300051, 2023 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38320026

ABSTRACT

Canonical critical care syndromes such as sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) include patients with markedly heterogeneous biology.1 This, paired with decades of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were traditionally viewed as "negative," has stalled progress in improving patient outcomes.2 However, emerging awareness of sub-phenotypes based on differences in biomarker profiles and resulting heterogeneous treatment effects have led to calls for precision medicine in which therapies are targeted to those most likely to benefit.3.


Subject(s)
Critical Illness , Precision Medicine , Humans , Precision Medicine/methods , Critical Illness/therapy , Biomarkers , Critical Care/methods , Phenotype
9.
Crit Care Explor ; 4(5): e0695, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35783548

ABSTRACT

Use of prone positioning in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) from COVID-19 may be greater than in patients treated for ARDS before the pandemic. However, the magnitude of this increase, sources of practice variation, and the extent to which use adheres to guidelines is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To compare prone positioning practices in patients with COVID-19 ARDS versus ARDS treated before the pandemic. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study of mechanically ventilated patients with early moderate-to-severe ARDS from COVID-19 (2020-2021) or ARDS from non-COVID-19 pneumonia (2018-2019) across 19 ICUs at five hospitals in Maryland. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was initiation of prolonged prone positioning (≥ 16 hr) within 48 hours of meeting oxygenation criteria. Comparisons were made between cohorts and within subgroups including academic versus community hospitals, and medical versus nonmedical ICUs. Other outcomes of interest included time to proning initiation, duration of prone sessions and temporal trends in proning frequency. RESULTS: Proning was initiated within 48 hours in 227 of 389 patients (58.4%) with COVID-19 and 11 of 123 patients (8.9%) with historic ARDS (49.4% absolute increase [95% CI for % increase, 41.7-57.1%]). Comparing COVID-19 to historic ARDS, increases in proning were similar in academic and community settings but were larger in medical versus nonmedical ICUs. Proning was initiated earlier in COVID-19 versus historic ARDS (median hours (hr) from oxygenation criteria, 12.9 vs 30.6; p = 0.002) and proning sessions were longer (median hr, 43.0 vs 28.0; p = 0.01). Proning frequency increased rapidly at the beginning of the pandemic and was sustained. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We observed greater overall use of prone positioning, along with shorter time to initiation and longer proning sessions in ARDS from COVID-19 versus historic ARDS. This rapid practice change can serve as a model for implementing evidence-based practices in critical care.

11.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 204(6): 632-641, 2021 09 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34086536

ABSTRACT

Oxygen supplementation is one of the most common interventions in critically ill patients. Despite over a century of data suggesting both beneficial and detrimental effects of supplemental oxygen, optimal arterial oxygenation targets in adult patients remain unclear. Laboratory animal studies have consistently showed that exposure to a high FiO2 causes respiratory failure and early death. Human autopsy studies from the 1960s purported to provide histologic evidence of pulmonary oxygen toxicity in the form of diffuse alveolar damage. However, concomitant ventilator-induced lung injury and/or other causes of acute lung injury may explain these findings. Although some observational studies in general populations of critically adults showed higher mortality in association with higher oxygen exposures, this finding has not been consistent. For some specific populations, such as those with cardiac arrest, studies have suggested harm from targeting supraphysiologic PaO2 levels. More recently, randomized clinical trials of arterial oxygenation targets in narrower physiologic ranges were conducted in critically ill adult patients. Although two smaller trials came to opposite conclusions, the two largest of these trials showed no differences in clinical outcomes in study groups that received conservative versus liberal oxygen targets, suggesting that either strategy is reasonable. It is possible that some strategies are of benefit in some subpopulations, and this remains an important ongoing area of research. Because of the ubiquity of oxygen supplementation in critically ill adults, even small treatment effects could have a large impact on a global scale.


Subject(s)
Critical Care/methods , Hyperoxia/etiology , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/adverse effects , Oxygen/toxicity , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Adult , Animals , Critical Illness , Humans , Hyperoxia/prevention & control , Oxygen/therapeutic use , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Respiratory Insufficiency/physiopathology
12.
J Hosp Med ; 15(12): 768, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33284745
13.
Sex Transm Dis ; 42(9): 533-9, 2015 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26267881

ABSTRACT

Partner notification is a widely accepted method whose intent is to limit onward HIV transmission. With increasing use of new technologies such as text messaging, e-mail, and social network sites, there is growing interest in using these techniques for "next-generation" HIV partner services (PS). We conducted a systematic review to assess the use and effectiveness of these technologies in HIV PS. Our literature search resulted in 1343 citations, with 7 meeting inclusion criteria. We found programs in 2 domains: (1) Public Health Department usage of new technologies to augment traditional partner notification (n = 3) and (2) patient or provider-led usage of partner notification Web sites (n = 4) The health department-based efforts showed an ability to find new cases in a previously unreachable population but in the limited comparisons to traditional PS had a lower rate of successful contact. Usage data from the partner notification Web sites revealed a high total number of e-notifications sent, with less than 10% of cards sent for HIV. Clear evidence on outcomes and directly traceable utilization for these Web services was lacking. When given a choice, most clients chose to send e-notifications via text versus e-mail. Although successful notification may be lower overall, use of next-generation services provides an avenue to contact those who would previously have been untraceable. Additional research is needed to determine to what extent technology-enhanced PS improves the identification of newly infected persons as well as the initiation of new prevention interventions for HIV-negative clients within high-risk networks.


Subject(s)
Contact Tracing/methods , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Internet , Sexual Partners , Text Messaging , Directive Counseling , Humans , Preventive Health Services
14.
Sex Transm Infect ; 91(5): 375-82, 2015 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25605970

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Herpes simplex virus-2 (HSV-2) and syphilis are associated with increased risk of HIV, highlighting the importance of understanding their transmission dynamics. In India, most studies of HSV-2 and syphilis incidence are in high-risk populations and may not accurately reflect infectious activity. In this study, we aim to define HSV-2/syphilis incidence and risk factors in a population sample. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal population-based survey in Andhra Pradesh, India, in two rounds: 2004-2005 and 2010-2011. Sociodemographic and behavioural data were collected, and dried blood spots tested for HSV-2 and Treponema pallidum IgG. After calculating sexually transmitted infection (STI) incidence, associated factors were assessed using modified Poisson regression and within-couple transmission rates modelled using seroconcordance/discordance data. RESULTS: 12,617 adults participated at baseline with 8494 at follow-up. Incidence of HSV-2 and syphilis per 1000 person-years was 25.6 (95% CI 24.1 to 27.2) and 3.00 (95% CI 2.52 to 3.54). Incidence of HSV-2 was higher in women vs. men (31.1 vs. 20.2) and in rural vs urban residents (31.1 vs 19.0) (p<0.05 for both). STI seroincidence increased in a step-wise fashion with age and was associated with spousal seropositivity for both sexes (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 2.59 to 6.78). Within couples the rate of transmission per 1000 couple-years from men to women vs. women to men was higher for HSV-2 (193.3 vs. 119.0) compared with syphilis (27.6 vs. 198.8), p<0.05 for both. CONCLUSIONS: HSV-2 has higher incidence among subpopulations such as women, rural residents and older-aged individuals, suggesting a need for more generalised STI prevention approaches among populations traditionally considered low risk.


Subject(s)
HIV Infections/epidemiology , Herpes Genitalis/epidemiology , Herpesvirus 2, Human/isolation & purification , Syphilis/epidemiology , Treponema pallidum/isolation & purification , Adult , Female , Follow-Up Studies , HIV Infections/blood , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Herpes Genitalis/blood , Humans , Incidence , India/epidemiology , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Risk Factors , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Sexual Behavior , Syphilis/blood
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...