Effect of Broad-Spectrum Antibiotic De-escalation on Critically Ill Patient Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Antibiotic de-escalation (ADE) in critically ill patients is controversial. Previous studies mainly focused on mortality; however, data are lacking about superinfection. Therefore, we aimed to identify the impact of ADE versus continuation of therapy on superinfections rate and other outcomes in critically ill patients. METHODS: This was a two-center retrospective cohort study of adults initiated on broad-spectrum antibiotics in the intensive care unit (ICU) for ≥ 48 h. The primary outcome was the superinfection rate. Secondary outcomes included 30-day infection recurrence, ICU and hospital length of stay, and mortality. RESULTS: 250 patients were included, 125 in each group (ADE group and continuation group). Broad spectrum antibiotic discontinuation occurred at a mean of 7.2 ± 5.2 days in the ADE arm vs. 10.3 ± 7.7 in the continuation arm (P value = 0.001). Superinfection was numerically lower in the ADE group (6.4% vs. 10.4%; P = 0.254), but the difference was not significant. Additionally, the ADE group had shorter days to infection recurrence (P = 0.045) but a longer hospital stay (26 (14-46) vs. 21 (10-36) days; P = 0.016) and a longer ICU stay (14 (6-23) vs. 8 (4-16) days; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: No significant differences were found in superinfection rates among ICU patients whose broad-spectrum antibiotics were de-escalated versus patients whose antibiotics were continued. Future research into the association between rapid diagnostics with antibiotic de-escalation in the setting of high resistance is warranted.

Active viral shedding in a vaccinated hospitalized patient infected with the delta variant (B.1.617.2) of SARS-CoV-2 and challenges of de-isolation.

In the era of SARS-CoV-2 variants and COVID-19 vaccination, the duration of infectious viral shedding and isolation in post vaccine breakthrough infections is challenging and depends on disease severity. The current study described a case of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant pneumonia requiring hospitalization. The patient received two doses of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccines, and he had positive SARS-CoV-2 viral cultures 12 days post symptom onset. The time between the second dose of vaccine and the breakthrough infection was 6 months. While immunosuppression is a known risk factor for prolonged infectious viral shedding, age and time between vaccination and breakthrough infection are important risk factors that warrant further studies.

Critically ill patients with diabetes and Middle East respiratory syndrome: a multi-center observational study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a risk factor for infection with coronaviruses. This study describes the demographic, clinical data, and outcomes of critically ill patients with diabetes and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia (September 2012-January 2018). We compared the demographic characteristics, underlying medical conditions, presenting symptoms and signs, management and clinical course, and outcomes of critically ill patients with MERS who had diabetes compared to those with no diabetes. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine if diabetes was an independent predictor of 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Of the 350 critically ill patients with MERS, 171 (48.9%) had diabetes. Patients with diabetes were more likely to be older, and have comorbid conditions, compared to patients with no diabetes. They were more likely to present with respiratory failure requiring intubation, vasopressors, and corticosteroids. The median time to clearance of MERS-CoV RNA was similar (23 days (Q1, Q3: 17, 36) in patients with diabetes and 21.0 days (Q1, Q3: 10, 33) in patients with no diabetes). Mortality at 90 days was higher in patients with diabetes (78.9% versus 54.7%, p < 0.0001). Multivariable regression analysis showed that diabetes was an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-3.72). CONCLUSIONS: Half of the critically ill patients with MERS have diabetes; which is associated with more severe disease. Diabetes is an independent predictor of mortality among critically patients with MERS.

Ribavirin and Interferon Therapy for Critically Ill Patients With Middle East Respiratory Syndrome: A Multicenter Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of ribavirin and recombinant interferon (RBV/rIFN) therapy on the outcomes of critically ill patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), accounting for time-varying confounders. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS from 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia diagnosed between September 2012 and January 2018. We evaluated the association of RBV/rIFN with 90-day mortality and MERS coronavirus (MERS-CoV) RNA clearance using marginal structural modeling to account for baseline and time-varying confounders. RESULTS: Of 349 MERS patients, 144 (41.3%) patients received RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a; none received rIFN-ß1b). RBV/rIFN was initiated at a median of 2 days (Q1, Q3: 1, 3 days) from intensive care unit admission. Crude 90-day mortality was higher in patients with RBV/rIFN compared to no RBV/rIFN (106/144 [73.6%] vs 126/205 [61.5%]; P = .02]. After adjusting for baseline and time-varying confounders using a marginal structural model, RBV/rIFN was not associated with changes in 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 1.03 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .73-1.44]; P = .87) or with more rapid MERS-CoV RNA clearance (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65 [95% CI, .30-1.44]; P = .29). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational study, RBV/rIFN (RBV and/or rIFN-α2a, rIFN-α2b, or rIFN-ß1a) therapy was commonly used in critically ill MERS patients but was not associated with reduction in 90-day mortality or in faster MERS-CoV RNA clearance.

National Approach to Standardize and Improve Mechanical Ventilation.

NASAM (National Approach to Standardize and Improve Mechanical Ventilation) is a national collaborative quality improvement project in Saudi Arabia. It aims to improve the care of mechanically ventilated patients by implementing evidence-based practices with the goal of reducing the rate of ventilator-associated events and therefore reducing mortality, mechanical ventilation duration and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay. The project plans to extend the implementation to a total of 100 ICUs in collaboration with multiple health systems across the country. As of March 22, 2019, a total of 78 ICUs have registered from 6 different health sectors, 48 hospitals, and 27 cities. The leadership support in all health sectors for NASAM speaks of the commitment to improve the care of mechanically ventilated patients across the kingdom.

Noninvasive ventilation in critically ill patients with the Middle East respiratory syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has been used in patients with the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, but the effectiveness of this approach has not been studied. METHODS: Patients with MERS from 14 Saudi Arabian centers were included in this analysis. Patients who were initially managed with NIV were compared to patients who were managed only with invasive mechanical ventilation (invasive MV). RESULTS: Of 302 MERS critically ill patients, NIV was used initially in 105 (35%) patients, whereas 197 (65%) patients were only managed with invasive MV. Patients who were managed with NIV initially had lower baseline SOFA score and less extensive infiltrates on chest radiograph compared with patients managed with invasive MV. The vast majority (92.4%) of patients who were managed initially with NIV required intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation, and were more likely to require inhaled nitric oxide compared to those who were managed initially with invasive MV. ICU and hospital length of stay were similar between NIV patients and invasive MV patients. The use of NIV was not independently associated with 90-day mortality (propensity score-adjusted odds ratio 0.61, 95% CI [0.23, 1.60] P = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MERS and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, NIV failure was very high. The use of NIV was not associated with improved outcomes.

Macrolides in critically ill patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Macrolides have been reported to be associated with improved outcomes in patients with viral pneumonia related to influenza and other viruses, possibly because of their immune-modulatory effects. Macrolides have frequently been used in patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). This study investigated the association of macrolides with 90-day mortality and MERS coronavirus (CoV) RNA clearance in critically ill patients with MERS. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of a multicenter cohort database included 14 tertiary-care hospitals in five cities in Saudi Arabia. Multivariate logistic-regression analysis was used to determine the association of macrolide therapy with 90-day mortality, and the Cox-proportional hazard model to determine the association of macrolide therapy with MERS-CoV RNA clearance. RESULTS: Of 349 critically ill MERS patients, 136 (39%) received macrolide therapy. Azithromycin was most commonly used (97/136; 71.3%). Macrolide therapy was commonly started before the patient arrived in the intensive care unit (ICU) (51/136; 37.5%), or on day1 in ICU (53/136; 39%). On admission to ICU, the baseline characteristics of patients who received and did not receive macrolides were similar, including demographic data and sequential organ failure assessment score. However, patients who received macrolides were more likely to be admitted with community-acquired MERS (P=0.02). Macrolide therapy was not independently associated with a significant difference in 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] :0.47-1.51; P=0.56) or MERS-CoV RNA clearance (adjusted HR: 0.88; 95% CI:0.47-1.64; P=0.68). CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that macrolide therapy is not associated with a reduction in 90-day mortality or improvement in MERS-CoV RNA clearance.

Critically ill healthcare workers with the middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS): A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) leads to healthcare-associated transmission to patients and healthcare workers with potentially fatal outcomes. AIM: We aimed to describe the clinical course and functional outcomes of critically ill healthcare workers (HCWs) with MERS. METHODS: Data on HCWs was extracted from a multi-center retrospective cohort study on 330 critically ill patients with MERS admitted between (9/2012-9/2015). Baseline demographics, interventions and outcomes were recorded and compared between survivors and non-survivors. Survivors were approached with questionnaires to elucidate their functional outcomes using Karnofsky Performance Status Scale. FINDINGS: Thirty-Two HCWs met the inclusion criteria. Comorbidities were recorded in 34% (11/32) HCW. Death resulted in 8/32 (25%) HCWs including all 5 HCWs with chronic renal impairment at baseline. Non-surviving HCW had lower PaO2/FiO2 ratios 63.5 (57, 116.2) vs 148 (84, 194.3), p = 0.043, and received more ECMO therapy compared to survivors, 9/32 (28%) vs 4/24 (16.7%) respectively (p = 0.02).Thirteen of the surviving (13/24) HCWs responded to the questionnaire. Two HCWs confirmed functional limitations. Median number of days from hospital discharge until the questionnaires were filled was 580 (95% CI 568, 723.5) days. CONCLUSION: Approximately 10% of critically ill patients with MERS were HCWs. Hospital mortality rate was substantial (25%). Patients with chronic renal impairment represented a particularly high-risk group that should receive extra caution during suspected or confirmed MERS cases clinical care assignment and during outbreaks. Long-term repercussions of critical illness due to MERS on HCWs in particular, and patients in general, remain unknown and should be investigated in larger studies.

Low-molecular-weight heparin venous thromboprophylaxis in critically ill patients with renal dysfunction: A subgroup analysis of the PROTECT trial.

INTRODUCTION: There is concern about excessive bleeding when low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) are used for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in renal dysfunction. Our objective was to evaluate whether LMWH VTE prophylaxis was safe and effective in critically ill patients with renal dysfunction by conducting a subgroup analysis of PROTECT, a randomized blinded trial. METHODS: We studied intensive care unit (ICU) patients with pre-ICU dialysis-dependent end-stage renal disease (ESRD; pre-specified subgroup; n = 118), or severe renal dysfunction at ICU admission (defined as ESRD or non-dialysis dependent with creatinine clearance [CrCl] <30 ml/min; post hoc subgroup; n = 590). We compared dalteparin, 5000 IU daily, with unfractionated heparin (UFH), 5000 IU twice daily, and considered outcomes of proximal leg deep vein thrombosis (DVT); pulmonary embolism (PE); any VTE; and major bleeding. Adjusted hazard ratios [HR] were calculated using Cox regression. RESULTS: In patients with ESRD, there was no significant difference in DVT (8.3% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.76), any VTE (10.0% vs. 6.9%; p = 0.39) or major bleeding (5.0% vs. 8.6%; p = 0.32) between UFH and dalteparin. In patients with severe renal dysfunction, there was no significant difference in any VTE (10.0% vs. 6.4%; p = 0.07) or major bleeding (8.9% vs. 11.0%; p = 0.66) but an increase in DVT with dalteparin (7.6% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.04). Interaction p-values for comparisons of HRs (ESRD versus not) were non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients with ESRD, or severe renal dysfunction, there was no significant difference in any VTE or major bleeding between UFH and dalteparin. Patients with severe renal dysfunction who received dalteparin had more proximal DVTs than those on UFH; this finding did not hold in patients with ESRD alone.

Treatment of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome with a combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and interferon-ß1b (MIRACLE trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: It had been more than 5 years since the first case of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus infection (MERS-CoV) was recorded, but no specific treatment has been investigated in randomized clinical trials. Results from in vitro and animal studies suggest that a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and interferon-ß1b (IFN-ß1b) may be effective against MERS-CoV. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficacy of treatment with a combination of lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant IFN-ß1b provided with standard supportive care, compared to treatment with placebo provided with standard supportive care in patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS requiring hospital admission. METHODS: The protocol is prepared in accordance with the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines. Hospitalized adult patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS will be enrolled in this recursive, two-stage, group sequential, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized controlled trial. The trial is initially designed to include 2 two-stage components. The first two-stage component is designed to adjust sample size and determine futility stopping, but not efficacy stopping. The second two-stage component is designed to determine efficacy stopping and possibly readjustment of sample size. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality. DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomized controlled trial of a potential treatment for MERS. The study is sponsored by King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Enrollment for this study began in November 2016, and has enrolled thirteen patients as of Jan 24-2018. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02845843 . Registered on 27 July 2016.

Corticosteroid Therapy for Critically Ill Patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome.

RATIONALE: Corticosteroid therapy is commonly used among critically ill patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), but its impact on outcomes is uncertain. Analyses of observational studies often do not account for patients' clinical condition at the time of corticosteroid therapy initiation. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of corticosteroid therapy on mortality and on MERS coronavirus RNA clearance in critically ill patients with MERS. METHODS: ICU patients with MERs were included from 14 Saudi Arabian centers between September 2012 and October 2015. We performed marginal structural modeling to account for baseline and time-varying confounders. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 309 patients, 151 received corticosteroids. Corticosteroids were initiated at a median of 3.0 days (quartile 1 [Q1]-Q3, 1.0-7.0) from ICU admission. Patients who received corticosteroids were more likely to receive invasive ventilation (141 of 151 [93.4%] vs. 121 of 158 [76.6%]; P < 0.0001) and had higher 90-day crude mortality (112 of 151 [74.2%] vs. 91 of 158 [57.6%]; P = 0.002). Using marginal structural modeling, corticosteroid therapy was not significantly associated with 90-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.07; P = 0.12) but was associated with delay in MERS coronavirus RNA clearance (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17-0.72; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroid therapy in patients with MERS was not associated with a difference in mortality after adjustment for time-varying confounders but was associated with delayed MERS coronavirus RNA clearance. These findings highlight the challenges and importance of adjusting for baseline and time-varying confounders when estimating clinical effects of treatments using observational studies.

Critically Ill Patients With the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe patient characteristics, clinical manifestations, disease course including viral replication patterns, and outcomes of critically ill patients with severe acute respiratory infection from the Middle East respiratory syndrome and to compare these features with patients with severe acute respiratory infection due to other etiologies. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Patients admitted to ICUs in 14 Saudi Arabian hospitals. PATIENTS: Critically ill patients with laboratory-confirmed Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (n = 330) admitted between September 2012 and October 2015 were compared to consecutive critically ill patients with community-acquired severe acute respiratory infection of non-Middle East respiratory syndrome etiology (non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection) (n = 222). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Although Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection patients were younger than those with non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (median [quartile 1, quartile 3] 58 yr [44, 69] vs 70 [52, 78]; p < 0.001), clinical presentations and comorbidities overlapped substantially. Patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection had more severe hypoxemic respiratory failure (PaO2/FIO2: 106 [66, 160] vs 176 [104, 252]; p < 0.001) and more frequent nonrespiratory organ failure (nonrespiratory Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score: 6 [4, 9] vs 5 [3, 7]; p = 0.002), thus required more frequently invasive mechanical ventilation (85.2% vs 73.0%; p < 0.001), oxygen rescue therapies (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation 5.8% vs 0.9%; p = 0.003), vasopressor support (79.4% vs 55.0%; p < 0.001), and renal replacement therapy (48.8% vs 22.1%; p < 0.001). After adjustment for potential confounding factors, Middle East respiratory syndrome was independently associated with death compared to non-Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection (adjusted odds ratio, 5.87; 95% CI, 4.02-8.56; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial overlap exists in the clinical presentation and comorbidities among patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome severe acute respiratory infection from other etiologies; therefore, a high index of suspicion combined with diagnostic testing is essential component of severe acute respiratory infection investigation for at-risk patients. The lack of distinguishing clinical features, the need to rely on real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction from respiratory samples, variability in viral shedding duration, lack of effective therapy, and high mortality represent substantial clinical challenges and help guide ongoing clinical research efforts.

Introducing the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program for mechanically ventilated patients in Saudi Arabian Intensive Care Units.

Over the past decade, there have been major improvements to the care of mechanically ventilated patients (MVPs). Earlier initiatives used the concept of ventilator care bundles (sets of interventions), with a primary focus on reducing ventilator-associated pneumonia. However, recent evidence has led to a more comprehensive approach: The ABCDE bundle (Awakening and Breathing trial Coordination, Delirium management and Early mobilization). The approach of the Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program (CUSP) was developed by patient safety researchers at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and is supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to improve local safety cultures and to learn from defects by utilizing a validated structured framework. In August 2015, 17 Intensive Care Units (ICUs) (a total of 271 beds) in eight hospitals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia joined the CUSP for MVPs (CUSP 4 MVP) that was conducted in 235 ICUs in 169 US hospitals and led by the Johns Hopkins Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality. The CUSP 4 MVP project will set the stage for cooperation between multiple hospitals and thus strives to create a countrywide plan for the management of all MVPs in Saudi Arabia.

The association between platelet transfusions and bleeding in critically ill patients with thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Platelet transfusions are commonly used to treat critically ill patients with thrombocytopenia. Whether platelet transfusions are associated with a reduction in the risk of major bleeding is unknown. PATIENTS/METHODS: Observational cohort study nested in a previous multicenter, randomized thromboprophylaxis trial in the intensive care unit (ICU). The objective was to evaluate the association between platelet transfusions and adjudicated major bleeding events. Platelet transfusion episodes were reviewed for timing of administration, product type, and dose. Major bleeding with and without platelet transfusions was adjusted for severity of thrombocytopenia, use of anti-platelet agents, surgery and other covariates. Secondary outcomes were thrombosis, death in ICU and platelet count increment. RESULTS: Among 2,256 patients, 71 (3.1%) received 190 platelet transfusions. Of those, 121 (63.7%) were administered to 54 non-bleeding, thrombocytopenic patients. Adjusted rates of major bleeding were not statistically different with or without the administration of platelet transfusions (hazard ratio for transfused patients 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-1.72). We did not find a significant association between platelet transfusion use and thrombosis or death in ICU in adjusted analyses. Thrombocytopenia, anemia, major or minor bleeding and use of anticoagulants were associated with platelet transfusion administration. The median post-transfusion platelet count increment was 20×109/L at 3.5 hours post-transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of major bleeding were not different for patients who did and did not receive platelet transfusions. Inferences were limited by the small number of transfused patients. Clinical trials are needed to better investigate the potential hemostatic benefit and potential harms of platelet transfusions for this high-risk population.

Patient characteristics infected with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection in a tertiary hospital.

BACKGROUND: In April 2014, a surge in cases of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection was seen in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The aim of this study is to describe the demographic and clinical features, laboratory and radiological findings of MERS-CoV patients identified during this outbreak in a single tertiary hospital. METHODS: All laboratory-confirmed MERS-CoV cases who presented to King Faisal Specialist Hospital from March 1, 2014, to May 30, 2014, were identified. Patients' charts were reviewed for demographic information, comorbidities, clinical presentations, and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 39 patients with confirmed MERS-CoV infection were identified. Twenty-one were male (54%), aged 40 ± 19 years and included 3 (8%) pediatric patients (<18-year-old). 16 (41%) patients were health care workers. Twenty-one (53%) patients were previously healthy whereas eighteen (47%) had at least one comorbidity. The predominant comorbidities included hypertension (31%), diabetes (26%), respiratory (23%), and renal disease (18%). Thirty patients (81%) were symptomatic at presentation, fever (69%) being the most common complaint. The overall mortality rate was 28%. In univariate analysis, older age, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease were associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: MERS-CoV presentation varies from asymptomatic infection to severe respiratory disease causing death. Future studies to identify the risk factors for worse outcome are needed.

Antibody Response and Disease Severity in Healthcare Worker MERS Survivors.

We studied antibody response in 9 healthcare workers in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, who survived Middle East respiratory syndrome, by using serial ELISA and indirect immunofluorescence assay testing. Among patients who had experienced severe pneumonia, antibody was detected for >18 months after infection. Antibody longevity was more variable in patients who had experienced milder disease.

Healthcare Workers Emotions, Perceived Stressors and Coping Strategies During a MERS-CoV Outbreak.

OBJECTIVE: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of contracting Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) during an epidemic. We explored the emotions, perceived stressors, and coping strategies of healthcare workers who worked during a MERS-CoV outbreak in our hospital. DESIGN: A cross-sectional descriptive survey design. SETTING: A tertiary care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: HCWs (150) who worked in high risk areas during the April-May 2014 MERS-CoV outbreak that occurred in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. METHODS: We developed and administered a "MERS-CoV staff questionnaire" to study participants. The questionnaire consisted of 5 sections with 72 questions. The sections evaluated hospital staffs emotions, perceived stressors, factors that reduced their stress, coping strategies, and motivators to work during future outbreaks. Responses were scored on a scale from 0-3. The varying levels of stress or effectiveness of measures were reported as mean and standard deviation, as appropriate. RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were returned by 117 (78%) of the participants. The results had many unique elements. HCWs ethical obligation to their profession pushed them to continue with their jobs. The main sentiments centered upon fear of personal safety and well-being of colleagues and family. Positive attitudes in the workplace, clinical improvement of infected colleagues, and stoppage of disease transmission among HCWs after adopting strict protective measures alleviated their fear and drove them through the epidemic. They appreciated recognition of their efforts by hospital management and expected similar acknowledgment, infection control guidance, and equipment would entice them to work during future epidemics. CONCLUSION: The MERS-CoV outbreak was a distressing time for our staff. Hospitals can enhance HCWs experiences during any future MERS-CoV outbreak by focusing on the above mentioned aspects.

Acute Management and Long-Term Survival Among Subjects With Severe Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Pneumonia and ARDS.

BACKGROUND: Data on the management, clinical course, and outcome of critical patients with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus are scarce. We report here our experience and long-term outcome of such patients. METHODS: Subjects intubated for management of ARDS from Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus pneumonia and ARDS during the April-May 2014 outbreak were included. Their characteristics, ICU course, management, and outcome were evaluated. RESULTS: Fourteen subjects, including 3 health-care workers, met study criteria. Besides 2 health-care workers, all subjects had comorbidities. Predominant symptoms were fever, cough, and dyspnea. The worst median PaO2 /FIO2 ratio of 118 post-intubation was seen on the third day, and median APACHE II score was 27. All subjects received lung-protective ventilation and 1 mg/kg/d methylprednisolone infusion for ARDS. Eleven subjects received ribavirin and peginterferon α-2a. Subjects had a critical ICU course and required neuromuscular blockade (n = 11; 79%), required rescue therapy for respiratory failure (n = 8; 57%), developed shock (n = 10; 71%), and required renal replacement therapy (n = 8; 57%). Declining C-reactive protein levels correlated with clinical improvement despite continued positive real-time polymerase chain reaction results. Nine subjects died in ICU. Five subjects, including 3 health-care workers, were discharged from hospital and were alive after 1 y. CONCLUSIONS: Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus pneumonia with ARDS has high mortality in subjects with comorbidities. The mainstay of treatment is meticulous ARDS management. Those who survived the acute infection and its complications remained well after 1 y in our study. The role of ribavirin and interferon warrants urgent further evaluation.

Failure of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis: risk factors in medical-surgical critically ill patients*.

OBJECTIVES: To identify risk factors for failure of anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis in critically ill patients in the ICU. DESIGN: Multivariable regression analysis of thrombosis predictors from a randomized thromboprophylaxis trial. SETTING: Sixty-seven medical-surgical ICUs in six countries. PATIENTS: Three thousand seven hundred forty-six medical-surgical critically ill patients. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin at standard doses. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Independent predictors for venous thromboembolism, proximal leg deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism developing during critical illness were assessed. A total of 289 patients (7.7%) developed venous thromboembolism. Predictors of thromboprophylaxis failure as measured by development of venous thromboembolism included a personal or family history of venous thromboembolism (hazard ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.03-2.59; p = 0.04) and body mass index (hazard ratio, 1.18 per 10-point increase; 95% CI, 1.04-1.35; p = 0.01). Increasing body mass index was also a predictor for developing proximal leg deep vein thrombosis (hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.06-1.46; p = 0.007), which occurred in 182 patients (4.9%). Pulmonary embolism occurred in 47 patients (1.3%) and was associated with body mass index (hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.02-1.83; p = 0.035) and vasopressor use (hazard ratio, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.01-3.35; p = 0.046). Low-molecular-weight heparin (in comparison to unfractionated heparin) thromboprophylaxis lowered pulmonary embolism risk (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95; p = 0.034) while statin use in the preceding week lowered the risk of proximal leg deep vein thrombosis (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27-0.77; p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Failure of standard thromboprophylaxis using low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin is more likely in ICU patients with elevated body mass index, those with a personal or family history of venous thromboembolism, and those receiving vasopressors. Alternate management or incremental risk reduction strategies may be needed in such patients.

Economic evaluation of the prophylaxis for thromboembolism in critical care trial (E-PROTECT): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication of critical illness with important clinical consequences. The Prophylaxis for ThromboEmbolism in Critical Care Trial (PROTECT) is a multicenter, blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of the two most common pharmocoprevention strategies, unfractionated heparin (UFH) and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) dalteparin, in medical-surgical patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). E-PROTECT is a prospective and concurrent economic evaluation of the PROTECT trial. METHODS/DESIGN: The primary objective of E-PROTECT is to identify and quantify the total (direct and indirect, variable and fixed) costs associated with the management of critically ill patients participating in the PROTECT trial, and, to combine costs and outcome results to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of LMWH versus UFH, from the acute healthcare system perspective, over a data-rich time horizon of ICU admission and hospital admission. We derive baseline characteristics and probabilities of in-ICU and in-hospital events from all enrolled patients. Total costs are derived from centers, proportional to the numbers of patients enrolled in each country. Direct costs include medication, physician and other personnel costs, diagnostic radiology and laboratory testing, operative and non-operative procedures, costs associated with bleeding, transfusions and treatment-related complications. Indirect costs include ICU and hospital ward overhead costs. Outcomes are the ratio of incremental costs per incremental effects of LMWH versus UFH during hospitalization; incremental cost to prevent a thrombosis at any site (primary outcome); incremental cost to prevent a pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, major bleeding event or episode of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (secondary outcomes) and incremental cost per life-year gained (tertiary outcome). Pre-specified subgroups and sensitivity analyses will be performed and confidence intervals for the estimates of incremental cost-effectiveness will be obtained using bootstrapping. DISCUSSION: This economic evaluation employs a prospective costing methodology concurrent with a randomized controlled blinded clinical trial, with a pre-specified analytic plan, outcome measures, subgroup and sensitivity analyses. This economic evaluation has received only peer-reviewed funding and funders will not play a role in the generation, analysis or decision to submit the manuscripts for publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00182143 . Date of registration: 10 September 2005.