Psychological symptoms and health-related quality of life in intubated and non-intubated intensive care survivors: A multicentre, prospective observational cohort study.

Objective: To compare long-term psychological symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in intubated versus non-intubated ICU survivors. Design: Prospective, multicentre observational cohort study. Setting: Four tertiary medical-surgical ICUs in Australia. Participants: Intubated and non-intubated adult ICU survivors. Main outcome measures: Primary outcomes: clinically significant psychological symptoms at 3- and 12-month follow-up using Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome-14 for post-traumatic stress disorder; Depression, Anxiety Stress Scales-21 for depression, anxiety, and stress. Secondary outcomes: HRQOL, using EuroQol-5D-5L questionnaire. Results: Of the 133 ICU survivors, 54/116 (47 %) had at least one clinically significant psychological symptom (i.e., post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, stress) at follow-up. Clinically significant scores for psychological symptoms were observed in 26 (39 %) versus 16 (32 %) at 3-months [odds ratio 1.4, 95 % confidence interval (0.66-3.13), p = 0.38]; 23 (37 %) versus 10 (31 %) at 12-months [odds ratio 1.3, 95 % confidence interval (0.53-3.31), p = 0.57] of intubated versus non-intubated survivors, respectively. Usual activities and mobility were the most commonly affected HRQOL dimension, with >30 % at 3 versus months and >20 % at 12-months of overall survivors reporting ≥ moderate problems. There was no difference between the groups in any of the EQ5D dimensions. Conclusions: Nearly one-in-two (47 %) of the intubated and non-intubated ICU survivors reported clinically significant psychological symptoms at 3 and 12-month follow-ups. Overall, more than 30 % at 3-months and over 20 % at 12-months of the survivors in both groups had moderate or worse problems with their usual activities and mobility. The presence of psychological symptoms and HRQOL impairments was similar between the groups.

Consensus statements on the utility of defining ARDS and the utility of past and current definitions of ARDS-protocol for a Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), marked by acute hypoxemia and bilateral pulmonary infiltrates, has been defined in multiple ways since its first description. This Delphi study aims to collect global opinions on the conceptual framework of ARDS, assess the usefulness of components within current and past definitions and investigate the role of subphenotyping. The varied expertise of the panel will provide valuable insights for refining future ARDS definitions and improving clinical management. METHODS: A diverse panel of 35-40 experts will be selected based on predefined criteria. Multiple choice questions (MCQs) or 7-point Likert-scale statements will be used in the iterative Delphi rounds to achieve consensus on key aspects related to the utility of definitions and subphenotyping. The Delphi rounds will be continued until a stable agreement or disagreement is achieved for all statements. ANALYSIS: Consensus will be considered as reached when a choice in MCQs or Likert-scale statement achieved ≥80% of votes for agreement or disagreement. The stability will be checked by non-parametric χ2 tests or Kruskal Wallis test starting from the second round of Delphi process. A p-value ≥0.05 will be used to define stability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be conducted in full concordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and will be reported according to CREDES guidance. This study has been granted an ethical approval waiver by the NMC Healthcare Regional Research Ethics Committee, Dubai (NMCHC/CR/DXB/REC/APP/002), owing to the nature of the research. Informed consent will be obtained from all panellists before the start of the Delphi process. The study will be published in a peer-review journal with the authorship agreed as per ICMJE requirements. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06159465.

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.

Feasibility, safety, and patient acceptability of electronic inspiratory muscle training in patients who require prolonged mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit: A dual-centre observational study.

BACKGROUND: Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) is an intervention that can be used to rehabilitate the respiratory muscle deconditioning experienced by patients with critical illness, requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Clinicians are currently using mechanical threshold IMT devices that have limited resistance ranges. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and acceptability of using an electronic device to facilitate IMT with participants requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. METHOD: A dual-centre observational cohort study, with convenience sampling, was conducted at two tertiary intensive care units. Daily training supervised by intensive care unit physiotherapists was completed with the electronic IMT device. A priori definitions for feasibility, safety, and acceptability were determined. Feasibility was defined as more than 80% of planned sessions completed. Safety was defined as no major adverse events and less than 3% minor adverse event rate, and acceptability was evaluated following the acceptability of intervention framework principles. RESULTS: Forty participants completed 197 electronic IMT treatment sessions. Electronic IMT was feasible, with 81% of planned sessions completed. There were 10% minor adverse events and no major adverse events. All the minor adverse events were transient without clinical consequences. All the participants who recalled completing electronic IMT sessions reported that the training was acceptable. Acceptability was demonstrated; over 85% of participants reported that electronic IMT was either helpful or beneficial and that electronic IMT assisted their recovery. CONCLUSION: Electronic IMT is feasible and acceptable to complete with critically ill participants who require prolonged mechanical ventilation. As all minor adverse events were transient without clinical consequences, electronic IMT can be considered a relatively safe intervention with patients who require prolonged mechanical ventilation.

The Predicted Outcome of Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With a Psychopathological Disorder and Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type 2: A Systematic Review From 2009 to 2021.

OBJECTIVES: Psychologic screening is often included as a mandatory component of evaluation of the impact of psychopathology disorders on the predicted outcome of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for patients with chronic pain due to persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2 (PSPS type 2). The conclusion of such screenings can influence the decision to offer SCS therapy to a patient. However, evidence on the impact of psychopathology on SCS outcomes is still scarce. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To address this knowledge gap, we systematically reviewed the literature from 2009 to 2021 to explore the correlation between the presence of a psychopathological disorder and the predicted outcome of SCS in patients with PSPS type 2. The literature search was conducted using various online data bases with "failed back surgery syndrome," "psychopathology," and "spinal cord stimulation" used as essential keywords. The identified studies were organized in a Rayyan AI data base, and the quality was analyzed with the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool. RESULTS: Our search generated the identification of 468 original articles, of which two prospective and four retrospective studies met our inclusion criteria. These studies reported pain relief, a reduction of symptoms of anxiety and depression, and an improvement in rumination on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale in patients with PSPS type 2 after SCS therapy. The studies also found contradictory outcomes measured using the Oswestry Disability Index, and in terms of the impact of psychopathological disorder on the clinical outcome and revision rate of the SCS system. CONCLUSION: In this systematic review, we found no convincing evidence that the presence of a psychopathological disorder affects the predicted outcome of SCS therapy in patients with PSPS type 2.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Very Elderly Patients Admitted to Intensive Care: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize and compare trends in ICU admission, hospital outcomes, and resource utilization for critically ill very elderly patients (≥ 80 yr old) compared with the younger cohort (16-79 yr old). DESIGN: A retrospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: One-hundred ninety-four ICUs contributing data to the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation Adult Patient Database between January 2006 and December 2018. PATIENTS: Adult (≥ 16 yr) patients admitted to Australian and New Zealand ICUs. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Very elderly patients with a mean ± sd age of 84.8 ± 3.7 years accounted for 14.8% (232,582/1,568,959) of all adult ICU admissions. They had higher comorbid disease burden and illness severity scores compared with the younger cohort. Hospital (15.4% vs 7.8%, p < 0.001) and ICU mortality (8.5% vs 5.2%, p < 0.001) were higher in the very elderly. They stayed fewer days in ICU, but longer in hospital and had more ICU readmissions. Among survivors, a lower proportion of very elderly was discharged home (65.2% vs 82.4%, p < 0.001), and a higher proportion was discharged to chronic care/nursing home facilities (20.1% vs 7.8%, p < 0.001). Although there was no change in the proportion of very elderly ICU admissions over the study period, they showed a greater decline in risk-adjusted mortality (6.3% [95% CI, 5.9%-6.7%] vs 4.0% [95% CI, 3.7%-4.2%] relative reduction per year, p < 0.001) compared with the younger cohort. The mortality of very elderly unplanned ICU admissions improved faster than the younger cohort ( p < 0.001), whereas improvements in mortality among elective surgical ICU admissions were similar in both groups ( p = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of ICU admissions greater than or equal to 80 years old did not change over the 13-year study period. Although their mortality was higher, they showed improved survivorship over time, especially in the unplanned ICU admission subgroup. A higher proportion of survivors were discharged to chronic care facilities.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: to Trial or Not to Trial?

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a recommended therapy to treat failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). A trial period is practiced to enhance patient selection. However, its fundamental evidence is limited, especially concerning long-term benefit and therapy safety. We compared the long-term (5.3 ± 4.0 years) clinical outcome and therapy safety of a trialed and nontrialed implantation strategy, including multidimensional variables and pain intensity fluctuations over time. A multicenter cohort analysis was performed in 2 comparable groups of FBSS patients. Regarding eligibility, patients had to be treated with SCS for at least 3 months. While the Trial group comprised patients who underwent an SCS implantation after a successful trial, the No-Trial group encompassed patients who underwent complete implantation within 1 session. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity scores and complications. The Trial and No-Trial groups consisted of 194 and 376 patients (N = 570), respectively. A statistically but not clinically significant difference in pain intensity (P = .003; effect = 0.506 (.172-.839)) was found in favor of the Trial group. No interaction between a time dependency effect and pain intensity was noted. Whereas trialed SCS patients were more likely to cease opioid usage (P = .003; OR = .509 (.326-.792)), patients in the No-Trial group endured fewer infections (P = .006; proportion difference = .43 (.007-.083)). Although the clinical relevance of our findings should be proven in future studies, this long-term real-world data study indicates that patient-centered assessments on whether an SCS trial should be performed have to be investigated. According to the current ambiguous evidence, SCS trials should be considered on a case-by-case basis. PERSPECTIVE: The currently available comparative evidence, together with our results, remains ambiguous on which SCS implantation strategy might be deemed superior. An SCS trial should be considered on a case-by-case basis, for which further investigation of its clinical utility in certain patient populations or character traits is warranted.

Inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) for the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19: A randomised controlled pilot study.

There is a strong scientific rationale to use nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) in treating patients with COVID-19. This pilot study investigated whether nebulised UFH was safe and had any impact on mortality, length of hospitalisation and clinical progression, in the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19. This parallel group, open label, randomised trial included adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to two hospitals in Brazil. One hundred patients were planned to be randomised to either "standard of care" (SOC) or SOC plus nebulized UFH. The trial was stopped after randomisation of 75 patients due to falling COVID-19 hospitalisation rates. Significance tests were 1-sided test (10% significance level). The key analysis populations were intention to treat (ITT) and modified ITT (mITT) which excluded (from both arms) subjects admitted to ITU or who died within 24 h of randomisation. In the ITT population (n = 75), mortality was numerically lower for nebulised UFH (6 out of 38 patients; 15.8%) versus SOC (10 out of 37 patients; 27.0%), but not statistically significant; odds ratio (OR) 0.51, p = 0.24. However, in the mITT population, nebulised UFH reduced mortality (OR 0.2, p = 0.035). Length of hospital stay was similar between groups, but at day 29, there was a greater improvement in ordinal score following treatment with UFH in the ITT and mITT populations (p = 0.076 and p = 0.012 respectively), while mechanical ventilation rates were lower with UFH in the mITT population (OR 0.31; p = 0.08). Nebulised UFH did not cause any significant adverse events. In conclusion, nebulised UFH added to SOC in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was well tolerated and showed clinical benefit, particularly in patients who received at least 6 doses of heparin. This trial was funded by The J.R. Moulton Charity Trust and registered under REBEC RBR-8r9hy8f (UTN code: U1111-1263-3136).

Weaning from mechanical ventilation in intensive care units across 50 countries (WEAN SAFE): a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Current management practices and outcomes in weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation are poorly understood. We aimed to describe the epidemiology, management, timings, risk for failure, and outcomes of weaning in patients requiring at least 2 days of invasive mechanical ventilation. METHODS: WEAN SAFE was an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study done in 481 intensive care units in 50 countries. Eligible participants were older than 16 years, admitted to a participating intensive care unit, and receiving mechanical ventilation for 2 calendar days or longer. We defined weaning initiation as the first attempt to separate a patient from the ventilator, successful weaning as no reintubation or death within 7 days of extubation, and weaning eligibility criteria based on positive end-expiratory pressure, fractional concentration of oxygen in inspired air, and vasopressors. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients successfully weaned at 90 days. Key secondary outcomes included weaning duration, timing of weaning events, factors associated with weaning delay and weaning failure, and hospital outcomes. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03255109. FINDINGS: Between Oct 4, 2017, and June 25, 2018, 10 232 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 5869 were enrolled. 4523 (77·1%) patients underwent at least one separation attempt and 3817 (65·0%) patients were successfully weaned from ventilation at day 90. 237 (4·0%) patients were transferred before any separation attempt, 153 (2·6%) were transferred after at least one separation attempt and not successfully weaned, and 1662 (28·3%) died while invasively ventilated. The median time from fulfilling weaning eligibility criteria to first separation attempt was 1 day (IQR 0-4), and 1013 (22·4%) patients had a delay in initiating first separation of 5 or more days. Of the 4523 (77·1%) patients with separation attempts, 2927 (64·7%) had a short wean (≤1 day), 457 (10·1%) had intermediate weaning (2-6 days), 433 (9·6%) required prolonged weaning (≥7 days), and 706 (15·6%) had weaning failure. Higher sedation scores were independently associated with delayed initiation of weaning. Delayed initiation of weaning and higher sedation scores were independently associated with weaning failure. 1742 (31·8%) of 5479 patients died in the intensive care unit and 2095 (38·3%) of 5465 patients died in hospital. INTERPRETATION: In critically ill patients receiving at least 2 days of invasive mechanical ventilation, only 65% were weaned at 90 days. A better understanding of factors that delay the weaning process, such as delays in weaning initiation or excessive sedation levels, might improve weaning success rates. FUNDING: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, European Respiratory Society.

The bereavement experiences of families of potential organ donors: a qualitative longitudinal case study illuminating opportunities for family care.

OBJECTIVES: To illuminate opportunities for care in the context of deceased organ donation by exploring pre-existing family and healthcare professional characteristics, in-hospital experiences, and ongoing adjustment through the lenses of grief theory, systems theory, meaning-making, narrative, and organ donation literature. METHOD: Qualitative longitudinal case studies explored individual and family change in five Australian families who had consented to Donation after Circulatory Determination of Death at a single centre. Participants attended semi-structured interviews at four, eight, and twelve months after the death. FINDINGS: Family values, pre-existing relationships, and in-hospital experiences influenced first responses to their changed lives, understanding of the patient's death, and ongoing family adjustment. Novel behaviour that was conguent with family values was required at the hospital, especially if the patient had previously played a key role in family decision-making. This behaviour and emerging interactional patterns were drawn into family life over the first year of their bereavement. RECOMMENDATIONS: Training that includes lenses introduced in this study will enable healthcare professionals to confidently respond to individual and family psychosocial needs. CONCLUSION: The lenses of grief theory and systems thinking highlight opportunities for care tailored to the unique in-hospital context and needs that emerge in the months that follow.

The accuracy of simple, feasible alternatives to polysomnography for assessing sleep in intensive care: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance is common in intensive care patients. Understanding the accuracy of simple, feasible sleep measurement techniques is essential to informing their possible role in usual clinical care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether sleep monitoring techniques such as actigraphy (ACTG), behavioural assessments, and patient surveys are comparable with polysomnography (PSG) in accurately reporting sleep quantity and quality among conscious, intensive care patients. METHODS: An observational study was conducted in 20 patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for a minimum duration of 24 h, who underwent concurrent sleep monitoring via PSG, ACTG, nursing-based observations, and self-reported assessment using the Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire. RESULTS: The reported total sleep time (TST) for the 20 participants measured by PSG was 328.2 min (±106 min) compared with ACTG (362.4 min [±62.1 min]; mean difference = 34.22 min [±129 min]). Bland-Altman analysis indicated that PSG and ACTG demonstrated clinical agreement and did not perform differently across a number of sleep variables including TST, awakening, sleep-onset latency, and sleep efficiency. Nursing observations overestimated sleep duration compared to PSG TST (mean difference = 9.95 ± 136.3 min, p > 0.05), and patient-reported TST was underestimated compared to PSG TST (mean difference = -51.81 ± 144.1 7, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Amongst conscious patients treated in the ICU, sleep characteristics measured by ACTG were similar to those measured by PSG. ACTG may provide a clinically feasible and acceptable proxy approach to sleep monitoring in conscious ICU patients.

Does mechanical threshold inspiratory muscle training promote recovery and improve outcomes in patients who are ventilator-dependent in the intensive care unit? The IMPROVE randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients who are ventilator-dependent in the intensive care unit, inspiratory muscle training may improve inspiratory muscle strength and accelerate liberation from the ventilator, but optimal training parameters are yet to be established, and little is known about the impact of inspiratory muscle training on quality of life or dyspnoea. Thus, we sought to ascertain whether inspiratory muscle training, commenced while ventilator-dependent, would improve outcomes for patients invasively ventilated for 7 days or longer. METHODS: In this randomised trial with assessor blinding and intention-to-treat analysis, 70 participants (mechanically ventilated ≥7 days) were randomised to receive once-daily supervised high-intensity inspiratory muscle training with a mechanical threshold device in addition to usual care or to receive usual care (control). Primary outcomes were inspiratory muscle strength (maximum inspiratory pressure % predicted) and endurance (fatigue resistance index) at ventilator liberation and 1 week later. Secondary outcomes included quality of life (SF-36v2, EQ-5D), dyspnoea, physical function, duration of ventilation, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Thirty-three participants were randomly allocated to the training group, and 37 to the control group. There were no statistically significant differences in strength (maximum inspiratory pressure) (95% confidence interval [CI]: -7.4 to 14.0) or endurance (fatigue resistance index) (95% CI: -0.003 to 0.436). Quality of life improved significantly more in the training group than in the control group (EQ-5D: 17.2; 95% CI: 1.3-33.0) (SF-36-PCS: 6.97; 95% CI: 1.96-12.00). Only the training group demonstrated significant reductions in dyspnoea (-1.5 at rest, -1.9 during exercise). There were no between-group differences in duration of ventilation or other measures. In-hospital mortality was higher in the control group than in the training group (9 vs 4, 24% vs 12%, p = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: In patients who are ventilator-dependent, mechanical threshold loading inspiratory muscle training improves quality of life and dyspnoea, even in the absence of strength improvements or acceleration of ventilator liberation.

The CHARTER-Ireland trial: can nebulised heparin reduce acute lung injury in patients with SARS-CoV-2 requiring advanced respiratory support in Ireland: a study protocol and statistical analysis plan for a randomised control trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pneumonia is associated with the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) displaying some typical histological features. These include diffuse alveolar damage with extensive pulmonary coagulation activation. This results in fibrin deposition in the microvasculature, leading to the formation of hyaline membranes in the air sacs. Well-conducted clinical trials have found that nebulised heparin limits pulmonary fibrin deposition, attenuates progression of ARDS, hastens recovery and is safe in non-COVID ARDS. Unfractionated heparin also inactivates the SARS-CoV-2 virus and prevents entry into mammalian cells. Nebulisation of heparin may therefore limit fibrin-mediated lung injury and inhibit pulmonary infection by SARS-CoV-2. Based on these findings, we designed the CHARTER-Ireland Study, a phase 1b/2a randomised controlled study of nebulised heparin in patients requiring advanced respiratory support for COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This is a multi-centre, phase 1b/IIa, randomised, parallel-group, open-label study. The study will randomise 40 SARs-CoV-2-positive patients receiving advanced respiratory support in a critical care area. Randomisation will be via 1:1 allocation to usual care plus nebulised unfractionated heparin 6 hourly to day 10 while receiving advanced respiratory support or usual care only. The study aims to evaluate whether unfractionated heparin will decrease the procoagulant response associated with ARDS up to day 10. The study will also assess safety and tolerability of nebulised heparin as defined by number of severe adverse events; oxygen index and respiratory oxygenation index of intubated and unintubated, respectively; ventilatory ratio; and plasma concentration of interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL6, IL-8, IL-10 and soluble tumour necrosis factor receptor 1, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, ferritin, fibrinogen and lactate dehydrogenase as well as the ratios of IL-1ß/IL-10 and IL-6/IL-10. These parameters will be assessed on days 1, 3, 5 and 10; time to separation from advanced respiratory support, time to discharge from the intensive care unit and number tracheostomised to day 28; and survival to days 28 and 60 and to hospital discharge, censored at day 60. Some clinical outcome data from our study will be included in the international meta-trials, CHARTER and INHALE-HEP. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to provide evidence of potential therapeutic benefit while establishing safety of nebulised heparin in the management of ARDS associated with SARs-CoV-2 infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04511923 . Registered on 13 August 2020. Protocol version 8, 22/12/2021 Protocol identifier: NUIG-2020-003 EudraCT registration number: 2020-003349-12 9 October 2020.

Standard care versus individualized blood pressure targets among critically ill patients with shock: A multicenter feasibility and preliminary efficacy study.

PURPOSE: Emerging evidence suggests that minimizing mean perfusion pressure (MPP) deficit during vasopressor therapy for shock can potentially reduce adverse kidney-related outcomes in ICU. We assessed feasibility and preliminary efficacy of individualizing MPP targets based on patients' own pre-illness basal-MPP among vasopressor-treated patients with shock. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective before-and-after trial, 31 patients during the 'before'/observational phase and 31 patients during the 'after'/intervention phase were enrolled at two tertiary-level Australian ICUs. Feasibility endpoint was time-weighted average MPP-deficit during vasopressor therapy. Preliminary efficacy outcomes were new significant AKI, major adverse kidney events within 14 days (MAKE-14), and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: Patients in the after group had lower MPP-deficit (median 18%, [interquartile range [IQR]: 11-23] vs. 4%, [IQR: 2-9], p < 0.001) and lower incidence of new significant AKI (8/31 [26%] vs. 1/31 [3%], p = 0.01) than the before group. The between-group differences in MAKE-14 (9/31 [29%] vs. 4/31 [13%], p = 0.12) and 90-day mortality (6/31 [19%] vs. 2/31 [6%], p = 0.13) were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: An individualized blood pressure target strategy during vasopressor therapy in ICU was feasible and appeared to be efficacious in this preliminary study. Testing this strategy in a larger randomized controlled trial is warranted. STUDY REGISTRATION: ACTRN12617001459314.

Can nebulised HepArin Reduce morTality and time to Extubation in patients with COVID-19 Requiring invasive ventilation Meta-Trial (CHARTER-MT): Protocol and statistical analysis plan for an investigator-initiated international meta-trial of prospective randomised clinical studies.

There is significant interest in the potential for nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH), as a novel therapy for patients with COVID-19 induced acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure requiring invasive ventilation. The scientific and biological rationale for nebulised heparin stems from the evidence for extensive activation of coagulation resulting in pulmonary microvascular thrombosis in COVID-19 pneumonia. Nebulised delivery of heparin to the lung may limit alveolar fibrin deposition and thereby limit progression of lung injury. Importantly, laboratory studies show that heparin can directly inactivate the SARS-CoV-2 virus, thereby prevent its entry into and infection of mammalian cells. UFH has additional anti-inflammatory and mucolytic properties that may be useful in this context. METHODS AND INTERVENTION: The Can nebulised HepArin Reduce morTality and time to Extubation in Patients with COVID-19 Requiring invasive ventilation Meta-Trial (CHARTER-MT) is a collaborative prospective individual patient data analysis of on-going randomised controlled clinical trials across several countries in five continents, examining the effects of inhaled heparin in patients with COVID-19 requiring invasive ventilation on various endpoints. Each constituent study will randomise patients with COVID-19 induced respiratory failure requiring invasive ventilation. Patients are randomised to receive nebulised heparin or standard care (open label studies) or placebo (blinded placebo-controlled studies) while under invasive ventilation. Each participating study collect a pre-defined minimum dataset. The primary outcome for the meta-trial is the number of ventilator-free days up to day 28 day, defined as days alive and free from invasive ventilation.

Prophylactic melatonin for delirium in intensive care (Pro-MEDIC): a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Delirium is common in the critically ill, highly distressing to patients and families and associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Results of studies on preventative use of melatonin in various patient groups have produced mixed results. The aim of this study was to determine whether administration of melatonin decreases the prevalence of delirium in critically ill patients. METHODS: Multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial across 12 Australian ICUs recruiting patients from July 2016 to September 2019. Patients of at least 18 years requiring ICU admission with an expected length of stay (LOS) greater than 72 h; enrolled within 48 h of ICU admission. Indistinguishable liquid melatonin (4 mg; n = 419) or placebo (n = 422) was administered enterally at 21:00 h for 14 consecutive nights or until ICU discharge. The primary outcome was the proportion of delirium-free assessments, as a marker of delirium prevalence, within 14 days or before ICU discharge. Delirium was assessed twice daily using the Confusion Assessment Method for ICU (CAM-ICU) score. Secondary outcomes included sleep quality and quantity, hospital and ICU LOS, and hospital and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 847 patients were randomized into the study with 841 included in data analysis. Baseline characteristics of the participants were similar. There was no significant difference in the average proportion of delirium-free assessments per patient between the melatonin and placebo groups (79.2 vs 80% respectively, p = 0.547). There was no significant difference in any secondary outcomes including ICU LOS (median: 5 vs 5 days, p = 0.135), hospital LOS (median: 14 vs 12 days, p = 0816), mortality at any time point including at 90 days (15.5 vs 15.6% p = 0.948), nor in the quantity or quality of sleep. There were no serious adverse events reported in either group. CONCLUSION: Enteral melatonin initiated within 48 h of ICU admission did not reduce the prevalence of delirium compared to placebo. These findings do not support the routine early use of melatonin in the critically ill.

Inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin for the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19: A multicentre case series of 98 patients.

AIMS: To determine the safety and efficacy-potential of inhaled nebulised unfractionated heparin (UFH) in the treatment of hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective, uncontrolled multicentre single-arm case series of hospitalised patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, treated with inhaled nebulised UFH (5000 IU q8h, 10 000 IU q4h, or 25 000 IU q6h) for 6 ± 3 (mean ± standard deviation) days. Outcomes were activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) before treatment (baseline) and highest-level during treatment (peak), and adverse events including bleeding. Exploratory efficacy outcomes were oxygenation, assessed by ratio of oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2 ) and FiO2 , and the World Health Organisation modified ordinal clinical scale. RESULTS: There were 98 patients included. In patients on stable prophylactic or therapeutic systemic anticoagulant therapy but not receiving therapeutic UFH infusion, APTT levels increased from baseline of 34 ± 10 seconds to a peak of 38 ± 11 seconds (P < .0001). In 3 patients on therapeutic UFH infusion, APTT levels did not significantly increase from baseline of 72 ± 20 to a peak of 84 ± 28 seconds (P = .17). Two patients had serious adverse events: bleeding gastric ulcer requiring transfusion and thigh haematoma; both were on therapeutic anticoagulation. Minor bleeding occurred in 16 patients, 13 of whom were on therapeutic anticoagulation. The oxygen saturation/FiO2 ratio and the FiO2 worsened before and improved after commencement of inhaled UFH (change in slope, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Inhaled nebulised UFH in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 was safe. Although statistically significant, inhaled nebulised UFH did not produce a clinically relevant increase in APTT (peak values in the normal range). Urgent randomised evaluation of nebulised UFH in patients with COVID-19 is warranted and several studies are currently underway.

Characteristics and outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients with dialysis-dependent kidney disease in Australian intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: In Australia, 531 people per million population have dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD5D). The incidence is four times higher for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (indigenous) people compared with non-Indigenous Australians. CKD5D increases the risk of hospitalisation, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and mortality compared with patients without CKD5D. There is limited literature describing short-term outcomes of patients with CKD5D who are admitted to the ICU, comparing indigenous and non-indigenous patients. AIMS: This registry-based retrospective cohort analysis compared demographic and clinical data between indigenous and non-indigenous patients with CKD5D and tested whether indigenous status predicted short-term outcomes independently of other contributing factors. Adjusted hospital mortality was the primary outcome measure. METHODS: Data were from the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society's Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation Adult Patient Database. Australian ICU admissions between 2010 and 2017 were included. Data from 173 ICU (2136 beds) include 1 051 697 ICU admissions, of which 23 793 had a pre-existing diagnosis of CKD5D. RESULTS: Indigenous patients comprised 11.9% of CKD5D patients in ICU. CKD5D was prevalent among 4.9% of indigenous and 2.9% of non-indigenous ICU admissions. Indigenous patients were 13.5 years younger, had fewer comorbidities and lower crude mortality despite equivalent calculated mortality risk. After adjusting for age, remoteness and severity of illness, indigenous status did not predict mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic disadvantage contributes to earlier development of CKD5D and the overrepresentation in ICU of indigenous people. Mortality is equivalent once correcting for confounders, but addressing inequality requires strengthening preventative care.

Diagnostic tools should be used for the diagnosis of chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy in breast cancer patients receiving taxanes.

BACKGROUND: Though the incidence, characteristics, and pathogenesis of chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) by taxane based chemotherapy were extensively studied, diagnostic guidelines extent only recently. AIM: To observationally investigate whether specific tests can be used to predict and monitor CIPN severity. METHODS: Fourteen female breast cancer patients receiving paclitaxel or docetaxel were evaluated using the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) grading, clinical total neuropathy score (TNSc), quantitative sensory testing (QST) of pressure pain threshold (PPT), and numeric rating scale (NRS) scores and stocking and glove distribution testing (SGDT), at the start (T0), midst (T1), and end (T2) of their treatment and after 3 months (T3). RESULTS: At T3, patients scored NCI-CTC neuropathy grade 1 (14.3%), 2 (64.3%), and 3 (14.3%) respectively. Fifty percentage scored at least grade 1 at T0, with complaints not caused by CIPN. Pain, if present, was denominated "tingling" and "cold" in the MPQ. Median TNSc score increased from T0 (2.43) to T1 (4.71) to T2 (5.50) to T3 (5.57), as did pinprick and cold sensation disturbances in SGDT. PPT and associated NRS remained unchanged. TNSc and SGDT at T1 could not predict the NCI-CTC grade at T3. CONCLUSION: NCI-CTC, TNSc, and stocking and glove distribution testing can be used in the early diagnosis and monitoring of CIPN, with false-positive findings at baseline. Final NCI-CTC grades could not be predicted.