Inadequate prophylaxis in patients with trauma: anti-Xa-guided enoxaparin dosing management in critically ill patients with trauma.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) causes significant morbidity in patients with trauma despite advances in pharmacologic therapy. Prior literature suggests standard enoxaparin dosing may not achieve target prophylactic anti-Xa levels. We hypothesize that a new weight-based enoxaparin protocol with anti-Xa monitoring for dose titration in critically injured patients is safe and easily implemented. Methods: This prospective observational study included patients with trauma admitted to the trauma intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2021 to September 2022. Enoxaparin dosing was adjusted based on anti-Xa levels as standard of care via a performance improvement initiative. The primary outcome was the proportion of subtarget anti-Xa levels (<0.2 IU/mL) on 30 mg two times per day dosing of enoxaparin. Secondary outcomes included the dosing modifications to attain goal anti-Xa levels, VTE and bleeding events, and hospital and ICU lengths of stay. Results: A total of 282 consecutive patients were included. Baseline demographics revealed a median age of 36 (26-55) years, and 44.7% with penetrating injuries. Of these, 119 (42.7%) achieved a target anti-Xa level on a starting dose of 30 mg two times per day. Dose modifications for subtarget anti-Xa levels were required in 163 patients (57.8%). Of those, 120 underwent at least one dose modification, which resulted in 78 patients (47.8%) who achieved a target level prior to hospital discharge on a higher dose of enoxaparin. Overall, only 69.1% of patients achieved goal anti-Xa level prior to hospital discharge. VTE occurred in 25 patients (8.8%) and major bleeding in 3 (1.1%) patients. Conclusion: A majority of critically injured patients do not meet target anti-Xa levels with 30 mg two times per day enoxaparin dosing. This study highlights the need for anti-Xa-based dose modification and efficacy of a pharmacy-driven protocol. Further optimization is warranted to mitigate VTE events. Level of evidence: Therapeutic/care management, level III.

Adherence to Established Blood Pressure Targets and Associated Complications in Patients Presenting with Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting evidence exists surrounding systolic blood pressure (SBP) control in patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). The 2022 American Heart Association and American Stroke Association guidelines recommend targeting a SBP of 140 mm Hg while maintaining the range of 130-150 mm Hg. The current practice at our health system is to titrate antihypertensives to a SBP goal of < 160 mm Hg, which aligns with previous recommendations. We hypothesized that the prior lack of guidance to a specific SBP target range predisposed patients to hypotension leading to an increased risk of brain and renal adverse events. METHODS: This retrospective, multicenter, single health system cohort study included adults admitted to the neurointensive care unit or intermediate unit with acute ICH from June 2019 to June 2021. The primary objective evaluated the frequency of time within SBP range (140-160 mm Hg) in the first 48 h. Secondary and safety end points included the frequency of time above and below the established SBP range, episodes of hypotension (defined as a decrease in SBP < 140 mm Hg prompting discontinuation in antihypertensive[s] or the initiation of vasopressor[s]), the incidence of new brain or renal adverse events within 7 days, and modified Rankin Scale at discharge. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients (59% men; median age 62 years) were included. The majority of ICHs in this cohort were intraparenchymal (70%). Nearly one third were attributed to systemic hypertension (31%). During the first 48 h of admission, the frequency of time spent above, within, and below the target SBP range were 6 h (12%), 16 h (34%), and 26 h (54%), respectively. Hypotension was associated with renal adverse events (odds ratio [OR] 3.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-11.44, p = 0.023). A relative SBP reduction > 20% in the first 48 h was associated with renal adverse events (OR 8.99, 95% CI 2.57-35.25, p < 0.001), brain ischemia (OR 22.5, 95% CI 1.92-300.11, p = 0.005), and an increased odd of a modified Rankin Scale of 4-6 at discharge (OR 11.79, 95% CI 2.79-57.02, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In individuals with nontraumatic/nonaneurysmal ICH, SBP measurements were observed to be < 140 mm Hg for > 50% of the initial 48 h following admission. Hypotension and relative SBP reduction > 20% were also independent predictors of renal adverse events. SBP reduction > 20% was also an independent predictor of brain ischemia. These data indicate that intensive SBP reduction following ICH predispose patients to secondary organ injury that may impact long-term outcomes. Our data suggest that a more modest lowering of the SBP within 48 h, as recommended in the most recent guidelines, may minimize the risk of further adverse events.

Institutional Challenges and Solutions to Evidence-Based, Patient-Centered Practice: Implementing ICU Diaries.

BACKGROUND: Although diaries are an evidence-based practice that improves the quality of life of patients in an intensive care unit and their loved ones, centers in the United States are struggling to successfully implement diary programs in intensive care units. Currently, few published recommendations address how to facilitate implementation of a diary program, and how to effectively sustain it, in an intensive care unit. OBJECTIVES: To discuss challenges with implementing diary programs in intensive care units at 2 institutions in the United States, and to identify solutions that were operationalized to overcome these perceived difficulties. METHODS: The teams from the 2 institutions identified local barriers to implementing diaries in their intensive care units. Both groups developed standard operating procedures that outlined the execution and evaluation phases of their implementation projects. RESULTS: Barriers to implementation include liability and patient privacy, diary program development, and implementation and sustainability concerns. Various strategies can help maintain clinical and family member engagement. CONCLUSION: Through a team's sustained dedication and a diligent assessment of perceived obstacles, a diary program can indeed be implemented within an intensive care unit.