Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 57
Filtrar
1.
Trials ; 25(1): 296, 2024 May 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38698442

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The optimal amount and timing of protein intake in critically ill patients are unknown. REPLENISH (Replacing Protein via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial evaluates whether supplemental enteral protein added to standard enteral nutrition to achieve a high amount of enteral protein given from ICU day five until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve a moderate amount of enteral protein would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized trial, critically ill patients will be randomized to receive supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition to achieve a high amount of enteral protein (range of 2-2.4 g/kg/day) or no supplemental enteral protein to achieve a moderate amount of enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day). The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality; other outcomes include functional and health-related quality-of-life assessments at 90 days. The study sample size of 2502 patients will have 80% power to detect a 5% absolute risk reduction in 90-day mortality from 30 to 25%. Consistent with international guidelines, this statistical analysis plan specifies the methods for evaluating primary and secondary outcomes and subgroups. Applying this statistical analysis plan to the REPLENISH trial will facilitate unbiased analyses of clinical data. CONCLUSION: Ethics approval was obtained from the institutional review board, Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (RC19/414/R). Approvals were also obtained from the institutional review boards of each participating institution. Our findings will be disseminated in an international peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences and meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica , Proteínas en la Dieta , Nutrición Enteral , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Nutrición Enteral/métodos , Proteínas en la Dieta/administración & dosificación , Interpretación Estadística de Datos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Calidad de Vida , Resultado del Tratamiento , Respiración Artificial , Factores de Tiempo
2.
Trials ; 24(1): 485, 2023 Jul 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37518058

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Protein intake is recommended in critically ill patients to mitigate the negative effects of critical illness-induced catabolism and muscle wasting. However, the optimal dose of enteral protein remains unknown. We hypothesize that supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition formula to achieve high amount of enteral protein (range 2-2.4 g/kg/day) given from ICU day 5 until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve moderate amount enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day) would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: The REPLENISH (Replacing Protein Via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial is an open-label, multicenter randomized clinical trial. Patients will be randomized to the supplemental protein group or the control group. Patients in both groups will receive the primary enteral formula as per the treating team, which includes a maximum protein 1.2 g/kg/day. The supplemental protein group will receive, in addition, supplemental protein at 1.2 g/kg/day starting the fifth ICU day. The control group will receive the primary formula without supplemental protein. The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Other outcomes include functional and quality of life assessments at 90 days. The trial will enroll 2502 patients. DISCUSSION: The study has been initiated in September 2021. Interim analysis is planned at one third and two thirds of the target sample size. The study is expected to be completed by the end of 2025. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica , Calidad de Vida , Adulto , Humanos , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Nutrición Enteral/efectos adversos , Nutrición Enteral/métodos , Tiempo , Tamaño de la Muestra , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto
3.
Cureus ; 15(6): e39979, 2023 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37416032

RESUMEN

Background Multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB) present a significant and escalating hazard to healthcare globally. Context-specific interventions have been implemented for the prevention and control of MDR-GNB in several healthcare facilities. The objective of this study was to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of evidence-based interventions in the incidence and dissemination of MDR-GNB. Methods This was a pre-and post-intervention study conducted in three phases at King Abdulaziz Medical City Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. During Phase-1, the data on each of the four MDR-GNB (Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Escherichia coli) were collected prospectively. Genomic fingerprinting was performed on isolates using enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-polymerase chain reaction (ERIC-PCR) to determine clonality and establish a link between different strains within and between the hospital wards/units. In the second phase, targeted interventions were implemented in the adult intensive care unit (ICU) based on previously determined risk factors and included the education of healthcare workers on hand hygiene, disinfection of patients' surrounding, daily chlorhexidine baths, and disinfection rooms on discharge with hydrogen peroxide fogging after MDR-GNB patients were discharged. An antibiotic restriction protocol was simultaneously implemented as part of the hospital antibiotic stewardship program. In the third phase, the effectiveness of the interventions was evaluated by comparing the incidence rate and clonality (using ERIC-PCR genetic fingerprints) of MDR-GNB before and after the intervention. Results A significant reduction of MDR-GNB was observed in Phase-2 and Phase-3 compared with Phase-1. The mean incidence rate of MDR-GNB per 1000 patient days in Phase-1 (pre-intervention) was 11.08/1000, followed by 6.07 and 3.54/1000 in Phase-2 and Phase-3, respectively. A statistically significant reduction was observed in the incidence rate of MDR-GNB in the adult ICU (P=0.007), whereas no statistically significant decrease (P=0.419) was observed in areas other than the adult ICU. Two A. baumannii strains appear to be circulating within the ICU environment with reduced frequency in Phase-2 and Phase-3 compared to Phase-1. Conclusion  There was a significant reduction in the incidence of MDR-GNB in the adult ICU due to the successful implementation of both infection control and stewardship interventions, albeit challenging to ascertain the relative contribution of each.

4.
Crit Care ; 27(1): 83, 2023 03 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36869382

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the mobility levels among critically ill patients and the association of early mobility with incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the multicenter PREVENT trial, which evaluated adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h and found no effect on the primary outcome of incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis. Mobility levels were documented daily up to day 28 in the ICU using a tool with an 8-point ordinal scale. We categorized patients according to mobility levels within the first 3 ICU days into three groups: early mobility level 4-7 (at least active standing), 1-3 (passive transfer from bed to chair or active sitting), and 0 (passive range of motion). We evaluated the association of early mobility and incident lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality by Cox proportional models adjusting for randomization and other co-variables. RESULTS: Of 1708 patients, only 85 (5.0%) had early mobility level 4-7 and 356 (20.8%) level 1-3, while 1267 (74.2%) had early mobility level 0. Patients with early mobility levels 4-7 and 1-3 had less illness severity, femoral central venous catheters, and organ support compared to patients with mobility level 0. Incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 1/85 (1.3%) patients in the early mobility 4-7 group, 7/348 (2.0%) patients in mobility 1-3 group, and 50/1230 (4.1%) patients in mobility 0 group. Compared with early mobility group 0, mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 were not associated with differences in incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 8.90; p = 0.87 and 0.91, 95% CI 0.39, 2.12; p = 0.83, respectively). However, early mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 had lower 90-day mortality (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 1.01; p = 0.052, and 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62; p < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Only a small proportion of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were mobilized early. Early mobility was associated with reduced mortality, but not with different incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. This association does not establish causality, and randomized controlled trials are required to assess whether and to what extent this association is modifiable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).


Asunto(s)
Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Anticoagulantes , Enfermedad Crítica , Incidencia
5.
PLoS One ; 18(1): e0280744, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36716310

RESUMEN

This prospective quasi-experimental study from the NASAM (National Approach to Standardize and Improve Mechanical Ventilation) collaborative assessed the impact of evidence-based practices including subglottic suctioning, daily assessment for spontaneous awakening trial (SAT), spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), head of bed elevation, and avoidance of neuromuscular blockers unless otherwise indicated. The study outcomes included VAE (primary) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Changes in daily care process measures and outcomes were evaluated using repeated measures mixed modeling. The results were reported as incident rate ratio (IRR) for each additional month with 95% confidence interval (CI). A comprehensive program that included education on evidence-based practices for optimal care of mechanically ventilated patients with real-time benchmarking of daily care process measures to drive improvement in forty-two ICUs from 26 hospitals in Saudi Arabia (>27,000 days of observation). Compliance with subglottic suctioning, SAT and SBT increased monthly during the project by 3.5%, 2.1% and 1.9%, respectively (IRR 1.035, 95%CI 1.007-1.064, p = 0.0148; 1.021, 95% CI 1.010-1.032, p = 0.0003; and 1.019, 95%CI 1.009-1.029, p = 0.0001, respectively). The use of neuromuscular blockers decreased monthly by 2.5% (IRR 0.975, 95%CI 0.953-0.998, p = 0.0341). The compliance with head of bed elevation was high at baseline and did not change over time. Based on data for 83153 ventilator days, VAE rate was 15.2/1000 ventilator day (95%CI 12.6-18.1) at baseline and did not change during the project (IRR 1.019, 95%CI 0.985-1.053, p = 0.2812). Based on data for 8523 patients; the mortality was 30.4% (95%CI 27.4-33.6) at baseline, and decreased monthly during the project by 1.6% (IRR 0.984, 95%CI 0.973-0.996, p = 0.0067). A national quality improvement collaborative was associated with improvements in daily care processes. These changes were associated with a reduction in mortality but not VAEs. Registration The study is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03790150).


Asunto(s)
Respiración Artificial , Desconexión del Ventilador , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Estudios Prospectivos , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Desconexión del Ventilador/métodos , Ventiladores Mecánicos
6.
J Infect Public Health ; 15(6): 677-684, 2022 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35623242

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii is a continuously-emerging worldwide health crisis, with mortality rates approaching 50% in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate regional, patient-related, and organism-related predictors of survival among critically-ill patients with confirmed Acinetobacter infection. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted within ten ICUs across six geographically- and climatologically-distinct cities across Saudi Arabia over 13 months. RESULTS: Of 169 patients with confirmed Acinetobacter infection enrolled in the study, 80 (47.6%) died. Survivors were statistically younger, predominantly male, more likely to be admitted for trauma, less likely to have hypertension, diabetes, or have undergone hemodialysis, and more likely to have been treated with antibiotics prior to having a positive culture for Acinetobacter, but less likely to have received an aminoglycoside. Survivors also had lower baseline APACHE II and SOFA scores and were infected with stains of Acinetobacter that had less meropenem- or colistin-resistance. Multivariate analysis identified the following independent predictors of survival: younger age, lower ICU-day#1 APACHE-II and ICU-day#3 SOFA scores, being admitted for trauma, and having no history of hemodialysis. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-related factors outweigh regional and hospital-related factors as predictors of survival among critically-ill patients with Acinetobacter infection.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Acinetobacter , Acinetobacter baumannii , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios de Cohortes , Arabia Saudita/epidemiología , Infecciones por Acinetobacter/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones por Acinetobacter/epidemiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Enfermedad Crítica , Ciudades , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Estudios Retrospectivos
7.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 8519, 2022 05 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35595804

RESUMEN

There are contradictory data regarding the effect of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) on the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) and heart failure (HF) decompensation in critically ill patients. This study evaluated the effect of adjunctive use of IPC on the rate of incident DVT and ventilation-free days among critically ill patients with HF. In this pre-specified secondary analysis of the PREVENT trial (N = 2003), we compared the effect of adjunctive IPC added to pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis (IPC group), with pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis alone (control group) in critically ill patients with HF. The presence of HF was determined by the treating teams according to local practices. Patients were stratified according to preserved (≥ 40%) versus reduced (< 40%) left ventricular ejection fraction, and by the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification. The primary outcome was incident proximal lower-limb DVT, determined with twice weekly venous Doppler ultrasonography. As a co-primary outcome, we evaluated ventilation-free days as a surrogate for clinically important HF decompensation. Among 275 patients with HF, 18 (6.5%) patients had prevalent proximal lower-limb DVT (detected on trial day 1 to 3). Of 257 patients with no prevalent DVT, 11/125 (8.8%) patients in the IPC group developed incident proximal lower-limb DVT compared to 6/132 (4.5%) patients in the control group (relative risk, 1.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-5.08, p = 0.17). There was no significant difference in ventilator-free days between the IPC and control groups (median 21 days versus 25 days respectively, p = 0.17). The incidence of DVT with IPC versus control was not different across NYHA classes (p value for interaction = 0.18), nor across patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction (p value for interaction = 0.15). Ventilator-free days with IPC versus control were also not different across NYHA classes nor across patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction. In conclsuion, the use of adjunctive IPC compared with control was associated with similar rate of incident proximal lower-limb DVT and ventilator-free days in critically ill patients with HF.Trial registration: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02040103 ) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).


Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Cardíaca , Tromboembolia Venosa , Trombosis de la Vena , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/tratamiento farmacológico , Insuficiencia Cardíaca/terapia , Humanos , Aparatos de Compresión Neumática Intermitente , Volumen Sistólico , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Trombosis de la Vena/tratamiento farmacológico , Trombosis de la Vena/prevención & control , Función Ventricular Izquierda
8.
JAMA ; 327(21): 2104-2113, 2022 06 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35569448

RESUMEN

Importance: The efficacy and safety of prone positioning is unclear in nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of prone positioning in nonintubated adult patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pragmatic, unblinded randomized clinical trial conducted at 21 hospitals in Canada, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the US. Eligible adult patients with COVID-19 were not intubated and required oxygen (≥40%) or noninvasive ventilation. A total of 400 patients were enrolled between May 19, 2020, and May 18, 2021, and final follow-up was completed in July 2021. Intervention: Patients were randomized to awake prone positioning (n = 205) or usual care without prone positioning (control; n = 195). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation within 30 days of randomization. The secondary outcomes included mortality at 60 days, days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days, days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days, adverse events, and serious adverse events. Results: Among the 400 patients who were randomized (mean age, 57.6 years [SD, 12.83 years]; 117 [29.3%] were women), all (100%) completed the trial. In the first 4 days after randomization, the median duration of prone positioning was 4.8 h/d (IQR, 1.8 to 8.0 h/d) in the awake prone positioning group vs 0 h/d (IQR, 0 to 0 h/d) in the control group. By day 30, 70 of 205 patients (34.1%) in the prone positioning group were intubated vs 79 of 195 patients (40.5%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12], P = .20; absolute difference, -6.37% [95% CI, -15.83% to 3.10%]). Prone positioning did not significantly reduce mortality at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.40], P = .54; absolute difference, -1.15% [95% CI, -9.40% to 7.10%]) and had no significant effect on days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days or on days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days. There were no serious adverse events in either group. In the awake prone positioning group, 21 patients (10%) experienced adverse events and the most frequently reported were musculoskeletal pain or discomfort from prone positioning (13 of 205 patients [6.34%]) and desaturation (2 of 205 patients [0.98%]). There were no reported adverse events in the control group. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19, prone positioning, compared with usual care without prone positioning, did not significantly reduce endotracheal intubation at 30 days. However, the effect size for the primary study outcome was imprecise and does not exclude a clinically important benefit. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04350723.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Intubación Intratraqueal , Posición Prona , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Vigilia , Adulto , Anciano , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/terapia , Femenino , Humanos , Hipoxia/etiología , Hipoxia/terapia , Intubación Intratraqueal/métodos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/etiología , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia
9.
J Infect Public Health ; 15(1): 142-151, 2022 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34764042

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The rapid increase in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases during the subsequent waves in Saudi Arabia and other countries prompted the Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) to put together a panel of experts to issue evidence-based recommendations for the management of COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: The SCCS COVID-19 panel included 51 experts with expertise in critical care, respirology, infectious disease, epidemiology, emergency medicine, clinical pharmacy, nursing, respiratory therapy, methodology, and health policy. All members completed an electronic conflict of interest disclosure form. The panel addressed 9 questions that are related to the therapy of COVID-19 in the ICU. We identified relevant systematic reviews and clinical trials, then used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach as well as the evidence-to-decision framework (EtD) to assess the quality of evidence and generate recommendations. RESULTS: The SCCS COVID-19 panel issued 12 recommendations on pharmacotherapeutic interventions (immunomodulators, antiviral agents, and anticoagulants) for severe and critical COVID-19, of which 3 were strong recommendations and 9 were weak recommendations. CONCLUSION: The SCCS COVID-19 panel used the GRADE approach to formulate recommendations on therapy for COVID-19 in the ICU. The EtD framework allows adaptation of these recommendations in different contexts. The SCCS guideline committee will update recommendations as new evidence becomes available.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Cuidados Críticos , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Arabia Saudita
10.
Trials ; 22(1): 695, 2021 Oct 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34635151

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of screening for sepsis using an electronic sepsis alert vs. no alert in hospitalized ward patients on 90-day in-hospital mortality. METHODS: The SCREEN trial is designed as a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. Hospital wards (total of 45 wards, constituting clusters in this design) are randomized to have active alert vs. masked alert, 5 wards at a time, with each 5 wards constituting a sequence. The study consists of ten 2-month periods with a phased introduction of the intervention. In the first period, all wards have a masked alert for 2 months. Afterwards the intervention (alert system) is implemented in a new sequence every 2-month period until the intervention is implemented in all sequences. The intervention includes the implementation of an electronic alert system developed in the hospital electronic medical records based on the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA). The alert system sends notifications of "possible sepsis alert" to the bedside nurse, charge nurse, and primary medical team and requires an acknowledgment in the health information system from the bedside nurse and physician. The calculated sample size is 65,250. The primary endpoint is in-hospital mortality by 90 days. DISCUSSION: The trial started on October 1, 2019, and is expected to complete patient follow-up by the end of October 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04078594 . Registered on September 6, 2019.


Asunto(s)
Hospitales , Sepsis , Electrónica , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Pacientes , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Sepsis/diagnóstico , Sepsis/terapia
11.
J Crit Care ; 66: 109-116, 2021 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34508982

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Acinetobacter is an increasingly-problematic organism, especially in intensive care units (ICUs). In this study, we compared its incidence, outcomes, and predictors spanning eight ICUs in five geographically and climatologically-diverse cities in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: Geographic, climatologic, hospital-related, and patient-related factors were collected prospectively on 3179 patients admitted to eight Saudi ICUs from June 2018 through June 2019. These data then underwent both bivariable and multivariable analysis, the latter vis hierarchical logistic regression to identify predictors of clinically-manifest Acinetobacter infection. RESULTS: Overall incidence of Acinetobacter infection was 3.9% (n = 124). Of these 124 infections, 122 (98.4%) were cultured as A. baumannii. Incidence ranged from 1.0 to 7.9% across the eight ICUs. On bivariable analysis, incident Acinetobacter infection was more common in university and military hospitals, in hospitals with more total beds and ICU isolation rooms, and in 2018 versus 2019, incidence steadily declining over the 13 study months. Mechanically-ventilated patients had ten-fold increased odds of infection. Adjusted (multivariable) analysis revealed the risk of clinically-manifest Acinetobacter infection to increase the longer patients were on mechanical ventilation. Increased risk also existed at certain hospitals over others, especially in university-affiliated and military hospitals, larger hospitals with more isolation rooms, and hospitals with fewer ICU beds. CONCLUSION: In our study of eight ICUs across Saudi Arabia, inter-hospital differences did appear to account for inter-hospital differences in Acinetobacter incidence rates. Patients requiring mechanical ventilation for longer periods of time were particularly at risk.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Acinetobacter , Acinetobacter baumannii , Infección Hospitalaria , Infecciones por Acinetobacter/epidemiología , Cuidados Críticos , Infección Hospitalaria/epidemiología , Humanos , Incidencia , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Factores de Riesgo , Arabia Saudita/epidemiología
12.
BMJ Open ; 11(8): e052169, 2021 08 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34446500

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) delivered by helmet has been used for respiratory support of patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia. The aim of this study was to compare helmet NIV with usual care versus usual care alone to reduce mortality. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel randomised controlled trial that compares helmet NIV with usual care to usual care alone in a 1:1 ratio. A total of 320 patients will be enrolled in this study. The primary outcome is 28-day all-cause mortality. The primary outcome will be compared between the two study groups in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol cohorts. An interim analysis will be conducted for both safety and effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approvals are obtained from the institutional review boards of each participating institution. Our findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences and meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04477668.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Ventilación no Invasiva , Insuficiencia Respiratoria , Dispositivos de Protección de la Cabeza , Humanos , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/terapia , SARS-CoV-2
13.
Clin Nutr ESPEN ; 44: 166-172, 2021 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34330462

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal amount of protein intake in critically ill patients is unclear. The objective of this pilot trial is to assess the feasibility of a large randomized controlled trial testing higher versus lower protein intake in critically ill patients. METHODS: In this pilot randomized controlled trial (REPLacing Protein via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise ApproacH in critically ill patients: A pilot randomized controlled trial (REPLENISH pilot trial), critically ill patients underwent 2-step screening for eligibility on ICU day 1 and 5. Patients with renal disease were excluded. Eligible patients were randomized into REPLENISH group (target protein 1.8-2.2 g kg/day) and Standard group (target protein 0.8-1.0 g/kg/day) from day 6-14 after ICU admission. Dietitians adjusted caloric and protein intake throughout the study period (Day 1-14) to maintain similar caloric targets of permissive underfeeding (40-60% of estimated energy expenditure) in both study groups. RESULTS: Of 704 patients screened at 3 centers in Saudi Arabia from May 2018 to May 2019, only 63 (8.9%) were eligible and 40 (5.7% of screened) were randomized with an average of 2 patients enrolled in the trial per month. Among eligible patients, the consenting rate was high at 89%. During the intervention period, patients in the REPLENISH group (N = 21) had a modestly higher protein intake (median of 1.30 g/kg/day (Q1 Q3: 1.11, 1.57)) than those in the standard group (median of 0.77 g/kg/day (Q1 Q3: 0.57, 1.00); P = 0.0004). Only 31.4% of patients in the whole cohort had >80% of prescribed protein. The duration of daily interruption of feeding was almost 4 h in both groups. The 90-day mortality for the patient study cohort was 20.5%. Anthropometric and muscle strength measurements were performed in less than 50% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot trial highlighted several areas for improvement in the study protocol before launching a large randomized controlled trial. The restrictive eligibility criteria, the complex adjustments of protein and energy and some of the outcome measurements were identified as targets for modifications, to improve enrollment and generalizability and to enhance adherence to study interventions and measurements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03480555.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Crítica , Nutrición Enteral , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Tiempo de Internación , Proyectos Piloto
14.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 84, 2021 Jan 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33468070

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/complicaciones , Complicaciones de la Diabetes/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Corticoesteroides , Adulto , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Líquido del Lavado Bronquioalveolar/virología , Estudios de Cohortes , Comorbilidad , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Enfermedad Crítica , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio/genética , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio/aislamiento & purificación , Nasofaringe/virología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/etiología , Insuficiencia Respiratoria/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Arabia Saudita/epidemiología , Esputo/virología , Tráquea/virología
15.
N Engl J Med ; 383(17): 1645-1656, 2020 10 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33026741

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Whether combined treatment with recombinant interferon beta-1b and lopinavir-ritonavir reduces mortality among patients hospitalized with Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, adaptive, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that enrolled patients at nine sites in Saudi Arabia. Hospitalized adults with laboratory-confirmed MERS were randomly assigned to receive recombinant interferon beta-1b plus lopinavir-ritonavir (intervention) or placebo for 14 days. The primary outcome was 90-day all-cause mortality, with a one-sided P-value threshold of 0.025. Prespecified subgroup analyses and safety analyses were conducted. Because of the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019, the data and safety monitoring board requested an unplanned interim analysis and subsequently recommended the termination of enrollment and the reporting of the results. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were enrolled; 43 patients were assigned to the intervention group and 52 to the placebo group. A total of 12 patients (28%) in the intervention group and 23 (44%) in the placebo group died by day 90. The analysis of the primary outcome, with accounting for the adaptive design, yielded a risk difference of -19 percentage points (upper boundary of the 97.5% confidence interval [CI], -3; one-sided P = 0.024). In a prespecified subgroup analysis, treatment within 7 days after symptom onset led to lower 90-day mortality than use of placebo (relative risk, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.75), whereas later treatment did not. Serious adverse events occurred in 4 patients (9%) in the intervention group and in 10 (19%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of recombinant interferon beta-1b and lopinavir-ritonavir led to lower mortality than placebo among patients who had been hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed MERS. The effect was greatest when treatment was started within 7 days after symptom onset. (Funded by the King Abdullah International Medical Research Center; MIRACLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02845843.).


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/tratamiento farmacológico , Interferon beta-1b/uso terapéutico , Lopinavir/uso terapéutico , Ritonavir/uso terapéutico , Administración Oral , Adulto , Anciano , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Método Doble Ciego , Combinación de Medicamentos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Inyecciones Subcutáneas , Interferon beta-1b/efectos adversos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Lopinavir/efectos adversos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ritonavir/efectos adversos , Estadísticas no Paramétricas , Tiempo de Tratamiento
16.
Intensive Care Med ; 46(4): 737-746, 2020 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32095845

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: We examined the association between surveillance for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) among medical-surgical critically ill patients by twice-weekly ultrasonography and 90-day all-cause mortality. METHODS: This was a pre-planned sub-study of the Pneumatic Compression for Preventing Venous Thromboembolism (PREVENT) trial (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02040103) that compared addition of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) to pharmacologic prophylaxis versus pharmacologic prophylaxis alone. The surveillance group included enrolled patients in the trial, while the non-surveillance group included eligible non-enrolled patients. Using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models, we examined the association of surveillance with the primary outcome of 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were DVT and pulmonary embolism (PE). RESULTS: The surveillance group consisted of 1682 patients and the non-surveillance group included 383 patients. Using Cox proportional hazards model with bootstrapping, surveillance was associated with a decrease in 90-day mortality (adjusted HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.57, 0.98). Surveillance was associated with earlier diagnosis of DVT [(median 4 days (IQR 2, 10) vs. 20 days (IQR 16, 22)] and PE [median 4 days (IQR 2.5, 5) vs. 7.5 days (IQR 6.1, 28.9)]. There was an increase in diagnosis of DVT (adjusted HR 5.49; 95% CI 2.92, 13.02) with no change in frequency in diagnosis of PE (adjusted HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.19, 1.91). CONCLUSIONS: Twice-weekly surveillance ultrasonography was associated with an increase in DVT detection, reduction in diagnostic testing for non-lower limb DVT and PE, earlier diagnosis of DVT and PE, and lower 90-day mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103. Registered on 3 November 2013; Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506. Registered on 30 October 2013.


Asunto(s)
Embolia Pulmonar , Tromboembolia Venosa , Trombosis de la Vena , Enfermedad Crítica , Humanos , Ultrasonografía , Trombosis de la Vena/diagnóstico por imagen , Trombosis de la Vena/prevención & control
17.
Trials ; 21(1): 8, 2020 Jan 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31900204

RESUMEN

The MIRACLE trial (MERS-CoV Infection tReated with A Combination of Lopinavir/ritonavir and intErferon-ß1b) investigates the efficacy of a combination therapy of lopinavir/ritonavir and recombinant interferon-ß1b provided with standard supportive care, compared to placebo provided with standard supportive care, in hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS. The MIRACLE trial is designed as a recursive, two-stage, group sequential, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind randomized controlled trial. The aim of this article is to describe the statistical analysis plan for the MIRACLE trial. The primary outcome is 90-day mortality. The primary analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle. The MIRACLE trial is the first randomized controlled trial for MERS treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02845843. Registered on 27 July 2016.


Asunto(s)
Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/tratamiento farmacológico , Interferon beta-1b/uso terapéutico , Lopinavir/uso terapéutico , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio/efectos de los fármacos , Ritonavir/uso terapéutico , Antivirales/efectos adversos , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Infecciones por Coronavirus/virología , Interpretación Estadística de Datos , Método Doble Ciego , Combinación de Medicamentos , Interacciones Huésped-Patógeno , Humanos , Interferon beta-1b/efectos adversos , Lopinavir/efectos adversos , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio/patogenicidad , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Ritonavir/efectos adversos , Arabia Saudita , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
18.
Clin Infect Dis ; 70(9): 1837-1844, 2020 04 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31925415

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Interferón alfa-2/uso terapéutico , Ribavirina/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Enfermedad Crítica , Femenino , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Coronavirus del Síndrome Respiratorio de Oriente Medio , Neumonía Viral/tratamiento farmacológico , ARN Viral/sangre , Estudios Retrospectivos , Arabia Saudita , Resultado del Tratamiento
19.
Health Qual Life Outcomes ; 17(1): 101, 2019 Jun 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31186042

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Data are lacking on impact of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among survivors. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of MERS survivors who required hospitalization in Saudi Arabia during 2016-2017, approximately 1 year after diagnosis. The Short-Form General Health Survey 36 (SF-36) was administered by telephone interview to assess 8 quality of life domains for MERS survivors and a sample of survivors of severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) without MERS. We compared mean SF-36 scores of MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors using independent t-test, and compared categorical variables using chi-square test. Adjusted analyses were performed using multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Of 355 MERS survivors, 83 were eligible and 78 agreed to participate. MERS survivors were younger than non-MERS SARI survivors (mean ± SD): (44.9 years ±12.9) vs (50.0 years ±13.6), p = 0.031. Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions were similar for MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors (46.2% vs. 57.1%), p = 0.20. After adjusting for potential confounders, there were no significant differences between MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors in physical component or mental component summary scores. MERS ICU survivors scored lower than MERS survivors not admitted to an ICU for physical function (p = 0.05), general health (p = 0.01), vitality (p = 0.03), emotional role (p = 0.03) and physical component summary (p < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Functional scores were similar for MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors. However, MERS survivors of critical illness reported lower quality of life than survivors of less severe illness. Efforts are needed to address the long-term medical and psychological needs of MERS survivors.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/psicología , Calidad de Vida , Sobrevivientes/psicología , Adulto , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Comorbilidad , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Arabia Saudita , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Sobrevivientes/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto Joven
20.
Ann Thorac Med ; 14(2): 148-154, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31007767

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Asthma control is suboptimal in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). AIMS: The aim of this study is to assess the level of asthma control in Saudi patients as per the Global Initiative for Asthma 2012 classification and explore its potential predictive factors. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Epidemiological Study on the Management of Asthma in Asthmatic Middle East Adult Population (ESMAA) is a multicentric, descriptive, epidemiological study assessing asthma management in the MENA region. In this article, we report the results of patients from Saudi Arabia included in the ESMAA study. METHODS: Adult patients diagnosed with asthma at least 1 year before study entry were considered for inclusion. Asthma control level and its predictive factors were explored. Treatment adherence and quality of life (QoL) were assessed by MMAS-4© and Short Form 8 Health Survey QoL questionnaires, respectively. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Descriptive statistics were done considering two-sided 95% confidence intervals. Logistic regression was used to explore the potential predictive factors of asthma control. All statistical tests were two-sided, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Data of 1009 patients from Saudi Arabia were analyzed. Less than one-third of patients (30.1%) were found to have controlled asthma with significantly higher QoL. High level of asthma control was reported among male patients and those with high educational level, while age, body mass index, and adherence to treatment were found to have no effect on asthma control. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma control remains suboptimal among Saudi population. This needs huge efforts to achieve acceptable levels of control and better QoL for asthma patients. Further studies are still needed in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East region.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...