ESICM guidelines on acute respiratory distress syndrome: definition, phenotyping and respiratory support strategies.

The aim of these guidelines is to update the 2017 clinical practice guideline (CPG) of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). The scope of this CPG is limited to adult patients and to non-pharmacological respiratory support strategies across different aspects of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), including ARDS due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These guidelines were formulated by an international panel of clinical experts, one methodologist and patients' representatives on behalf of the ESICM. The review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and grade recommendations and the quality of reporting of each study based on the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) network guidelines. The CPG addressed 21 questions and formulates 21 recommendations on the following domains: (1) definition; (2) phenotyping, and respiratory support strategies including (3) high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNO); (4) non-invasive ventilation (NIV); (5) tidal volume setting; (6) positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RM); (7) prone positioning; (8) neuromuscular blockade, and (9) extracorporeal life support (ECLS). In addition, the CPG includes expert opinion on clinical practice and identifies the areas of future research.

Impact of the first wave of COVID-19 on outcomes following emergency admissions for common acute surgical conditions: analysis of a national database in England.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the impact of the first COVID-19 wave in England on outcomes for acute appendicitis, gallstone disease, intestinal obstruction, diverticular disease, and abdominal wall hernia. METHODS: Emergency surgical admissions for patients aged 18 years and older to 124 NHS Trust hospitals between January and June in 2019 and 2020 were extracted from Hospital Episode Statistics. The risk of 90-day mortality after admission during weeks 11-19 in 2020 (national lockdown) and 2019 (pre-COVID-19) was estimated using multilevel logistic regression with case-mix adjustment. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 90 days. RESULTS: There were 12 231 emergency admissions and 564 deaths within 90 days during weeks 11-19 in 2020, compared with 18 428 admissions and 542 deaths in the same interval in 2019. Overall, 90-day mortality was higher in 2020 versus 2019, with an adjusted OR of 1.95 (95 per cent c.i. 0.78 to 4.89) for appendicitis, 2.66 (1.81 to 3.92) for gallstone disease, 1.99 (1.44 to 2.74) for diverticular disease, 1.70 (1.13 to 2.55) for hernia, and 1.22 (1.01 to 1.47) for intestinal obstruction. After emergency surgery, 90-day mortality was higher in 2020 versus 2019 for gallstone disease (OR 3.37, 1.26 to 9.02), diverticular disease (OR 2.35, 1.16 to 4.73), and hernia (OR 2.34, 1.23 to 4.45). For intestinal obstruction, the corresponding OR was 0.91 (0.59 to 1.41). For admissions not leading to emergency surgery, mortality was higher in 2020 versus 2019 for gallstone disease (OR 2.55, 1.67 to 3.88), diverticular disease (1.90, 1.32 to 2.73), and intestinal obstruction (OR 1.30, 1.06 to 1.60). CONCLUSION: Emergency admission was reduced during the first lockdown in England and this was associated with higher 90-day mortality.

Corticosteroids in adult respiratory distress syndrome - an inconvenient truth?

OBJECTIVES: Recent studies have demonstrated mortality benefits from corticosteroid use in COVID-19 patients requiring respiratory support. However, clinical practice may warrant the use of corticosteroids outside the context of a clinical trial. Such data are rarely, if ever, reported. We explored the use of corticosteroids for adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) indications in patients with non-COVID ARDS. METHODS: We retrospectively studied patients with moderate-to-severe ARDS, admitted to our intensive care unit (ICU) between January 2018 and March 2020. KEY FINDINGS: Of the 91 patients with ARDS identified, 80% were treated with a corticosteroid during their ICU admission. Of these, 73 (82%) had corticosteroids administered for reasons other than ARDS. CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroid use for non-ARDS indications is commonplace in ARDS patients in our ICU. The use of corticosteroids outside a randomisation process in randomised clinical trials may be more common than appreciated and needs to be routinely reported.

Non-specialist therapeutic strategies in acute respiratory distress syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We undertook a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the mortality benefit of non-specialist therapeutic interventions for ARDS available to general critical care units. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register for RCTs investigating therapeutic interventions in ARDS including corticosteroids, fluid management strategy, high PEEP, low tidal volume ventilation, neuromuscular blockade, prone position ventilation, or recruitment maneuvers. Data was collected on demographic information, treatment strategy, duration and dose of treatment, and primary (28 or 30-day mortality) and secondary (PaO2:FiO2 ratio at 24-48 hours) outcomes. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: No improvement in 28-day mortality could be demonstrated in three RCTs investigating high PEEP (28.0% vs. 30.2% control; risk ratio [confidence interval] 0.93 [0.82-1.06]; eight assessing prone position ventilation (39.3% vs. 44.5%; RR 0.83 [0.68-1.01]; seven investigating neuromuscular blockade (37.8% vs. 42.0%; RR 0.91 [0.81-1.03]); ten investigating recruitment maneuvers (42.4% vs. 42.1%; RR 1.01 [0.91-1.12]); eight investigating steroids (34.8% vs. 41.1%; RR 0.81 [0.59-1.12]); and one investigating conservative fluid strategies (25.4% vs. 28.4%; RR 0.90 [0.73-1.10]). Three studies assessing low tidal volume ventilation (33.1% vs. 41.9%; RR 0.79 (0.68-0.91); P=0.001), and subgroup analyses within studies investigating prone position ventilation greater than 12 hours (33.1% vs. 44.4%; RR 0.75 [0.59-0.95), P=0.02) did reveal outcome benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Among non-specialist therapeutic strategies available to general critical care units, low tidal volumes and prone position ventilation for greater than 12 hours improve mortality in ARDS.

A cohort study of 30 day mortality after NON-EMERGENCY surgery in a COVID-19 cold site.

BACKGROUND: Two million non-emergency surgeries are being cancelled globally every week due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which will have a major impact on patients and healthcare systems. METHODS: During the peak of the pandemic in the United Kingdom, we set up a multicentre cancer network amongst 14 National Health Service institutions, performing urological, thoracic, gynaecological and general surgical urgent and cancer operations at a central COVID-19 cold site. This is a cohort study of 500 consecutive patients undergoing surgery in this network. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality from COVID-19. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and post-operative complications at 30-days. RESULTS: 500 patients underwent surgery with median age 62.5 (IQR 51-71). 65% were male, 60% had a known diagnosis of cancer and 61% of surgeries were considered complex or major. No patient died from COVID-19 at 30-days. 30-day all-cause mortality was 3/500 (1%). 10 (2%) patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, 4 (1%) with confirmed laboratory diagnosis and 6 (1%) with probable COVID-19. 33/500 (7%) of patients developed Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher complications, with 1/33 (3%) occurring in a patient with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: It is safe to continue cancer and urgent surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic with appropriate service reconfiguration.

Effect of Intravenous Interferon ß-1a on Death and Days Free From Mechanical Ventilation Among Patients With Moderate to Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with high mortality. Interferon (IFN) ß-1a may prevent the underlying event of vascular leakage. Objective: To determine the efficacy and adverse events of IFN-ß-1a in patients with moderate to severe ARDS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial conducted at 74 intensive care units in 8 European countries (December 2015-December 2017) that included 301 adults with moderate to severe ARDS according to the Berlin definition. The radiological and partial pressure of oxygen, arterial (Pao2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) criteria for ARDS had to be met within a 24-hour period, and the administration of the first dose of the study drug had to occur within 48 hours of the diagnosis of ARDS. The last patient visit was on March 6, 2018. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive an intravenous injection of 10 µg of IFN-ß-1a (144 patients) or placebo (152 patients) once daily for 6 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a score combining death and number of ventilator-free days at day 28 (score ranged from -1 for death to 27 if the patient was off ventilator on the first day). There were 16 secondary outcomes, including 28-day mortality, which were tested hierarchically to control type I error. Results: Among 301 patients who were randomized (mean age, 58 years; 103 women [34.2%]), 296 (98.3%) completed the trial and were included in the primary analysis. At 28 days, the median composite score of death and number of ventilator-free days at day 28 was 10 days (interquartile range, -1 to 20) in the IFN-ß-1a group and 8.5 days (interquartile range, 0 to 20) in the placebo group (P = .82). There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the IFN-ß-1a vs placebo groups (26.4% vs 23.0%; difference, 3.4% [95% CI, -8.1% to 14.8%]; P = .53). Seventy-four patients (25.0%) experienced adverse events considered to be related to treatment during the study (41 patients [28.5%] in the IFN-ß-1a group and 33 [21.7%] in the placebo group). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with moderate or severe ARDS, intravenous IFN-ß-1a administered for 6 days, compared with placebo, resulted in no significant difference in a composite score that included death and number of ventilator-free days over 28 days. These results do not support the use of IFN-ß-1a in the management of ARDS. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02622724.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of FP-1201-lyo (intravenously administered recombinant human interferon beta-1a) and placebo in the treatment of patients with moderate or severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) results in vascular leakage, inflammation and respiratory failure. There are currently no approved pharmacological treatments for ARDS and standard of care involves treatment of the underlying cause, and supportive care. The vascular leakage may be related to reduced concentrations of local adenosine, which is involved in maintaining endothelial barrier function. Interferon (IFN) beta-1a up-regulates the cell surface ecto-5'-nucleotidase cluster of differentiation 73 (CD73), which increases adenosine levels, and IFN beta-1 may, therefore, be a potential treatment for ARDS. In a phase I/II, open-label study in 37 patients with acute lung injury (ALI)/ARDS, recombinant human IFN beta-1a was well tolerated and mortality rates were significantly lower in treated than in control patients. METHODS/DESIGN: In this phase III, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trial, the efficacy and safety of recombinant human IFN beta-1a (FP-1201-lyo) will be compared with placebo in adult patients with ARDS. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive 10 µg FP-1201-lyo or placebo administered intravenously once daily for 6 days and will be monitored for 28 days or until discharged from the intensive care unit. Follow-up visits will then take place at days 90, 180 and 360. The primary endpoint is a composite endpoint including any cause of death at 28 days and days free of mechanical ventilation within 28 days among survivors. Secondary endpoints include: all-cause mortality at 28, 90, 180 and 360 days; organ failure-free days; length of hospital stay; pharmacodynamic assessment including measurement of myxovirus resistance protein A concentrations; and measures of quality of life, respiratory and neurological function at 180 and 360 days. The estimated sample size to demonstrate a reduction in the primary outcome between groups from 30% to 15% is 300 patients, and the study will be conducted in 70-80 centers in nine countries across Europe. DISCUSSION: There are no effective specific treatments for patients with ARDS and mortality rates remain high. The results from this study will provide evidence regarding the efficacy of a potential new therapeutic agent, FP-1201-lyo, in improving the clinical course and outcome for patients with moderate/severe ARDS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Union Clinical Trials Register, no: 2014-005260-15 . Registered on 15 July 2017.

A multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of early nutritional support via the parenteral versus the enteral route in critically ill patients (CALORIES).

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is a common problem in critically ill patients in UK NHS critical care units. Early nutritional support is therefore recommended to address deficiencies in nutritional state and related disorders in metabolism. However, evidence is conflicting regarding the optimum route (parenteral or enteral) of delivery. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effect of early nutritional support via the parenteral route compared with the enteral route on mortality at 30 days and on incremental cost-effectiveness at 1 year. Secondary objectives were to compare the route of early nutritional support on duration of organ support; infectious and non-infectious complications; critical care unit and acute hospital length of stay; all-cause mortality at critical care unit and acute hospital discharge, at 90 days and 1 year; survival to 90 days and 1 year; nutritional and health-related quality of life, resource use and costs at 90 days and 1 year; and estimated lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness. DESIGN: A pragmatic, open, multicentre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with an integrated economic evaluation. SETTING: Adult general critical care units in 33 NHS hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: 2400 eligible patients. INTERVENTIONS: Five days of early nutritional support delivered via the parenteral (n = 1200) and enteral (n = 1200) route. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All-cause mortality at 30 days after randomisation and incremental net benefit (INB) (at £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year) at 1 year. RESULTS: By 30 days, 393 of 1188 (33.1%) patients assigned to receive early nutritional support via the parenteral route and 409 of 1195 (34.2%) assigned to the enteral route had died [p = 0.57; absolute risk reduction 1.15%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.65 to 4.94; relative risk 0.97 (0.86 to 1.08)]. At 1 year, INB for the parenteral route compared with the enteral route was negative at -£1320 (95% CI -£3709 to £1069). The probability that early nutritional support via the parenteral route is more cost-effective - given the data - is < 20%. The proportion of patients in the parenteral group who experienced episodes of hypoglycaemia (p = 0.006) and of vomiting (p < 0.001) was significantly lower than in the enteral group. There were no significant differences in the 15 other secondary outcomes and no significant interactions with pre-specified subgroups. LIMITATIONS: Blinding of nutritional support was deemed to be impractical and, although the primary outcome was objective, some secondary outcomes, although defined and objectively assessed, may have been more vulnerable to observer bias. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days for early nutritional support via the parenteral route compared with the enteral route among adults admitted to critical care units in England. On average, costs were higher for the parenteral route, which, combined with similar survival and quality of life, resulted in negative INBs at 1 year. FUTURE WORK: Nutritional support is a complex combination of timing, dose, duration, delivery and type, all of which may affect outcomes and costs. Conflicting evidence remains regarding optimum provision to critically ill patients. There is a need to utilise rigorous consensus methods to establish future priorities for basic and clinical research in this area. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17386141. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 28. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Sepsis biomarkers.

Sepsis is the most frequent cause of death in non-coronary intensive care units (ICUs). In the past 10 years, progress has been made in the early identification of septic patients and in their treatment and these improvements in support and therapy mean that the mortality is gradually decreasing but it still remains unacceptably high. Leaving clinical diagnosis aside, the laboratory diagnostics represent a complex range of investigations that can place significant demands on the system given the speed of response required. There are hundreds of biomarkers which could be potentially used for diagnosis and prognosis in septic patients. The main attributes of successful markers would be high sensitivity, specificity, possibility of bed-side monitoring, and financial accessibility. Only a fraction is used in routine clinical practice because many lack sufficient sensitivity or specificity. The following review gives a short overview of the current epidemiology of sepsis, its pathogenesis and state-of-the-art knowledge on the use of specific biochemical, hematological and immunological parameters in its diagnostics. Prospective approaches towards discovery of new diagnostic biomarkers have been shortly mentioned.

Trial of the route of early nutritional support in critically ill adults.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty exists about the most effective route for delivery of early nutritional support in critically ill adults. We hypothesized that delivery through the parenteral route is superior to that through the enteral route. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, randomized trial involving adults with an unplanned admission to one of 33 English intensive care units. We randomly assigned patients who could be fed through either the parenteral or the enteral route to a delivery route, with nutritional support initiated within 36 hours after admission and continued for up to 5 days. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30 days. RESULTS: We enrolled 2400 patients; 2388 (99.5%) were included in the analysis (1191 in the parenteral group and 1197 in the enteral group). By 30 days, 393 of 1188 patients (33.1%) in the parenteral group and 409 of 1195 patients (34.2%) in the enteral group had died (relative risk in parenteral group, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.08; P=0.57). There were significant reductions in the parenteral group, as compared with the enteral group, in rates of hypoglycemia (44 patients [3.7%] vs. 74 patients [6.2%]; P=0.006) and vomiting (100 patients [8.4%] vs. 194 patients [16.2%]; P<0.001). There were no significant differences between the parenteral group and the enteral group in the mean number of treated infectious complications (0.22 vs. 0.21; P=0.72), 90-day mortality (442 of 1184 patients [37.3%] vs. 464 of 1188 patients [39.1%], P=0.40), in rates of 14 other secondary outcomes, or in rates of adverse events. Caloric intake was similar in the two groups, with the target intake not achieved in most patients. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant difference in 30-day mortality associated with the route of delivery of early nutritional support in critically ill adults. (Funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research; CALORIES Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN17386141.).

Management of a mixed overdose of calcium channel blockers, ß-blockers and statins.

We describe a case of extreme mixed overdose of calcium channel blockers, ß-blockers and statins. The patient was successfully treated with aggressive resuscitation including cardiac pacing and multiorgan support, glucagon and high-dose insulin for toxicity related to calcium channel blockade and ß-blockade, and ubiquinone for treating severe presumed statin-induced rhabdomyolysis and muscle weakness.

Selective decontamination of the digestive tract in critically ill patients treated in intensive care units: a mixed-methods feasibility study (the SuDDICU study).

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are particularly susceptible to these infections. One intervention that has gained much attention in reducing HAIs is selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD). SDD involves the application of topical non-absorbable antibiotics to the oropharynx and stomach and a short course of intravenous (i.v.) antibiotics. SDD may reduce infections and improve mortality, but has not been widely adopted in the UK or internationally. Hence, there is a need to identify the reasons for low uptake and whether or not further clinical research is needed before wider implementation would be considered appropriate. OBJECTIVES: The project objectives were to (1) identify and describe the SDD intervention, (2) identify views about the evidence base, (3) identify acceptability of further research and (4) identify feasibility of further randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DESIGN: A four-stage approach involving (1) case studies of two ICUs in which SDD is delivered including observations, interviews and documentary analysis, (2) a three-round Delphi study for in-depth investigation of clinicians' views, including semi-structured interviews and two iterations of questionnaires with structured feedback, (3) a nationwide online survey of consultants in intensive care medicine and clinical microbiology and (4) semistructured interviews with international clinical triallists to identify the feasibility of further research. SETTING: Case studies were set in two UK ICUs. Other stages of this research were conducted by telephone and online with NHS staff working in ICUs. PARTICIPANTS: (1) Staff involved in SDD adoption or delivery in two UK ICUs, (2) ICU experts (intensive care consultants, clinical microbiologists, hospital pharmacists and ICU clinical leads), (3) all intensive care consultants and clinical microbiologists in the UK with responsibility for patients in ICUs were invited and (4) international triallists, selected from their research profiles in intensive care, clinical trials and/or implementation trials. INTERVENTIONS: SDD involves the application of topical non-absorbable antibiotics to the oropharynx and stomach and a short course of i.v. antibiotics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Levels of support for, or opposition to, SDD in UK ICUs; views about the SDD evidence base and about barriers to implementation; and feasibility of further SDD research (e.g. likely participation rates). RESULTS: (1) The two case studies identified complexity in the interplay of clinical and behavioural components of SDD, involving multiple staff. However, from the perspective of individual staff, delivery of SDD was regarded as simple and straightforward. (2) The Delphi study (n = 42) identified (a) specific barriers to SDD implementation, (b) uncertainty about the evidence base and (c) bimodal distributions for key variables, e.g. support for, or opposition to, SDD. (3) The national survey (n = 468) identified uncertainty about the effect of SDD on antimicrobial resistance, infection rates, mortality and cost-effectiveness. Most participants would participate in further SDD research. (4) The triallist interviews (n = 10) focused largely on the substantial challenges of conducting a large, multinational clinical effectiveness trial. CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable uncertainty about possible benefits and harms of SDD. Further large-scale clinical effectiveness trials of SDD in ICUs may be required to address these uncertainties, especially relating to antimicrobial resistance. There was a general willingness to participate in a future effectiveness RCT of SDD. However, support was not unanimous. Future research should address the barriers to acceptance and participation in any trial. There was some, but a low level of, interest in adoption of SDD, or studies to encourage implementation of SDD into practice. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 25. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The views of health care professionals about selective decontamination of the digestive tract: an international, theoretically informed interview study.

PURPOSE: Selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) as a prophylactic intervention improves hospital-acquired infection and survival rates. Uptake of SDD is low and remains controversial. This study applied the theoretical domains framework to assess intensive care unit clinicians' views about SDD in regions with limited or no adoption of SDD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants were health professionals with "decisional authority" for the adoption of SDD. Semistructured interviews were conducted as the first round of a Delphi study. Views about SDD adoption, delivery, and further SDD research were explored. Directed content analysis of interview data identified subthemes, which informed item development for subsequent Delphi rounds. Linguistic features of interview data were also explored. RESULTS: One hundred forty-one participants provided interview data. Fifty-six subthemes were identified; 46 were common across regions. Beliefs about consequences were the most widely elaborated theme. Linguistic features of how participants discussed SDD included caution expressed when discussing the risks and benefits and words such as "worry," "anxiety," and "fear" when discussing potential antibiotic resistance associated with SDD. CONCLUSIONS: We identified salient beliefs, barriers, and facilitators to SDD adoption and delivery. What participants said about SDD and the way in which they said it demonstrated the degree of clinical caution, uncertainty, and concern that SDD evokes.

The effect of intravenous interferon-beta-1a (FP-1201) on lung CD73 expression and on acute respiratory distress syndrome mortality: an open-label study.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary vascular leakage occurs early in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Mortality is high (35-45%), but no effective pharmacotherapy exists. Production of anti-inflammatory adenosine by ecto-5'-nucleotidase (CD73) helps maintain endothelial barrier function. We tested whether interferon-beta-1a (IFN-beta-1a), which increases CD73 synthesis, can reduce vascular leakage and mortality in patients with ARDS. METHODS: In ex-vivo studies, we first established that IFN-beta-1a induced CD73 up-regulation in cultured human lung tissue samples. We then tested the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of intravenous human recombinant IFN-beta-1a (FP-1201) in patients with ARDS in an open-label study (comprising dose-escalation and expansion phases). We recruited patients from eight intensive care units in the UK. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had ARDS, and were being treated with assisted ventilation. We established an optimal tolerated dose (OTD) in the first, dose-escalation phase. Once established, we gave all subsequently enrolled patients the OTD of intravenous FP-1201 for 6 days. We assessed 28-day mortality (our primary endpoint) in all patients receiving the OTD versus 28-day mortality in a group of patients who did not receive treatment (this control group comprised patients in the study but who did not receive treatment because they were screened during the safety windows after dose escalation). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00789685, and the EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT, number 2008-000140-13. FINDINGS: IFN-beta-1a increased the number of CD73-positive vessels in lung culture by four times on day 1 (p=0·04) and by 14·3 times by day 4 (p=0·004). For the clinical trial, between Feb 23, 2009, and April 7, 2011, we identified 150 patients, of whom 37 were enrolled into the trial and given treatment. The control group consisted of 59 patients who were recruited to take part in the study, but who did not receive treatment. Demographic characteristics and severity of illness did not differ between treatment and control groups. The optimal tolerated FP-1201 dose was 10 µg per day for 6 days. By day 28, 3 (8%) of 37 patients in the treatment cohort and 19 (32%) of 59 patients in the control cohort had died-thus, treatment with FP-1201 was associated with an 81% reduction in odds of 28-day mortality (odds ratio 0·19 [95% CI 0·03-0·72]; p=0·01). INTERPRETATION: FP-1201 up-regulates human lung CD73 expression, and is associated with a reduction in 28-day mortality in patients with ARDS. Our findings need to be substantiated in large, prospective randomised trials, but suggest that FP-1201 could be the first effective, mechanistically targeted, disease-specific pharmacotherapy for patients with ARDS.

Comparison of four methods for assessing the importance of attitudinal beliefs: an international Delphi study in intensive care settings.

OBJECTIVES: Behaviour change interventions often target 'important' beliefs. The literature proposes four methods for assessing importance of attitudinal beliefs: elicitation frequency, importance ratings, and strength of prediction (bivariate and multivariate). We tested congruence between these methods in a Delphi study about selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD). SDD improves infection rates among critically ill patients, yet uptake in intensive care units is low internationally. METHODS: A Delphi study involved three iterations ('rounds'). Participants were 105 intensive care clinicians in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia/New Zealand. In Round 1, semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit beliefs about delivering SDD. In Rounds 2 and 3, participants completed questionnaires, rating agreement and importance for each belief-statement (9-point Likert scales). Belief importance was assessed using elicitation frequency, mean importance ratings, and prediction of global attitude (Pearson's correlations; beta-weights). Correlations between indices were computed. RESULTS: Participants generated 14 attitudinal beliefs. Indices had adequate variation (frequencies: 4-94, mean importance ratings: 4.93-8.00, Pearson's correlations: ± 0.09 to ± 0.54, beta-weights: ± 0.01 to ± 0.30). SDD increases antibiotic resistance was the most important belief according to three methods and was ranked second by beta-weights (behind Overall, SDD benefits patients to whom it is delivered). Spearman's correlations were significant for importance ratings with frequencies and correlations. However, other indices were unrelated. The top four beliefs differed according to the measure used. CONCLUSIONS: Results provided evidence of congruence across three methods for assessing belief importance. Beta-weights were unrelated to other indices, suggesting that they may not be appropriate as the sole method. STATEMENT OF CONTRIBUTION: What is already known on this subject? Attitudinal beliefs (specific beliefs about the consequences of performing an action) are key to designing interventions to change intentions and behaviour. The literature reports four methods for assessing the importance of attitudinal beliefs: frequency of elicitation in interviews, importance ratings in questionnaires, and strength of prediction (bivariate and multivariate) of global attitude scores. The congruence between these measures of importance is not known. What does this study add? Four indices of importance were examined in a multi-professional, international study about the use of selective digestive decontamination to prevent infection in intensive care settings. Three indices were correlated with one another. Each method used to assess importance produced a different subset of the most important beliefs. Selection of the most important beliefs should use multiple assessment methods. This evidence suggests that multiple regression approaches may not be appropriate as the sole method for assessing belief importance.

Clinical stakeholders' opinions on the use of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in critically ill patients in intensive care units: an international Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: Selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) is a prophylactic antibiotic regimen that is not widely used in practice. We aimed to describe the opinions of key 'stakeholders' about the validity of the existing evidence base, likely consequences of implementation, relative importance of their opinions in influencing overall practice, likely barriers to implementation and perceptions of the requirement for further research to inform the decision about whether to embark on a further large randomised controlled trial. METHODS: This was a Delphi study informed by comprehensive framework of possible determinants of health professionals' behaviour to study Critical Care practice in four countries. There were four key stakeholder participant groups including ICU physicians, pharmacists, clinical leads, and clinical microbiologists/ infectious disease physicians. Round one comprised participant interviews and Rounds two and three were online questionnaires using Delphi method. RESULTS: In this study, 141 participants were recruited of whom 82% were retained. Participants rated themselves as knowledgeable about SDD. Antibiotic resistance was identified as the most important issue. SDD was seen as a low clinical priority but few participants reported strong opposition. There was moderate agreement that research to date has not adequately addressed concerns about antibiotic resistance and lacks generalizability. Participants indicated equipoise with regard to benefits and harms of SDD, and indicated strong support for a further randomised trial. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians have clinical equipoise about the effectiveness of SDD. Future research requires longer follow up to assess antibiotic resistance as well as greater validity/generalizability to provide definitive answers on the effectiveness of decontamination and effects on antibiotic resistance. SDD was regarded as not being a high clinical priority, which may limit future trial participation. These results have identified that further large randomised controlled trial of SDD in critical care is both warranted and appropriate.

Clinical components and associated behavioural aspects of a complex healthcare intervention: multi-methods study of selective decontamination of the digestive tract in critical care.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to identify and describe the clinical and behavioural components (e.g. the what, how, when, where and by whom) of 'selective decontamination of the digestive tract' (SDD) as routinely implemented in the care of critically ill patients. METHODS: Multi-methods study, consisting of semi-structured observations of SDD delivery, interviews with clinicians and documentary analysis, conducted in two ICUs in the UK that routinely deliver SDD. Data were analysed within-site to describe clinical and behavioural SDD components and synthesised across-sites to describe SDD in context. RESULTS: SDD delivery involved multiple behaviours extending beyond administration of its clinical components. Not all behaviours were specified in relevant clinical documentation. Overall, SDD implementation and delivery included: adoption (i.e. whether to implement SDD), operationalisation (i.e. implementing SDD into practice), provision (i.e. delivery of SDD) and surveillance (i.e. monitoring the ecological effects). Implementation involved organisational, team and individual-level behaviours. Delivery was perceived as easy by individual staff, but displayed features of complexity (including multiple interrelated behaviours, staff and contexts). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to formally outline the full spectrum of clinical and behavioural aspects of SDD. It identified points in the delivery process where complex behaviours occur and outlined how SDD can be interpreted and applied variably in practice. This comprehensive specification allows greater understanding of how this intervention could be implemented in units not currently using it, or replicated in research studies. It also identified strategies required to adopt SDD and to standardise its implementation.

'Matching Michigan': a 2-year stepped interventional programme to minimise central venous catheter-blood stream infections in intensive care units in England.

BACKGROUND: Bloodstream infections from central venous catheters (CVC-BSIs) increase morbidity and costs in intensive care units (ICUs). Substantial reductions in CVC-BSI rates have been reported using a combination of technical and non-technical interventions. METHODS: We conducted a 2-year, four-cluster, stepped non-randomised study of technical and non-technical (behavioural) interventions to prevent CVC-BSIs in adult and paediatric ICUs in England. Random-effects Poisson regression modelling was used to compare infection rates. A sample of ICUs participated in data verification. RESULTS: Of 223 ICUs in England, 215 (196 adult, 19 paediatric) submitted data on 2479 of 2787 possible months and 147 (66%) provided complete data. The exposure rate was 438 887 (404 252 adult and 34 635 paediatric) CVC-patient days. Over 20 months, 1092 CVC-BSIs were reported. Of these, 884 (81%) were ICU acquired. For adult ICUs, the mean CVC-BSI rate decreased over 20 months from 3.7 in the first cluster to 1.48 CVC-BSIs/1000 CVC-patient days (p<0.0001) for all clusters combined, and for paediatric ICUs from 5.65 to 2.89 (p=0.625). The trend for infection rate reduction did not accelerate following interventions training. CVC utilisation rates remained stable. Pre-ICU infections declined in parallel with ICU-acquired infections. Criterion-referenced case note review showed high agreement between adjudicators (κ 0.706) but wide variation in blood culture sampling rates and CVC utilisation. Generic infection control practices varied widely. CONCLUSIONS: The marked reduction in CVC-BSI rates in English ICUs found in this study is likely part of a wider secular trend for a system-wide improvement in healthcare-associated infections. Opportunities exist for greater harmonisation of infection control practices. Future studies should investigate causal mechanisms and contextual factors influencing the impact of interventions directed at improving patient care.