Respiratory Therapist-Driven Mechanical Ventilation Protocol Is Associated With Increased Lung Protective Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical ventilation is a common life-saving procedure but can lead to serious complications, including ARDS and oxygen toxicity. Nonadherence to lung-protective ventilation guidelines is common. We hypothesized that a respiratory therapist-driven mechanical ventilation bundle could increase adherence to lung-protective ventilation and decrease the incidence of pulmonary complications in the ICU. METHODS: A respiratory therapist-driven protocol was implemented on August 1, 2018, in all adult ICUs of a Midwestern academic tertiary center. The protocol targeted low tidal volume, adequate PEEP, limiting oxygen, adequate breathing frequency, and head of the bed elevation. Adherence to lung-protective guidelines and clinical outcomes were retrospectively observed in adult subjects admitted to the ICU and on ventilation for ≥ 24 h between January 2011 and December 2019. RESULTS: We included 666 subjects; 68.5% were in the pre-intervention group and 31.5% were in the post-intervention group. After adjusting for body mass index and intubation indication, a significant increase in overall adherence to lung-protective ventilation guidelines was observed in the post-intervention period (adjusted odds ratio 2.48, 95% CI 1.73-3.56). Fewer subjects were diagnosed with ARDS in the post-intervention group (adjusted odds ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.65) than in the pre-intervention group. There was no difference in the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia, ventilator-free days, ICU mortality, or death within 1 month of ICU discharge. CONCLUSIONS: A respiratory therapist-driven protocol increased adherence to lung-protective mechanical ventilation guidelines in the ICU and was associated with decreased ARDS incidence.

Analgesia for the treatment of acute pancreatitis: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal hospitalisations in the USA cause over US$130 billion in expenditures, and acute pancreatitis is a leading cause of these hospitalisations. Adequate pain control is one of the primary treatment goals for acute pancreatitis. Though opioids are commonly used for analgesia in these patients, there have been concerns about short-term and long-term side effects of using opioids. Recently, non-opioid medications have been studied to treat pain in patients with acute pancreatitis. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to assess the comparative efficacy of analgesic medication for non-severe, acute pancreatitis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search multiple electronic databases for randomised controlled trials that study pain management in patients with non-severe, acute pancreatitis. The intervention will be any analgesic for acute pancreatitis in the hospital setting. The comparison group will be patients who received a placebo or other active interventions for pain management. The primary outcomes of interest include pain scores and the need for supplementary analgesia. The secondary outcomes will be serious adverse events, local complications, progression to severe pancreatitis, transfer to the intensive care unit, length of hospitalisation, time to start enteral feeds, 30-day all-cause mortality and Quality of Life Scale scores. If sufficient homogeneity exists among included studies, the findings will be pooled using a traditional pairwise and network meta-analysis. The risk of bias in randomised control trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach will be used to report the certainty of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review will not involve direct contact with human subjects. The findings of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. They will give healthcare providers a better awareness of the optimal analgesic medication for pain treatment in non-severe, acute pancreatitis.