Stress and Burnout among Intensive Care Unit Healthcare Professionals in an Indian Tertiary Care Hospital.

Intensive care unit (ICU) healthcare professionals work under a stressful environment which can lead to burnout syndrome. We conducted this study to evaluate the prevalence of stress and burnout syndrome among doctors and other healthcare professionals in ICU. We also evaluated the individual contributing factors for stress and burnout syndrome among these ICU healthcare workers. The cross-sectional survey was conducted among the healthcare professionals (doctors, nurses, clinical pharmacists, respiratory therapists and physiotherapists) in the ICUs of multispecialty hospital in south India. The survey was conducted using well-accepted tools which included job satisfaction scale, perceived stress scale and Maslach burnout inventory-human service survey. Overall, 204 healthcare professionals completed the survey. The prevalence of high burnout in our study was 80% which included 6% (n = 12) of doctors and 69% (n = 140) of nurses. Our study showed statistically significant correlation between level of job satisfaction and the level of burnout. There was a significant correlation between the level of stress and the emotional exhaustion and depersonalization domains of Maslach burnout inventory. Critical care societies and institutional committees should step forward to draft policies and benchmarks to curb the causes of stress, reduce burnout and to increase the job satisfaction. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Lakshmikanthcharan S, Sivakumar MN, Hisham M. Stress and Burnout among Intensive Care Unit Healthcare Professionals in an Indian Tertiary Care Hospital. Indian J Crit Care Med 2019;23(10):462-466.

Practice Guidelines for Enteral Nutrition Management in Dysglycemic Critically Ill Patients: A Relook for Indian Scenario.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Intensive-care practices and settings differ for India in comparison to other countries. While guidelines are available to direct the use of enteral nutrition (EN), there are no recommendations specific to nutritional management of EN in dysglycemic patients, specific to patients in Indian critical care settings. Advisory board meetings were arranged to develop the practice guidelines specific to the Indian context, for the use of EN in dysglycemic critically ill patients and to overcome challenges in this field. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two advisory board meetings were organized to review various existing guidelines, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials and review articles, for their contextual relevance and strength. Three rounds of Delphi voting were done to arrive at consensus on certain recommendations. A systematic grading of practice guidelines by the advisory board was done based on strength of the consensus voting and reviewed supporting evidences. RESULTS: Based on the literature review, the recommendations for developing the practice guidelines were made as per the grading criteria agreed upon by the advisory board. The recommendations were to address challenges regarding prediction and assessment of dysglycemia (DG), acceptable glycemic targets in such settings, general nutritional aspects pertaining to DG nutrition, and nutrition in various superspecialty cases in critical care settings, where DG is commonly encountered. CONCLUSION: This paper summarizes the optimum EN practices for managing DG in critically ill patients. The practical solutions to overcome the challenges in this field are presented as practice guidelines at the end of each section. These guidelines are expected to provide guidance for EN management in dysglycemic critically ill patients. These guidelines also outline the model glycemic control task force and its roles in nutrition care as well as an intensive care unit DG nutrition protocol. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Mehta Y, Mithal A, Kulkarni A, Reddy BR, Sharma J, Dixit S, et al. Practice Guidelines for Enteral Nutrition Management in Dysglycemic Critically Ill Patients: A Relook for Indian Scenario. Indian J Crit Care Med 2019;23(12):594-603.

Practice Guidelines for Nutrition in Critically Ill Patients: A Relook for Indian Scenario.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Intensive-care practices and settings may differ for India in comparison to other countries. While international guidelines are available to direct the use of enteral nutrition (EN), there are no recommendations specific to Indian settings. Advisory board meetings were arranged to develop the practice guidelines specific to Indian context, for the use of EN in critically ill patients and to overcome challenges in this field. METHODS: Various existing guidelines, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, and review articles were reviewed for their contextual relevance and strength. A systematic grading of practice guidelines by advisory board was done based on strength of the supporting evidence. Wherever Indian studies were not available, references were taken from the international guidelines. RESULTS: Based on the literature review, the recommendations for developing the practice guidelines were made as per the grading criteria agreed upon by the advisory board. The recommendations were to address challenges regarding EN versus parenteral nutrition; nutrition screening and assessment; nutrition in hemodynamically unstable; route of nutrition; tube feeding and challenges; tolerance; optimum calorie-protein requirements; selection of appropriate enteral feeding formula; micronutrients and immune-nutrients; standard nutrition in hepatic, renal, and respiratory diseases and documentation of nutrition practices. CONCLUSION: This paper summarizes the optimum nutrition practices for critically ill patients. The possible solutions to overcome the challenges in this field are presented as practice guidelines at the end of each section. These guidelines are expected to provide guidance in critical care settings regarding appropriate critical-care nutrition practices and to set up Intensive Care Unit nutrition protocols.

Single cannula versus double cannula tracheostomy tubes in major oral and oropharyngeal resections.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of two types of tracheostomy tubes used in major head and neck surgery. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of prospectively collected data. The post-operative safety and adequacy of a single cannula tracheostomy tube was compared to a double cannula tracheostomy tube in patients undergoing tracheostomy during major oral and oropharyngeal resections. RESULTS: Out of 46 patients with the single cannula tube, 7 (15 per cent) experienced significant obstruction warranting immediate tube removal, while another 9 (20 per cent) needed a change of tube or tube re-insertion for continued airway protection. In contrast, out of 50 patients with the double cannula tube, the corresponding numbers were 0 (p = 0.004) and 1 (2 per cent; p = 0.007) respectively. CONCLUSION: Insertion of a double cannula (instead of a single cannula) tracheostomy tube in the course of major oral and oropharyngeal resections offers better airway protection during the post-operative period.