Practice and Predictors of Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders in a Tertiary-Care Intensive Care Unit in Saudi Arabia.

Introduction: The objective of this study was to describe Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) practices in a tertiary-care intensive care unit (ICU) in Saudi Arabia, and determine the predictors and outcomes of patients who had DNR orders. Methods: This retrospective cohort study was based on a prospectively collected database for a medical-surgicalIntensive CareDepartment in a tertiary-care center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (1999-2017). We compared patients who had DNR orders during the ICU stay with those with "full code." The primary outcome was hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included ICU mortality, tracheostomy, duration of mechanical ventilation, and length of stay in the ICU and hospital. Results: Among 24790 patients admitted to the ICU over the 19-year study period, 3217 (13%) had DNR orders during the ICU stay. Compared to patients with "full code," patients with DNR orders were older (median 67 years [Q1, Q3: 55, 76] versus 57 years [Q1, Q3: 33, 71], p < 0.0001), were more likely to be females (43% versus 38%, p < 0.0001), had worse premorbid functional status (WHO performance status scores 4-5: 606[18.9%] versus 1894[8.8%], p < 0.0001), higher prevalence of comorbid conditions, and higher APACHE II score (median 28 [Q1, Q3: 23, 34] versus 19 [Q1, Q3: 13, 25], p < 0.0001) and were more likely to be mechanically ventilated (83% versus 55%, p < 0.0001). Patients had DNR orders were more likely to die in the ICU (67.8% versus 8.5%, p < 0.0001) and hospital (82.4% versus 18.1%, p < 0.0001). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, the following were associated with an increased likelihood of DNR status: increasing age (odds ratio (OR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.02), higher APACHE II score (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.08-1.10), and worse WHO performance status score. Patients admitted in recent years (2012-2017 versus 2002-2005) were less likely to have DNR orders (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.32-0.39, p < 0.0001). Patients with DNR orders had higher ICU mortality, more tracheostomies, longer duration of mechanical ventilation and length of ICU stay compared to patients with with "full code" but they had shorter length of hospital stay. Conclusion: In a tertiary-care hospital in Saudi Arabia, 13% of critically ill patients had DNR orders during ICU stay. This study identified several predictors of DNR orders, including the severity of illness and poor premorbid functional status.

Combination of norepinephrine with phenylephrine versus norepinephrine with vasopressin in critically ill patients with septic shock: A retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of patients with septic shock treated with a combination of norepinephrine with phenylephrine compared to norepinephrine with vasopressin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including adults admitted between 2002 and 2017 with septic shock according to the Sepsis 3 criteria. We compared outcomes of patients treated with norepinephrine with phenylephrine to those treated with norepinephrine with vasopressin. Multivariate analysis was carried out to evaluate the association of norepinephrine with phenylephrine compared to norepinephrine with vasopressin with in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 158 patients with septic shock were treated with norepinephrine with phenylephrine and 129 with norepinephrine with vasopressin. Crude in-hospital mortality was not different between the two groups [91/158 (57.6%) versus 80/129 (62.5%), p = 0.40]. There was also no difference in ICU length of stay or hospital length of stay. Multivariate analysis demonstrated no significant association of norepinephrine with phenylephrine with in-hospital mortality compared to norepinephrine with vasopressin (OR 0.62 (95% confidence interval 0.31, 1.23, p = 0.17). CONCLUSION: Phenylephrine used as a second-line vasoactive agent combined with norepinephrine may be a reasonable option compared to vasopressin. However, this finding needs to be validated in a randomized controlled trial.

Point prevalence of delirium among critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia: A multicenter observational study.

Background: Delirium in critically ill patients is independently associated with poor clinical outcomes. There is a scarcity of published data on the prevalence of delirium among critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we sought to determine, in a multicenter fashion, the prevalence of delirium in critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia and explore associated risk factors. Methods: A cross-sectional point prevalence study was conducted on January 28, 2020, at 14 intensive care units (ICUs) across 3 universities and 11 other tertiary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Delirium was screened once using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist. We excluded patients who were unable to participate in a valid delirium assessment, patients admitted with traumatic brain injury, and patients with documented dementia in their medical charts. Results: Of the 407 screened ICU patients, 233 patients were enrolled and 45.9% were diagnosed with delirium. The prevalence was higher in mechanically ventilated patients compared to patients not mechanically ventilated (57.5% vs. 33.6%; P < 0.001). In a multivariate model, risk factors independently associated with delirium included age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.021; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.04; P = 0.008), mechanical ventilation (AOR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.34-4.28; P = 0.003), and higher severity of illness (AOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.001-1.021; P = 0.026). Conclusion: In our study, delirium remains a prevalent complication, with distinct risk factors. Further studies are necessary to investigate long-term outcomes of delirium in critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia.