Prognostic evaluation of quick sequential organ failure assessment score in ICU patients with sepsis across different income settings.

BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence on association between quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and sepsis mortality in ICU patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the association between qSOFA and 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. Association of qSOFA with early (3-day), medium (28-day), late (90-day) mortality was assessed in low and lower middle income (LLMIC), upper middle income (UMIC) and high income (HIC) countries/regions. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the MOSAICS II study, an international prospective observational study on sepsis epidemiology in Asian ICUs. Associations between qSOFA at ICU admission and mortality were separately assessed in LLMIC, UMIC and HIC countries/regions. Modified Poisson regression was used to determine the adjusted relative risk (RR) of qSOFA score on mortality at 28 days with adjustments for confounders identified in the MOSAICS II study. RESULTS: Among the MOSAICS II study cohort of 4980 patients, 4826 patients from 343 ICUs and 22 countries were included in this secondary analysis. Higher qSOFA was associated with increasing 28-day mortality, but this was only observed in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) and not HIC (p = 0.220) countries/regions. Similarly, higher 90-day mortality was associated with increased qSOFA in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) only. In contrast, higher 3-day mortality with increasing qSOFA score was observed across all income countries/regions (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that qSOFA remained associated with 28-day mortality (adjusted RR 1.09 (1.00-1.18), p = 0.038) even after adjustments for covariates including APACHE II, SOFA, income country/region and administration of antibiotics within 3 h. CONCLUSIONS: qSOFA was independently associated with 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. In LLMIC and UMIC countries/regions, qSOFA was associated with early to late mortality but only early mortality in HIC countries/regions.

Critical care bed capacity in Asian countries and regions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the importance of critical care. The aim of the current study was to compare the number of adult critical care beds in relation to population size in Asian countries and regions before (2017) and during (2022) the pandemic. Methods: This observational study collected data closest to 2022 on critical care beds (intensive care units and intermediate care units) in 12 middle-income and 7 high-income economies (using the 2022-2023 World Bank classification), through a mix of methods including government sources, national critical care societies, personal contacts, and data extrapolation. Data were compared with a prior study from 2017 of the same countries and regions. Findings: The cumulative number of critical care beds per 100,000 population increased from 3.0 in 2017 to 9.4 in 2022 (p = 0.003). The median figure for middle-income economies increased from 2.6 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.7-7.8) to 6.6 (IQR 2.2-13.3), and that for high-income economies increased from 11.4 (IQR 7.3-22.8) to 13.9 (IQR 10.7-21.7). Only 3 countries did not see a rise in bed capacity. Where data were available in 2022, 10.9% of critical care beds were in single rooms (median 5.0% in middle-income and 20.3% in high-income economies), and 5.3% had negative pressure (median 0.7% in middle-income and 18.5% in high-income economies). Interpretation: Critical care bed capacity in the studied Asian countries and regions increased close to three-fold from 2017 to 2022. Much of this increase was attributed to middle-income economies, but substantial heterogeneity exists. Funding: None.

Epidemiology, Management, and Outcomes of Sepsis in ICUs among Countries of Differing National Wealth across Asia.

Rationale: Directly comparative data on sepsis epidemiology and sepsis bundle implementation in countries of differing national wealth remain sparse. Objectives: To evaluate across countries/regions of differing income status in Asia 1) the prevalence, causes, and outcomes of sepsis as a reason for ICU admission and 2) sepsis bundle (antibiotic administration, blood culture, and lactate measurement) compliance and its association with hospital mortality. Methods: A prospective point prevalence study was conducted among 386 adult ICUs from 22 Asian countries/regions. Adult ICU participants admitted for sepsis on four separate days (representing the seasons of 2019) were recruited. Measurements and Main Results: The overall prevalence of sepsis in ICUs was 22.4% (20.9%, 24.5%, and 21.3% in low-income countries/regions [LICs]/lower middle-income countries/regions [LMICs], upper middle-income countries/regions, and high-income countries/regions [HICs], respectively; P < 0.001). Patients were younger and had lower severity of illness in LICs/LMICs. Hospital mortality was 32.6% and marginally significantly higher in LICs/LMICs than HICs on multivariable generalized mixed model analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-3.37; P = 0.049). Sepsis bundle compliance was 21.5% at 1 hour (26.0%, 22.1%, and 16.2% in LICs/LMICs, upper middle-income countries/regions, and HICs, respectively; P < 0.001) and 36.6% at 3 hours (39.3%, 32.8%, and 38.5%, respectively; P = 0.001). Delaying antibiotic administration beyond 3 hours was the only element independently associated with increased mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 2.53; 95% confidence interval, 2.07-3.08; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Sepsis is a common cause of admission to Asian ICUs. Mortality remains high and is higher in LICs/LMICs after controlling for confounders. Sepsis bundle compliance remains low. Delaying antibiotic administration beyond 3 hours from diagnosis is associated with increased mortality. Clinical trial registered with www.ctri.nic.in (CTRI/2019/01/016898).

Critical Care Bed Capacity in Asian Countries and Regions.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the number of adult critical care beds in Asian countries and regions in relation to population size. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study. SETTING: Twenty-three Asian countries and regions, covering 92.1% of the continent's population. PARTICIPANTS: Ten low-income and lower-middle-income economies, five upper-middle-income economies, and eight high-income economies according to the World Bank classification. INTERVENTIONS: Data closest to 2017 on critical care beds, including ICU and intermediate care unit beds, were obtained through multiple means, including government sources, national critical care societies, colleges, or registries, personal contacts, and extrapolation of data. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Cumulatively, there were 3.6 critical care beds per 100,000 population. The median number of critical care beds per 100,000 population per country and region was significantly lower in low- and lower-middle-income economies (2.3; interquartile range, 1.4-2.7) than in upper-middle-income economies (4.6; interquartile range, 3.5-15.9) and high-income economies (12.3; interquartile range, 8.1-20.8) (p = 0.001), with a large variation even across countries and regions of the same World Bank income classification. This number was independently predicted by the World Bank income classification on multivariable analysis, and significantly correlated with the number of acute hospital beds per 100,000 population (r = 0.19; p = 0.047), the universal health coverage service coverage index (r = 0.35; p = 0.003), and the Human Development Index (r = 0.40; p = 0.001) on univariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Critical care bed capacity varies widely across Asia and is significantly lower in low- and lower-middle-income than in upper-middle-income and high-income countries and regions.