Nurse-to-Nurse Familiarity and Mortality in the Critically Ill: A Multicenter Observational Study.

Rationale: Nurse-to-nurse familiarity at work should strengthen the components of teamwork and enhance its efficiency. However, its impact on patient outcomes in critical care remains poorly investigated. Objectives: To explore the role of nurse-to-nurse familiarity on inpatient deaths during ICU stay. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study in eight adult academic ICUs between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2016. Measurements and Main Results: Nurse-to-nurse familiarity was measured across day and night 12-hour daily shifts as the mean number of previous collaborations between each nursing team member during previous shifts within the given ICU (suboptimal if <50). Primary outcome was a shift with at least one inpatient death, excluding death of patients with a decision to forego life-sustaining therapy. A multiple modified Poisson regression was computed to identify the determinants of mortality per shift, taking into account ICU, patient characteristics, patient-to-nurse and patient-to-assistant nurse ratios, nurse experience length, and workload. A total of 43,479 patients were admitted, of whom 3,311 (8%) died. The adjusted model showed a lower risk of a shift with mortality when nurse-to-nurse familiarity increased in the shift (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval per 10 shifts, 0.82-0.98; P = 0.012). Low nurse-to-nurse familiarity during the shift combined with suboptimal patient-to-nurse and patient-to-assistant nurse ratios (suboptimal if >2.5 and >4, respectively) were associated with increased risk of shift with mortality (relative risk, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-2.96; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Shifts with low nurse-to-nurse familiarity were associated with an increased risk of patient deaths.

Respiratory challenges and ventilatory management in different types of acute brain-injured patients.

Acute brain injury (ABI) covers various clinical entities that may require invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) in the intensive care unit (ICU). The goal of MV, which is to protect the lung and the brain from further injury, may be difficult to achieve in the most severe forms of lung or brain injury. This narrative review aims to address the respiratory issues and ventilator management, specific to ABI patients in the ICU.

Neurological and respiratory effects of lung protective ventilation in acute brain injury patients without lung injury: brain vent, a single centre randomized interventional study.

INTRODUCTION: Lung protective ventilation (LPV) comprising low tidal volume (VT) and high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) may compromise cerebral perfusion in acute brain injury (ABI). In patients with ABI, we investigated whether LPV is associated with increased intracranial pressure (ICP) and/or deranged cerebral autoregulation (CA), brain compensatory reserve and oxygenation. METHODS: In a prospective, crossover study, 30 intubated ABI patients with normal ICP and no lung injury were randomly assigned to receive low VT [6 ml/kg/predicted (pbw)]/at either low (5 cmH2O) or high PEEP (12 cmH2O). Between each intervention, baseline ventilation (VT 9 ml/kg/pbw and PEEP 5 cmH2O) were resumed. The safety limit for interruption of the intervention was ICP above 22 mmHg for more than 5 min. Airway and transpulmonary pressures were continuously monitored to assess respiratory mechanics. We recorded ICP by using external ventricular drainage or a parenchymal probe. CA and brain compensatory reserve were derived from ICP waveform analysis. RESULTS: We included 27 patients (intracerebral haemorrhage, traumatic brain injury, subarachnoid haemorrhage), of whom 6 reached the safety limit, which required interruption of at least one intervention. For those without intervention interruption, the ICP change from baseline to "low VT/low PEEP" and "low VT/high PEEP" were 2.2 mmHg and 2.3 mmHg, respectively, and considered clinically non-relevant. None of the interventions affected CA or oxygenation significantly. Interrupted events were associated with high baseline ICP (p < 0.001), low brain compensatory reserve (p < 0.01) and mechanical power (p < 0.05). The transpulmonary driving pressure was 5 ± 2 cmH2O in both interventions. Partial arterial pressure of carbon dioxide was kept in the range 34-36 mmHg by adjusting the respiratory rate, hence, changes in carbon dioxide were not associated with the increase in ICP. CONCLUSIONS: The present study found that most patients did not experience any adverse effects of LPV, neither on ICP nor CA. However, in almost a quarter of patients, the ICP rose above the safety limit for interrupting the interventions. Baseline ICP, brain compensatory reserve, and mechanical power can predict a potentially deleterious effect of LPV and can be used to personalize ventilator settings. Trial registration NCT03278769 . Registered September 12, 2017.

Prone Position in COVID-19 and -COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: An International Multicenter Observational Comparative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Prone position is used in acute respiratory distress syndrome and in coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, it is unclear how responders may be identified and whether an oxygenation response improves outcome. The objective of this study was to quantify the response to prone position, describe the differences between coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute respiratory distress syndrome, and explore variables associated with survival. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational, multicenter, international cohort study. SETTING: Seven ICUs in Italy, United Kingdom, and France. PATIENTS: Three hundred seventy-six adults (220 coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome and 156 acute respiratory distress syndrome). INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Preproning, a greater proportion of coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome patients had severe disease (53% vs 40%), worse Pao2/Fio2 (13.0 kPa [interquartile range, 10.5-15.5 kPa] vs 14.1 kPa [interquartile range, 10.5-18.6 kPa]; p = 0.017) but greater compliance (38 mL/cm H2O [interquartile range, 27-53 mL/cm H2O] vs 31 mL/cm H2O [interquartile range, 21-37 mL/cm H2O]; p < 0.001). Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome had a longer median time from intubation to prone position (2.0 d [interquartile range, 0.7-5.0 d] vs 1.0 d [interquartile range, 0.5-2.9 d]; p = 0.03). The proportion of responders, defined by an increase in Pao2/Fio2 greater than or equal to 2.67 kPa (20 mm Hg), upon proning, was similar between acute respiratory distress syndrome and coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome (79% vs 76%; p = 0.5). Responders had earlier prone position (1.4 d [interquartile range, 0.7-4.2 d] vs 2.5 d [interquartile range, 0.8-6.2 d]; p = 0.06)]. Prone position less than 24 hours from intubation achieved greater improvement in oxygenation (11 kPa [interquartile range, 4-21 kPa] vs 7 kPa [interquartile range, 2-13 kPa]; p = 0.002). The variables independently associated with the "responder" category were Pao2/Fio2 preproning (odds ratio, 0.89 kPa-1 [95% CI, 0.85-0.93 kPa-1]; p < 0.001) and interval between intubation and proning (odds ratio, 0.94 d-1 [95% CI, 0.89-0.99 d-1]; p = 0.019). The overall mortality was 45%, with no significant difference observed between acute respiratory distress syndrome and coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome. Variables independently associated with mortality included age (odds ratio, 1.03 yr-1 [95% CI, 1.01-1.05 yr-1]; p < 0.001); interval between hospital admission and proning (odds ratio, 1.04 d-1 [95% CI, 1.002-1.084 d-1]; p = 0.047); and change in Pao2/Fio2 on proning (odds ratio, 0.97 kPa-1 [95% CI, 0.95-0.99 kPa-1]; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Prone position, particularly when delivered early, achieved a significant oxygenation response in ~80% of coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory distress syndrome, similar to acute respiratory distress syndrome. This response was independently associated with improved survival.

Prone position in COVID 19-associated acute respiratory failure.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Prone position has been widely used in the COVID-19 pandemic, with an extension of its use in patients with spontaneous breathing ('awake prone'). We herein propose a review of the current literature on prone position in mechanical ventilation and while spontaneous breathing in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia or COVID-19 ARDS. RECENT FINDINGS: A literature search retrieved 70 studies separating whether patient was intubated (24 studies) or nonintubated (46 studies). The outcomes analyzed were intubation rate, mortality and respiratory response to prone. In nonintubated patient receiving prone position, the main finding was mortality reduction in ICU and outside ICU setting. SUMMARY: The final results of the several randomized control trials completed or ongoing are needed to confirm the trend of these results. In intubated patients, observational studies showed that responders to prone in terms of oxygenation had a better survival than nonresponders.

Early prone positioning in acute respiratory distress syndrome related to COVID-19: a propensity score analysis from the multicentric cohort COVID-ICU network-the ProneCOVID study.

BACKGROUND: Delaying time to prone positioning (PP) may be associated with higher mortality in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We evaluated the use and the impact of early PP on clinical outcomes in intubated patients hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs) for COVID-19. METHODS: All intubated patients with ARDS due to COVID-19 were involved in a secondary analysis from a prospective multicenter cohort study of COVID-ICU network including 149 ICUs across France, Belgium and Switzerland. Patients were followed-up until Day-90. The primary outcome was survival at Day-60. Analysis used a Cox proportional hazard model including a propensity score. RESULTS: Among 2137 intubated patients, 1504 (70.4%) were placed in PP during their ICU stay and 491 (23%) during the first 24 h following ICU admission. One hundred and eighty-one patients (36.9%) of the early PP group had a PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 150 mmHg when prone positioning was initiated. Among non-early PP group patients, 1013 (47.4%) patients had finally been placed in PP within a median delay of 3 days after ICU admission. Day-60 mortality in non-early PP group was 34.2% versus 39.3% in the early PP group (p = 0.038). Day-28 and Day-90 mortality as well as the need for adjunctive therapies was more important in patients with early PP. After propensity score adjustment, no significant difference in survival at Day-60 was found between the two study groups (HR 1.34 [0.96-1.68], p = 0.09 and HR 1.19 [0.998-1.412], p = 0.053 in complete case analysis or in multiple imputation analysis, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In a large multicentric international cohort of intubated ICU patients with ARDS due to COVID-19, PP has been used frequently as a main treatment. In this study, our data failed to show a survival benefit associated with early PP started within 24 h after ICU admission compared to PP after day-1 for all COVID-19 patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation regardless of their severity.

Lung ultrasound response to awake prone positioning predicts the need for intubation in patients with COVID-19 induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (APP) reduces the intubation rate in COVID-19 patients treated by high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). However, the lung aeration response to APP has not been addressed. We aimed to explore the lung aeration response to APP by lung ultrasound (LUS). METHODS: This two-center, prospective, observational study enrolled patients with COVID-19-induced acute hypoxemic respiratory failure treated by HFNC and APP. LUS score was recorded 5-10 min before, 1 h after APP, and 5-10 min after supine in the first APP session within the first three days. The primary outcome was LUS score changes in the first three days. Secondary outcomes included changes in SpO2/FiO2 ratio, respiratory rate and ROX index (SpO2/FiO2/respiratory rate) related to APP, and the rate of treatment success (patients who avoided intubation). RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were enrolled. LUS score decreased from 20 (interquartile range [IQR] 19-24) to 19 (18-21) (p < 0.001) after the first APP session, and to 19 (18-21) (p < 0.001) after three days. Compared to patients with treatment failure (n = 20, 28%), LUS score reduction after the first three days in patients with treatment success (n = 51) was greater (- 2.6 [95% confidence intervals - 3.1 to - 2.0] vs 0 [- 1.2 to 1.2], p = 0.001). A decrease in dorsal LUS score > 1 after the first APP session was associated with decreased risk for intubation (Relative risk 0.25 [0.09-0.69]). APP daily duration was correlated with LUS score reduction in patients with treatment success, especially in dorsal lung zones (r = - 0.76; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 and treated by HFNC, APP reduced LUS score. The reduction in dorsal LUS scores after APP was associated with treatment success. The longer duration on APP was correlated with greater lung aeration. Trial registration This study was prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov on April 22, 2021. Identification number NCT04855162 .

Prone Positioning and Neuromuscular Blocking Agents as Adjunctive Therapies in Mechanically Ventilated Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) and prone position (PP) are two major adjunctive therapies that can improve outcome in moderate-to-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. NMBA should be used once lung-protective mechanical ventilation has been set, for 48 hours or less and as a continuous intravenous infusion. PP should be used as early as possible for long sessions; in COVID-19 its use has exploded. In nonintubated patients, PP might reduce the rate of intubation but not mortality. The goal of this article is to perform a narrative review on the pathophysiological rationale, the clinical effects, and the clinical use and recommendations of both NMBA and PP.

Prior Exposure to Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers in Patients With Septic Shock to Individualize Mean Arterial Pressure Target? A Post Hoc Analysis of the Sepsis and Mean Arterial Pressure (SEPSISPAM) Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Individualizing a target mean arterial pressure is challenging during the initial resuscitation of patients with septic shock. The Sepsis and Mean Arterial Pressure (SEPSISPAM) trial suggested that targeting high mean arterial pressure might reduce the occurrence of acute kidney injury among those included patients with a past history of chronic hypertension. We investigated whether the class of antihypertensive medications used before the ICU stay in chronic hypertensive patients was associated with the severity of acute kidney injury occurring after inclusion, according to mean arterial pressure target. DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of the SEPSISPAM trial. SETTING: The primary outcome was the occurrence of severe acute kidney injury during the ICU stay defined as kidney disease improving global outcome stage 2 or higher. Secondary outcomes were mortality at day 28 and mortality at day 90. PATIENTS: All patients with chronic hypertension included in SEPSISPAM with available antihypertensive medications data in the hospitalization report were included. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We analyzed 297 patients. Severe acute kidney injury occurred in 184 patients, without difference according to pre-ICU exposure to antihypertensive medications. Patients with pre-ICU exposure to angiotensin II receptor blockers had significantly less severe acute kidney injury in the high mean arterial pressure target group (adjusted odd ratio 0.24 with 95% CI [0.09-0.66]; p = 0.006). No statistically significant association was found after adjustment for pre-ICU exposure to antihypertensive medications and survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that patients with septic shock and chronic hypertension treated with angiotensin II receptor blocker may benefit from a high mean arterial pressure target to reduce the risk of acute kidney injury occurrence.

Expert consensus statements for the management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure using a Delphi method.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. METHODS: Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable). RESULTS: Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. CONCLUSION: Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Lung- and Diaphragm-Protective Ventilation.

Mechanical ventilation can cause acute diaphragm atrophy and injury, and this is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Although the importance and impact of lung-protective ventilation is widely appreciated and well established, the concept of diaphragm-protective ventilation has recently emerged as a potential complementary therapeutic strategy. This Perspective, developed from discussions at a meeting of international experts convened by PLUG (the Pleural Pressure Working Group) of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, outlines a conceptual framework for an integrated lung- and diaphragm-protective approach to mechanical ventilation on the basis of growing evidence about mechanisms of injury. We propose targets for diaphragm protection based on respiratory effort and patient-ventilator synchrony. The potential for conflict between diaphragm protection and lung protection under certain conditions is discussed; we emphasize that when conflicts arise, lung protection must be prioritized over diaphragm protection. Monitoring respiratory effort is essential to concomitantly protect both the diaphragm and the lung during mechanical ventilation. To implement lung- and diaphragm-protective ventilation, new approaches to monitoring, to setting the ventilator, and to titrating sedation will be required. Adjunctive interventions, including extracorporeal life support techniques, phrenic nerve stimulation, and clinical decision-support systems, may also play an important role in selected patients in the future. Evaluating the clinical impact of this new paradigm will be challenging, owing to the complexity of the intervention. The concept of lung- and diaphragm-protective ventilation presents a new opportunity to potentially improve clinical outcomes for critically ill patients.

Impact of take-home messages written into slide presentations delivered during lectures on the retention of messages and the residents' knowledge: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Lectures with slide presentations are widely used to teach evidence-based medicine to large groups. Take-home messages (THMs) are poorly identified and recollected by students. We investigated whether an instruction to list THMs in written form on slides would improve the retention thereof by residents, and the residents' level of knowledge, 1 month after lectures. METHODS: Prospective blinded randomized controlled study was conducted. Twelve lectures (6 control and 6 intervention lectures) were delivered to 73 residents. For the intervention lectures, the lecturers were instructed to incorporate clear written THMs into their slide presentations. The outcomes were ability of resident to recollect THMs delivered during a lecture (as assessed by accordance rate between the lecturers' and residents' THMs) and knowledge (as assessed by multiple choice questions (MCQs)). RESULTS: Data for 3738 residents' THMs and 3410 MCQs were analyzed. The intervention did not significantly increase the number of THMs written on slides (77% (n = 20/26), 95% CI 56-91 vs 64% (n = 18/28), 95% CI 44-81, p = 0.31) nor THMs retention (13% (n = 238/1791), 95% CI 12-15 vs 17% (n = 326/1947), 95% 15-18, p = 0.40) nor knowledge (63.8 ± 26.2 vs 61.1 ± 31.4 /100 points, p = 0.75). In multivariable analyses performed with all THMs written on slides from the two groups, a superior knowledge was associated with notetaking during lectures (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.41-2.51) and THMs retention (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.54-3.04); and THMs retention was associated with written THMs (OR 2.94, 95% CI 2.20-3.93). CONCLUSIONS: In lectures delivered to residents, a third of the THMs were not in written form. An intervention based on an explicit instruction to lecturers to provide THMs in written form in their slide presentations did not result in increased use of written THMs into the slide presentation or improvement of the THMs retention or level of knowledge. However, we showed that there was a strong positive association between writing THMs on a slide, retention of THMs and residents' knowledge. Further researches are needed to assess interventions to increase written THMs in lectures by faculty. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01795651 (Fev 21, 2013).

Enteral versus parenteral early nutrition in ventilated adults with shock: a randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group study (NUTRIREA-2).

BACKGROUND: Whether the route of early feeding affects outcomes of patients with severe critical illnesses is controversial. We hypothesised that outcomes were better with early first-line enteral nutrition than with early first-line parenteral nutrition. METHODS: In this randomised, controlled, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group study (NUTRIREA-2 trial) done at 44 French intensive-care units (ICUs), adults (18 years or older) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and vasopressor support for shock were randomly assigned (1:1) to either parenteral nutrition or enteral nutrition, both targeting normocaloric goals (20-25 kcal/kg per day), within 24 h after intubation. Randomisation was stratified by centre using permutation blocks of variable sizes. Given that route of nutrition cannot be masked, blinding of the physicians and nurses was not feasible. Patients receiving parenteral nutrition could be switched to enteral nutrition after at least 72 h in the event of shock resolution (no vasopressor support for 24 consecutive hours and arterial lactate <2 mmol/L). The primary endpoint was mortality on day 28 after randomisation in the intention-to-treat-population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01802099. FINDINGS: After the second interim analysis, the independent Data Safety and Monitoring Board deemed that completing patient enrolment was unlikely to significantly change the results of the trial and recommended stopping patient recruitment. Between March 22, 2013, and June 30, 2015, 2410 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned; 1202 to the enteral group and 1208 to the parenteral group. By day 28, 443 (37%) of 1202 patients in the enteral group and 422 (35%) of 1208 patients in the parenteral group had died (absolute difference estimate 2·0%; [95% CI -1·9 to 5·8]; p=0·33). Cumulative incidence of patients with ICU-acquired infections did not differ between the enteral group (173 [14%]) and the parenteral group (194 [16%]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·89 [95% CI 0·72-1·09]; p=0·25). Compared with the parenteral group, the enteral group had higher cumulative incidences of patients with vomiting (406 [34%] vs 246 [20%]; HR 1·89 [1·62-2·20]; p<0·0001), diarrhoea (432 [36%] vs 393 [33%]; 1·20 [1·05-1·37]; p=0·009), bowel ischaemia (19 [2%] vs five [<1%]; 3·84 [1·43-10·3]; p=0·007), and acute colonic pseudo-obstruction (11 [1%] vs three [<1%]; 3·7 [1·03-13·2; p=0·04). INTERPRETATION: In critically ill adults with shock, early isocaloric enteral nutrition did not reduce mortality or the risk of secondary infections but was associated with a greater risk of digestive complications compared with early isocaloric parenteral nutrition. FUNDING: La Roche-sur-Yon Departmental Hospital and French Ministry of Health.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Interventions to Increase Utilization of Prone Positioning for Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: Despite strong evidence supporting proning in acute respiratory distress syndrome, few eligible patients receive it. This study determines the cost-effectiveness of interventions to increase utilization of proning for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. DESIGN: We created decision trees to model severe acute respiratory distress syndrome from ICU admission through death (societal perspective) and hospital discharge (hospital perspective). We assumed patients received low tidal volume ventilation. We used short-term outcome estimates from the PROSEVA trial and longitudinal cost and benefit data from cohort studies. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, we used distributions for each input that included the fifth to 95th percentile of its CI. SETTING: ICUs that care for patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. SUBJECTS: Patients with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: The implementation of a hypothetical intervention to increase the appropriate utilization of prone positioning. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the societal perspective model, an intervention that increased proning utilization from 16% to 65% yielded an additional 0.779 (95% CI, 0.088-1.714) quality-adjusted life years at an additional long-term cost of $31,156 (95% CI, -$158 to $92,179) (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $38,648 per quality-adjusted life year [95% CI, $1,695-$98,522]). If society was willing to pay $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year, any intervention costing less than $51,328 per patient with moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome would represent good value. From a hospital perspective, the intervention yielded 0.072 (95% CI, 0.008-0.147) more survivals-to-discharge at a cost of $5,242 (95% CI, -$19,035 to $41,019) (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $44,615 per extra survival [95% CI, -$250,912 to $558,222]). If hospitals were willing to pay $100,000 per survival-to-discharge, any intervention costing less than $5,140 per patient would represent good value. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that increase utilization of proning would be cost-effective from both societal and hospital perspectives under many plausible cost and benefit assumptions.

Disagreement Between Clinicians and Score in Decision-Making Capacity of Critically Ill Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the assessment of decision-making capacity of ICU patients by attending clinicians (physicians, nurses, and residents) with a capacity score measured by the Mini-Mental Status Examination, completed by Aid to Capacity Evaluation if necessary. The primary outcome was agreement between physicians' assessments and the score. Secondary outcomes were agreement between nurses' or residents' assessments and the score and identification of factors associated with disagreement. DESIGN: A 1-day prevalence study. SETTING: Nineteen ICUs in France. SUBJECTS: All patients hospitalized in the ICU on the study day and the attending clinicians. INTERVENTIONS: The decision-making capacity of patients was assessed by the attending clinicians and independently by an observer using the score. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 206 patients were assessed by 213 attending clinicians (57 physicians, 97 nurses, and 59 residents). Physicians designated more patients as having decision-making capacity (n = 92/206 [45%]) than score (n = 34/206 [17%]; absolute difference 28% [95% CI, 20-37%]; p = 0.001). There was a high disagreement between assessments of all clinicians and score (Kappa coefficient 0.39 [95% CI, 0.29-0.50] for physicians; 0.39 [95% CI, 0.27-0.52] for nurses; and 0.46 [95% CI, 0.35-0.58] for residents). The main factor associated with disagreement was a Glasgow Coma Scale score between 10 and 15 (odds ratio, 2.92 [1.18-7.19], p = 0.02 for physicians; 4.97 [1.50-16.45], p = 0.01 for nurses; and 3.39 [1.12-10.29], p = 0.03 for residents) without differentiating between the Glasgow Coma Scale scores from 10 to 15. CONCLUSIONS: The decision-making capacity of ICU patients was largely overestimated by all attending clinicians as compared with a score. The main factor associated with disagreement was a Glasgow Coma Scale score between 10 and 15, suggesting that clinicians confused consciousness with decision-making capacity.

Physiological Effect of Prone Position in Children with Severe Bronchiolitis: A Randomized Cross-Over Study (BRONCHIO-DV).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of the prone position on physiological measures, including inspiratory effort, metabolic cost of breathing, and neural drive to the diaphragm as compared with the supine position in infants with severe bronchiolitis requiring noninvasive ventilation. STUDY DESIGN: Fourteen infants, median age 33 days (IQR [first and third quartiles], 25-58) were randomized to receive 7 cmH2O continuous positive airway pressure for 1 hour in the prone position or in the supine position, which was followed by cross-over to the supine position and the prone position for 1 hour, respectively. Flow, esophageal, airway, gastric, and transdiaphragmatic pressures, as well as electrical activity of the diaphragm were simultaneously recorded. The modified Wood clinical asthma score was also assessed. RESULTS: Median esophageal pressure-time product per minute was significantly lower in the prone position than in the supine position (227 cmH2O*s/minute [IQR, 156-282] cmH2O*s/minute vs 353 cmH2O*s/minute [IQR, 249-386 cmH2O*s/minute]; P = .048), as were the modified Wood clinical asthma score (P = .033) and electrical activity of the diaphragm (P = .006). The neuromechanical efficiency of the diaphragm, as assessed by transdiaphramagtic pressure to electrical activity of the diaphragm swing ratio, was significantly higher in the prone position than in the supine position (1.1 cmH2O/µV [IQR, 0.9-1.3 cmH2O/µV] vs 0.7 cmH2O/µV [IQR, 0.6-1.2 cmH2O/µV], respectively; P = .022). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a benefit of the prone position for infants with severe bronchiolitis requiring noninvasive ventilation by significantly decreasing the inspiratory effort and the metabolic cost of breathing. Further studies are needed to evaluate the potential impact of these physiological findings in a larger population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02602678.

Estimation of Extra Length of Stay Attributable to Hospital-Acquired Infections in Adult ICUs Using a Time-Dependent Multistate Model.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to estimate the length of stay of patients with hospital-acquired infections hospitalized in ICUs using a multistate model. DESIGN: Active prospective surveillance of hospital-acquired infection from January 1, 1995, to December 31, 2012. SETTING: Twelve ICUs at the University of Lyon hospital (France). PATIENTS: Adult patients age greater than or equal to 18 years old and hospitalized greater than or equal to 2 days were included in the surveillance. All hospital-acquired infections (pneumonia, bacteremia, and urinary tract infection) occurring during ICU stay were collected. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The competitive risks of in-hospital death, transfer, or discharge were considered in estimating the change in length of stay due to infection(s), using a multistate model, time of infection onset. Thirty-three thousand four-hundred forty-nine patients were involved, with an overall hospital-acquired infection attack rate of 15.5% (n = 5,176). Mean length of stay was 27.4 (± 18.3) days in patients with hospital-acquired infection and 7.3 (± 7.6) days in patients without hospital-acquired infection. A multistate model-estimated mean found an increase in length of stay by 5.0 days (95% CI, 4.6-5.4 d). The extra length of stay increased with the number of infected site and was higher for patients discharged alive from ICU. No increased length of stay was found for patients presenting late-onset hospital-acquired infection, more than the 25th day after admission. CONCLUSIONS: An increase length of stay of 5 days attributable to hospital-acquired infection in the ICU was estimated using a multistate model in a prospective surveillance study in France. The dose-response relationship between the number of hospitalacquired infection and length of stay and the impact of early-stage hospital-acquired infection may strengthen attention for clinicians to focus interventions on early preventions of hospital-acquired infection in ICU.

Genome data on the extinct Bison schoetensacki establish it as a sister species of the extant European bison (Bison bonasus).

BACKGROUND: The European bison (Bison bonasus), now found in Europe and the Caucasus, has been proposed to originate either from the extinct steppe/extant American bison lineage or from the extinct Bison schoetensacki lineage. Bison schoetensacki remains are documented in Eurasian Middle Pleistocene sites, but their presence in Upper Pleistocene sites has been questioned. Despite extensive genetic studies carried out on the steppe and European bison, no remains from the fossil record morphologically identified as Bison schoetensacki has been analyzed up to now. RESULTS: In this paper, we analyzed a 36,000-year-old Bison schoetensaki bone sample from the Siréjol cave (France) and a cave hyena coprolite (fossilized feces) found in a nearby cave and containing large amounts of Bovinae DNA. We show that the Bovinae mitochondrial DNA sequences from both samples, including a complete mitochondrial genome sequence, belong to a clade recently reported in the literature. This clade only includes ancient bison specimens without taxonomic identification and displays a sister relationship with the extant European bison. The genetic proximity of Bison schoetensacki with specimens from this clade is corroborated by the analysis of nuclear DNA single nucleotide polymorphisms. CONCLUSIONS: This work provides genetic evidence supporting the continuing presence of Bison schoetensacki up to the Upper Pleistocene. Bison schoetensacki turns out to be a sister species of Bison bonasus, excluding the steppe bison Bison priscus as a direct ancestor of the European bison.