Awareness and Management of Dysphagia in Dutch Intensive Care Units: A Nationwide Survey.

Dysphagia is a common problem in the intensive care unit (ICU), yet no national guidelines on dysphagia prevention, screening, and management exist. We performed a survey to learn which strategies are commonly being used in Dutch ICUs. A survey was developed based on current literature and experts' opinions. It comprised questions regarding hospital and ICU characteristics, perceived prevalence and importance of dysphagia, screening strategies, modalities used to prevent aspiration, and interventions used to improve swallowing function. It was sent to all 90 non-pediatric ICUs in The Netherlands. 67 of 90 addressed ICUs (74%) replied to our survey. A median relevance score of 4 (IQR 4-5) out of 5 was given to the topic of dysphagia. In 22% and 45% of ICUs, patients were always screened for dysphagia after extubation or tracheotomy, respectively. The water swallow test was always part of the work-up in 88% of ICUs. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing was used occasionally in 60% of ICUs, versus videofluoroscopic swallowing study in 25%. In 49% of ICUs, no standardized active rehabilitation protocol for dysphagia existed. In the remaining 51%, swallowing exercises were always part of standard rehabilitation, occasionally supplemented by electrical stimulation or surface-EMG biofeedback training in 6 and 10%, respectively. Most Dutch ICUs do not regularly screen for dysphagia and almost half do not seem to have a diagnostic, treatment, or rehabilitation protocol, despite recognizing it as a significant and relatively frequent problem in the ICU with potentially serious patient consequences.

The clinical value of routine chest radiographs in the first 24 hours after cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Chest radiographs (CXRs) are obtained frequently in the intensive care unit (ICU). Whether these CXRs should be performed routinely or on clinical indication only is often debated. The aim of our study was to investigate the incidence and clinical significance of abnormalities found on routine postoperative CXRs in cardiac surgery patients and whether a restricted use of CXRs would influence the number of significant findings. METHODS: We prospectively included all consecutive patients who underwent cardiac surgery during a 2-month period. Two or three CXRs were performed in the first 24 hours of ICU stay. After ICU admission and after drain removal, a clinical assessment was performed before a CXR was obtained. All CXR abnormalities were noted and it was also noted whether they led to an intervention. For the admission CXR and the drain removal CXR, a comparison was made between CXRs clinically indicated by the physician and those not clinically indicated. RESULTS: Two hundred fourteen patients were included. The majority of patients underwent coronary arterial bypass grafting (60%), heart valve surgery (21%), or a combination of these (14%). In total, 534 CXRs were performed (2.5 per patient). Abnormalities were found on 179 CXRs (33.5%) and 13 CXR results led to an intervention (2.4%). The association between clinically indicated CXRs and the presence of CXR abnormalities was poor. For 32 (10%) of the 321 admission and drain removal CXRs, clinical indications were stated by the physician beforehand. If these CXRs would not have been performed routinely, 68 abnormalities would have been missed, of which 5 led to an intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Partial elimination of routine CXRs in the first 24 hours after cardiac surgery seems possible for the majority of patients, but it is limited by the insensitivity of clinical assessment in predicting clinically important abnormalities detectable by CXRs.

Review of a large clinical series: the value of routinely obtained chest radiographs on admission to a mixed medical--surgical intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The efficacy of routinely obtained chest radiographs (CXRs) on admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) is largely unknown. The current study investigated the efficacy of routinely obtained admission CXRs and determined whether the value of this diagnostic test was dependent on patient category. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective nonrandomized controlled study. including 1081 admission CXRs of 1330 patients admitted to a 28-bed mixed medical-surgical university-affiliated ICU, over a 10-month period. To determine the value of admission CXRs, 2 categories of efficacy were used: diagnostic efficacy (the number of CXRs with a new or progressive major finding divided by the total number of CXRs) and therapeutic efficacy (the number of CXRs resulting in a change in clinical management divided by the total number of CXRs). Efficacy <15% was considered low. Patients were subclassified into subcategories on the basis of type of admission. RESULTS: Of all admission CXRs, 227 were clinically indicated and 854 were routinely obtained to establish a baseline prior to admission to ICU. Diagnostic efficacy of routinely obtained admission CXRs was 11%. The majority of abnormalities were malposition of invasive devices and severe pulmonary congestion. Therapeutic efficacy of routinely obtained admission CXRs was only 5%. Subgroup analysis showed highest efficacy in nonsurgical patients. CONCLUSIONS: In our mixed medical-surgical ICU the diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy of routinely obtained admission CXRs is low, though not completely negligible. Highest efficacy of CXRs was found in nonsurgical patients. Prospective studies are needed to determine whether abolishing this diagnostic test is a safe strategy.

Prevalence and characterization of dysphagia in hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: Information on the prevalence of dysphagia in a generalized hospitalized population is lacking. We aimed to gain information on the recognition of dysphagia by nursing staff and the swallow characteristics of patients with and without dysphagia. METHODS: The Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) and the volume-viscosity water swallow test (VVST) were utilized to assess the prevalence of dysphagia in a generalized hospitalized population in 2 centers (N = 205). Presence of dysphagia was defined as having either an EAT-10 score of 2 or higher or having a positive VVST. Nursing staff recognition of dysphagia was assessed. In addition, the swallow characteristics were assessed both clinically and using submandibular surface electromyographic (SEMG) values of the participants. KEY RESULTS: The prevalence of dysphagia in the hospitalized patients was 30.7%. Nursing staff did hardly ever recognize the presence of dysphagia. Concerning the swallow characteristics, patients with dysphagia demonstrated an increase in the SEMG peak levels of the swallowing actions over the course of an exercise from 103 to 110 µV (P = .05), whereas patients without dysphagia did not demonstrate this effect. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: Training should be conducted for nursing staff to improve awareness and recognition of dysphagia and thus prevent dysphagia complications. Dysphagia is a large burden on the hospitalized population, and further research should be conducted into the specifics.

On-demand rather than daily-routine chest radiography prescription may change neither the number nor the impact of chest computed tomography and ultrasound studies in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Elimination of daily-routine chest radiographs (CXRs) may influence chest computed tomography (CT) and ultrasound practice in critically ill patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study including all patients admitted to a university-affiliated intensive care unit during two consecutive periods of 5 months, one before and one after elimination of daily-routine CXR. Chest CT and ultrasound studies were identified retrospectively by using the radiology department information system. Indications for and the diagnostic/therapeutic yield of chest CT and ultrasound studies were collected. RESULTS: Elimination of daily-routine CXR resulted in a decrease of CXRs per patient day from 1.1 +/- 0.3 to 0.6 +/- 0.4 (P < 0.05). Elimination did not affect duration of stay or mortality rates. Neither the number of chest CT studies nor the ratio of chest CT studies per patient day changed with the intervention: Before elimination of daily-routine CXR, 52 chest CT studies were obtained from 747 patients; after elimination, 54 CT studies were obtained from 743 patients. Similarly, chest ultrasound practice was not affected by the change of CXR strategy: Before and after elimination, 21 and 27 chest ultrasound studies were performed, respectively. Also, timing of chest CT and ultrasound studies was not different between the two study periods. During the two periods, 40 of 106 chest CT studies (38%) and 18 of 48 chest ultrasound studies (38%) resulted in a change in therapy. The combined therapeutic yield of chest CT and ultrasound studies did not change with elimination of daily-routine CXR. CONCLUSIONS: Elimination of daily-routine CXRs may not affect chest CT and ultrasound practice in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit.

The clinical value of routinely obtained postoperative chest radiographs in post-anaesthesia care unit patients seems poor-a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The clinical value of routinely obtained postoperative chest radiographs (CXRs) in post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) patients is largely unknown. METHODS: To determine the diagnostic efficacy and treatment impact of postoperative routinely obtained CXRs in a university hospital PACU. Observational study collecting the expectations of attending physicians, the findings on routinely obtained CXRs and actions based on the findings on these CXRs in postoperative PACU patients. A 22-bed PACU in a university hospital in the Netherlands. Patients admitted to the PACU during a 9-month period. The analysis was restricted to CXRs routinely obtained during the first PACU admission, i.e., CXRs obtained during later admissions were excluded. Diagnostic efficacy, defined as the percentage of CXRs showing any unexpected major abnormality; treatment impact, defined as the percentage of CXRs showing an unexpected major abnormality that triggered a predefined change in therapy. RESULTS: The analysis included 294 postoperative CXRs. Of them 94 showed a new and unexpected predefined major abnormality (diagnostic efficacy of 35%). Of these 94 CXRs, only 10 triggered an intervention (treatment impact of 4%). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic efficacy of routinely obtained postoperative CXRs in PACU patients is fair; the treatment impact seems low if we assume that all CXRs that showed an abnormality but were not followed by an intervention and did not require an intervention. Future research should focus on the safety and cost-effectiveness of abrogating routine postoperative CXRs.

Elimination of daily routine chest radiographs in a mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of elimination of daily routine chest radiographs (CXRs) in a mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) on utility of on demand CXRs, length of stay (LOS) in ICU, readmission rate, and mortality rate. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective, nonrandomized, controlled study in a 28-bed ICU. Analysis included data of all admitted ICU patients during 5 months before and after elimination of daily routine CXRs. RESULTS: Before elimination, 2457 daily routine CXRs and 1437 on demand CXRs were obtained from 754 patients. After elimination, 1267 CXRs were obtained from 622 patients. The ratio of CXRs/patient day decreased from 1.1+/-0.3 to 0.6+/-0.4 (p<0.05). Elimination did not result in a change in utility and timing of on demand CXRs. The absolute diagnostic and therapeutic value of on demand CXRs increased with elimination of daily routine CXRs: before intervention, 147 unexpected predefined abnormalities were found (10.2% of all on demand CXRs in 15.9% of all patients), of which 57 (3.9%) in 6.4% of all patients led to a change in therapy. After intervention, 156 unexpected predefined abnormalities were found (11.6%; p<0.05), of which 61 (4.8%) in 9.5% of all patients (p<0.05) led to a change in therapy. The LOS in ICU, readmission rate and ICU, and hospital mortality rate were not influenced by the change in strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Elimination of daily routine CXRs reduced the number of CXRs in a mixed medical-surgical ICU, while not affecting readmission rate and ICU and hospital mortality rates.