Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Recognizing and Responding to Clinical Deterioration Outside the ICU: 2023.

RATIONALE: Clinical deterioration of patients hospitalized outside the ICU is a source of potentially reversible morbidity and mortality. To address this, some acute care hospitals have implemented systems aimed at detecting and responding to such patients. OBJECTIVES: To provide evidence-based recommendations for hospital clinicians and administrators to optimize recognition and response to clinical deterioration in non-ICU patients. PANEL DESIGN: The 25-member panel included representatives from medicine, nursing, respiratory therapy, pharmacy, patient/family partners, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. METHODS: We generated actionable questions using the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) format and performed a systematic review of the literature to identify and synthesize the best available evidence. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Approach to determine certainty in the evidence and to formulate recommendations and good practice statements (GPSs). RESULTS: The panel issued 10 statements on recognizing and responding to non-ICU patients with critical illness. Healthcare personnel and institutions should ensure that all vital sign acquisition is timely and accurate (GPS). We make no recommendation on the use of continuous vital sign monitoring among unselected patients. We suggest focused education for bedside clinicians in signs of clinical deterioration, and we also suggest that patient/family/care partners' concerns be included in decisions to obtain additional opinions and help (both conditional recommendations). We recommend hospital-wide deployment of a rapid response team or medical emergency team (RRT/MET) with explicit activation criteria (strong recommendation). We make no recommendation about RRT/MET professional composition or inclusion of palliative care members on the responding team but suggest that the skill set of responders should include eliciting patients' goals of care (conditional recommendation). Finally, quality improvement processes should be part of a rapid response system. CONCLUSIONS: The panel provided guidance to inform clinicians and administrators on effective processes to improve the care of patients at-risk for developing critical illness outside the ICU.

Executive Summary: Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Recognizing and Responding to Clinical Deterioration Outside the ICU.

RATIONALE: Clinical deterioration of patients hospitalized outside the ICU is a source of potentially reversible morbidity and mortality. To address this, some acute care facilities have implemented systems aimed at detecting and responding to such patients. OBJECTIVES: To provide evidence-based recommendations for hospital clinicians and administrators to optimize recognition and response to clinical deterioration in non-ICU patients. PANEL DESIGN: The 25-member panel included representatives from medicine, nursing, respiratory therapy, pharmacy, patient/family partners, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: We generated actionable questions using the Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes format and performed a systematic review of the literature to identify and synthesize the best available evidence. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to determine certainty in the evidence and to formulate recommendations and good practice statements (GPSs). RESULTS: The panel issued 10 statements on recognizing and responding to non-ICU patients with critical illness. Healthcare personnel and institutions should ensure that all vital sign acquisition is timely and accurate (GPS). We make no recommendation on the use of continuous vital sign monitoring among "unselected" patients due to the absence of data regarding the benefit and the potential harms of false positive alarms, the risk of alarm fatigue, and cost. We suggest focused education for bedside clinicians in signs of clinical deterioration, and we also suggest that patient/family/care partners' concerns be included in decisions to obtain additional opinions and help (both conditional recommendations). We recommend hospital-wide deployment of a rapid response team or medical emergency team (RRT/MET) with explicit activation criteria (strong recommendation). We make no recommendation about RRT/MET professional composition or inclusion of palliative care members on the responding team but suggest that the skill set of responders should include eliciting patients' goals of care (conditional recommendation). Finally, quality improvement processes should be part of a rapid response system (GPS). CONCLUSIONS: The panel provided guidance to inform clinicians and administrators on effective processes to improve the care of patients at-risk for developing critical illness outside the ICU.

Evaluation of a community pharmacy-based influenza and group A streptococcal pharyngitis disease management program using polymerase chain reaction point-of-care testing.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of implementing a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-waived real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) molecular test into a community pharmacy setting as part of a collaborative influenza and group A Streptococcus (GAS) disease management program. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Two community pharmacy sites in Tennessee. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Patients presenting to the pharmacy with symptoms consistent with influenza or GAS from November 1, 2016, to April 30, 2018. PRACTICE INNOVATION: Influenza and GAS management programs based on previously developed protocols occurred at 2 community pharmacies in Tennessee. Pharmacies used the Cobas Liat testing system (Roche Diagnostics). Based on test results and under a collaborative practice agreement, pharmacists dispensed prescription medications for patients with a positive test: oseltamivir for influenza and amoxicillin for GAS. Patients with negative tests were treated with over-the-counter (OTC) medications or referred. Patients testing negative for GAS were asked to consent to having a second throat swab sent for culture. EVALUATION: Number of patients tested, point-of-care test results, and treatment received. RESULTS: Two hundred and two patients received care at the 2 pharmacies (116 for influenza, 46 for GAS, and 43 for both). Sixty (38%) tested positive for influenza, with 51 receiving an antiviral prescription, and 16 (18%) tested positive and were treated for GAS. No patient testing negative for either or positive for influenza was dispensed an antibiotic. For patients consenting to a follow-up culture, all GAS cultures sent for confirmatory testing were negative. CONCLUSION: A protocol-driven community pharmacy-based disease management program using real-time PCR testing for influenza and GAS was able to offer appropriate treatment to patients without overuse of antibiotics.

Critical Illness-Related Corticosteroid Insufficiency (CIRCI): A Narrative Review from a Multispecialty Task Force of the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM).

OBJECTIVE: To provide a narrative review of the latest concepts and understanding of the pathophysiology of critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI). PARTICIPANTS: A multi-specialty task force of international experts in critical care medicine and endocrinology and members of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. RESULTS: Three major pathophysiologic events were considered to constitute CIRCI: dysregulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, altered cortisol metabolism, and tissue resistance to glucocorticoids. The dysregulation of the HPA axis is complex, involving multidirectional crosstalk between the CRH/ACTH pathways, autonomic nervous system, vasopressinergic system, and immune system. Recent studies have demonstrated that plasma clearance of cortisol is markedly reduced during critical illness, explained by suppressed expression and activity of the primary cortisol-metabolizing enzymes in the liver and kidney. Despite the elevated cortisol levels during critical illness, tissue resistance to glucocorticoids is believed to occur due to insufficient glucocorticoid alpha-mediated anti-inflammatory activity. CONCLUSIONS: Novel insights into the pathophysiology of CIRCI add to the limitations of the current diagnostic tools to identify at-risk patients and may also impact how corticosteroids are used in patients with CIRCI.

Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Critical Illness-Related Corticosteroid Insufficiency (CIRCI) in Critically Ill Patients (Part I): Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) 2017.

OBJECTIVE: To update the 2008 consensus statements for the diagnosis and management of critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) in adult and pediatric patients. PARTICIPANTS: A multispecialty task force of 16 international experts in critical care medicine, endocrinology, and guideline methods, all of them members of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and/or the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. DESIGN/METHODS: The recommendations were based on the summarized evidence from the 2008 document in addition to more recent findings from an updated systematic review of relevant studies from 2008 to 2017 and were formulated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The strength of each recommendation was classified as strong or conditional, and the quality of evidence was rated from high to very low based on factors including the individual study design, the risk of bias, the consistency of the results, and the directness and precision of the evidence. Recommendation approval required the agreement of at least 80% of the task force members. RESULTS: The task force was unable to reach agreement on a single test that can reliably diagnose CIRCI, although delta cortisol (change in baseline cortisol at 60 min of < 9 µg/dL) after cosyntropin (250 µg) administration and a random plasma cortisol of < 10 µg/dL may be used by clinicians. We suggest against using plasma-free cortisol or salivary cortisol level over plasma total cortisol (conditional, very low quality of evidence). For treatment of specific conditions, we suggest using IV hydrocortisone < 400 mg/day for ≥ 3 days at full dose in patients with septic shock that is not responsive to fluid and moderate- to high-dose vasopressor therapy (conditional, low quality of evidence). We suggest not using corticosteroids in adult patients with sepsis without shock (conditional recommendation, moderate quality of evidence). We suggest the use of IV methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg/day in patients with early moderate to severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (PaO2/FiO2 < 200 and within 14 days of onset) (conditional, moderate quality of evidence). Corticosteroids are not suggested for patients with major trauma (conditional, low quality of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in critically ill patients with sepsis and septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and major trauma have been developed by a multispecialty task force.

Trough concentration of voriconazole and its relationship with efficacy and safety: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The optimum trough concentration of voriconazole for clinical response and safety is controversial. The objective of this review was to determine the optimum trough concentration of voriconazole and evaluate its relationship with efficacy and safety. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Library and three Chinese literature databases were searched. Observational studies that compared clinical outcomes below and above the trough concentration cut-off value were included. We set the trough concentration cut-off value for efficacy as 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 mg/L and for safety as 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 5.5 and 6.0 mg/L. The efficacy outcomes were invasive fungal infection-related mortality, all-cause mortality, rate of successful treatment and rate of prophylaxis failure. The safety outcomes included incidents of hepatotoxicity, neurotoxicity and visual disorders. RESULTS: A total of 21 studies involving 1158 patients were included. Compared with voriconazole trough concentrations of >0.5 mg/L, levels of <0.5 mg/L significantly decreased the rate of treatment success (risk ratio = 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.74). The incidence of hepatotoxicity was significantly increased with trough concentrations >3.0, >4.0, >5.5 and >6.0 mg/L. The incidence of neurotoxicity was significantly increased with trough concentrations >4.0 and >5.5 mg/L. CONCLUSIONS: A voriconazole level of 0.5 mg/L should be considered the lower threshold associated with efficacy. A trough concentration >3.0 mg/L is associated with increased hepatotoxicity, particularly for the Asian population, and >4.0 mg/L is associated with increased neurotoxicity.

A Multicenter Evaluation of Prolonged Empiric Antibiotic Therapy in Adult ICUs in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine the rate of prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy in adult ICUs in the United States. Our secondary objective is to examine the relationship between the prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy rate and certain ICU characteristics. DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective, observational, 72-hour snapshot study. SETTING: Sixty-seven ICUs from 32 hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: Nine hundred ninety-eight patients admitted to the ICU between midnight on June 20, 2011, and June 21, 2011, were included in the study. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Antibiotic orders were categorized as prophylactic, definitive, empiric, or prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy. Prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy was defined as empiric antibiotics that continued for at least 72 hours in the absence of adjudicated infection. Standard definitions from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were used to determine infection. Prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy rate was determined as the ratio of the total number of empiric antibiotics continued for at least 72 hours divided by the total number of empiric antibiotics. Univariate analysis of factors associated with the ICU prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy rate was conducted using Student t test. A total of 660 unique antibiotics were prescribed as empiric therapy to 364 patients. Of the empiric antibiotics, 333 of 660 (50%) were continued for at least 72 hours in instances where Centers for Disease Control and Prevention infection criteria were not met. Suspected pneumonia accounted for approximately 60% of empiric antibiotic use. The most frequently prescribed empiric antibiotics were vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam. ICUs that utilized invasive techniques for the diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia had lower rates of prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy than those that did not, 45.1% versus 59.5% (p = 0.03). No other institutional factor was significantly associated with prolonged empiric antibiotic therapy rate. CONCLUSIONS: Half of all empiric antibiotics ordered in critically ill patients are continued for at least 72 hours in absence of adjudicated infection. Additional studies are needed to confirm these findings and determine the risks and benefits of prolonged empiric therapy in the critically ill.

Off-label use of gastrointestinal medications in the intensive care unit.

PURPOSE: Determine the level of evidence supporting off-label gastrointestinal (GI) medication use and identify the medication class and indication whereby off-label use was most common. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, multicentered observational study evaluated all medication orders written in 37 intensive care units (ICUs) in the United States, over a 24-hour period. All medications classified as "GI" according to a national reference were identified. The class and indication whereby off-label use was most prominent were determined and the level of evidence was described. RESULTS: There were 774 orders from 363 patients and 63% (489 of 774) were considered off-label. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) accounted for most of the off-label usage (55% [271 of 489]), followed by laxatives (16% [77 of 489]) and histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs; 15% [71 of 489]). When prescribed, 99% (271 of 274) of PPIs, 99% (71 of 72) of H2RAs, and 79% (30 of 38) of promotility agents were off-label. Stress ulcer prophylaxis (100% [309 of 309]), GI bleeding (100% [18 of 18]), and gastric motility (88% [30 of 34]) were the most common off-label indications. The most common strength of recommendation and level of evidence for off-label use was indeterminate (58% [282 of 489]) and none (57% [280 of 489]), respectively. CONCLUSION: The PPIs are the most widely used off-label medications in the ICU. Stress ulcer prophylaxis is the most common indication. The level of evidence supporting off-label GI medication use is poor.

Knowledge and attitudes of doctor of pharmacy students regarding the appropriate use of antimicrobials.

Pharmacists are key partners in antimicrobial stewardship efforts, yet their degree of education on and attitudes toward this topic during training are not well documented. An electronic survey measuring knowledge and attitudes regarding antimicrobial use and resistance was administered to graduating pharmacy students at 12 US schools of pharmacy. Of 1445 pharmacy students, 579 (40%) completed the survey. The vast majority (94%) believed that strong knowledge of antimicrobials was important for their pharmacy careers, and 89% desired more education on appropriate antimicrobial use. Most students (84%) considered their pharmacy education regarding antimicrobials useful or very useful, but there was significant variability on perceptions of preparation for most antimicrobial stewardship activities according to the students' school. The mean number of correct answers on a section of 11 knowledge questions was 5.8 (standard deviation 2.0; P value for score between schools <.001). On multivariable linear regression analysis, significant predictors of a higher knowledge score were pharmacy school attended, planned postgraduate training, completion of a clinical rotation in infectious diseases, perception of pharmacy school education as useful, use of resources to answer the knowledge questions, and use of Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines and smartphone applications as frequent resources for learning about antimicrobials. Pharmacy students perceive antimicrobial stewardship to be an important healthcare issue and desire more education on the subject. Student perceptions of antimicrobial coursework and actual antimicrobial knowledge scores significantly varied by the school of pharmacy attended. Sharing of best practices among institutions may enhance the preparation of future pharmacists to contribute to effective antimicrobial stewardship.

Epidemiology and predictors of multidrug-resistant community-acquired and health care-associated pneumonia.

There are limited U.S. data describing the risk factors for multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) isolation in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and health care-associated pneumonia (HCAP). However, concern for the presence of these pathogens drives the prescribing of empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics for CAP and HCAP. A retrospective study of all adults hospitalized with community-onset pneumonia (CAP and HCAP) at a large U.S. medical center from January 2010 to December 2011 was conducted. The objective was to ascertain the rate of pneumonia caused by MDROs and to evaluate whether HCAP is a risk factor for MDRO pneumonia. Univariate and propensity score-adjusted multivariate analyses were performed. A total of 521 patients (50.5% CAP and 49.5% HCAP) were included. The most common etiologies of pneumonia were primary viral and Streptococcus pneumoniae. MDROs were isolated in 20 (3.8%) patients overall, and MDROs occurred in 5.9% and 1.9% of HCAP and CAP patients, respectively. The presence of an MDRO was not associated with HCAP classification (odds ratio [OR]=1.95; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.66 to 5.80; P=0.23) or with most of its individual components (hemodialysis, home infusion, home wound care, and ≥48-h hospitalization in the last 90 days). Independent predictors of MDRO included the following: Pseudomonas aeruginosa colonization/infection in the previous year (OR=7.43; 95% CI, 2.24 to 24.61; P<0.001), antimicrobial use in the previous 90 days (OR=2.90; 95% CI, 1.13 to 7.45; P=0.027), admission from a nursing home (OR=4.19; 95% CI, 1.55 to 11.31; P=0.005), and duration of hospitalization in the previous 90 or 180 days (P=0.013 and P=0.002, respectively). MDROs were uncommon in HCAP and CAP. HCAP did not predict MDRO isolation. Local etiology of community onset pneumonia and specific MDRO risk factors should be integrated into therapeutic decisions to prevent empirical overprescribing of antibiotics for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and P. aeruginosa.

Effectiveness and safety of the awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility bundle.

OBJECTIVE: The debilitating and persistent effects of ICU-acquired delirium and weakness warrant testing of prevention strategies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of implementing the Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility bundle into everyday practice. DESIGN: Eighteen-month, prospective, cohort, before-after study conducted between November 2010 and May 2012. SETTING: Five adult ICUs, one step-down unit, and one oncology/hematology special care unit located in a 624-bed tertiary medical center. PATIENTS: Two hundred ninety-six patients (146 prebundle and 150 postbundle implementation), who are 19 years old or older, managed by the institutions' medical or surgical critical care service. INTERVENTIONS: Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility bundle. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For mechanically ventilated patients (n = 187), we examined the association between bundle implementation and ventilator-free days. For all patients, we used regression models to quantify the relationship between Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility bundle implementation and the prevalence/duration of delirium and coma, early mobilization, mortality, time to discharge, and change in residence. Safety outcomes and bundle adherence were monitored. Patients in the postimplementation period spent three more days breathing without mechanical assistance than did those in the preimplementation period (median [interquartile range], 24 [7-26] vs 21 [0-25]; p = 0.04). After adjusting for age, sex, severity of illness, comorbidity, and mechanical ventilation status, patients managed with the Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility bundle experienced a near halving of the odds of delirium (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33-0.93; p = 0.03) and increased odds of mobilizing out of bed at least once during an ICU stay (odds ratio, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.29-3.45; p = 0.003). No significant differences were noted in self-extubation or reintubation rates. CONCLUSIONS: Critically ill patients managed with the Awakening and Breathing Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management, and Early exercise/mobility bundle spent three more days breathing without assistance, experienced less delirium, and were more likely to be mobilized during their ICU stay than patients treated with usual care.

Statins role in the prevention and treatment of sepsis.

Sepsis is a complex disease with typically poor outcomes. While the onset of sepsis is typically infectious, the detrimental consequences follow pathogen toxin release that produces activation of numerous cytokines and a pro-inflammatory response. These same cytokines also stimulate activation of coagulation and inhibit natural fibrinolysis. Despite decades of research targeted against these pathways the development of sepsis and mortality in patients with sepsis remains high. While statins were developed for reducing cholesterol in patients with atherosclerotic disease, we now know they have a number of other properties which may be helpful in the prevention and treatment of sepsis. Statins have demonstrated the ability to reduce a number of pro-inflammatory cytokines known to be detrimental in the development and progression of sepsis. Statins have also demonstrated the ability to limit the coagulation response and promote fibrinolysis in the setting of sepsis. Based on these encouraging pharmacologic properties of statins a number of trials have been conducted evaluating the impact of statins on the prevention and treatment of sepsis. Most of the trials to date have been retrospective cohort trials, with very few prospective randomized trials. While some trials fail to demonstrate a benefit of statins, most trials suggest a reduction in the development of sepsis and/or other important sepsis related outcomes. While the laboratory and early clinical experience with statins are encouraging, randomized controlled trials will be need to fully define the role of statins in the prevention and treatment of sepsis.

Top 10 myths regarding sedation and delirium in the ICU.

The management of pain, agitation, and delirium in critically ill patients can be complicated by multiple factors. Decisions to administer opioids, sedatives, and antipsychotic medications are frequently driven by a desire to facilitate patients' comfort and their tolerance of invasive procedures or other interventions within the ICU. Despite accumulating evidence supporting new strategies to optimize pain, sedation, and delirium practices in the ICU, many critical care practitioners continue to embrace false perceptions regarding appropriate management in these critically ill patients. This article explores these perceptions in more detail and offers new evidence-based strategies to help critical care practitioners better manage sedation and delirium, particularly in ICU patients.

Implementing the awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility bundle into everyday care: opportunities, challenges, and lessons learned for implementing the ICU Pain, Agitation, and Delirium Guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: The awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility bundle is an evidence-based interprofessional multicomponent strategy for minimizing sedative exposure, reducing duration of mechanical ventilation, and managing ICU-acquired delirium and weakness. The purpose of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility bundle adoption and to evaluate the extent to which bundle implementation was effective, sustainable, and conducive to dissemination. DESIGN: Prospective, before-after, mixed-methods study. SETTING: Five adult ICUs, one step-down unit, and a special care unit located in a 624-bed academic medical center SUBJECTS: : Interprofessional ICU team members at participating institution. INTERVENTIONS AND MEASUREMENTS: In collaboration with the participating institution, we developed, implemented, and refined an awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility bundle policy. Over the course of an 18-month period, all ICU team members were offered the opportunity to participate in numerous multimodal educational efforts. Three focus group sessions, three online surveys, and one educational evaluation were administered in an attempt to identify facilitators and barriers to bundle adoption. MAIN RESULTS: Factors believed to facilitate bundle implementation included: 1) the performance of daily, interdisciplinary, rounds; 2) engagement of key implementation leaders; 3) sustained and diverse educational efforts; and 4) the bundle's quality and strength. Barriers identified included: 1) intervention-related issues (e.g., timing of trials, fear of adverse events), 2) communication and care coordination challenges, 3) knowledge deficits, 4) workload concerns, and 5) documentation burden. Despite these challenges, participants believed implementation ultimately benefited patients, improved interdisciplinary communication, and empowered nurses and other ICU team members. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of the implementation of the awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility bundle in a tertiary care setting, clear factors were identified that both advanced and impeded adoption of this complex intervention that requires interprofessional education, coordination, and cooperation. Focusing on these factors preemptively should enable a more effective and lasting implementation of the bundle and better care for critically ill patients. Lessons learned from this study will also help healthcare providers optimize implementation of the recent ICU pain, agitation, and delirium guidelines, which has many similarities but also some important differences as compared with the awakening and breathing coordination, delirium monitoring/management, and early exercise/mobility bundle.

A comparison of critical care research funding and the financial burden of critical illness in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate federal dollars spent on critical care research, the cost of providing critical care, and to determine whether the percentage of federal research dollars spent on critical care research is commensurate with the financial burden of critical care. DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES: The National Institutes of Health Computer Retrieval of Information on Scientific Projects database was queried to identify funded grants whose title or abstract contained a key word potentially related to critical care. Each grant identified was analyzed by two reviewers (three if the analysis was discordant) to subjectively determine whether it was definitely, possibly, or definitely not related to critical care. Hospital and total costs of critical care were estimated from the Premier Database, state discharge data, and Medicare data. To estimate healthcare expenditures associated with caring for critically ill patients, total costs were calculated as the combination of hospitalization costs that included critical illness as well as additional costs in the year after hospital discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 19,257 grants funded by the National Institutes of Health, 332 (1.7%) were definitely related to critical care and a maximum of 1212 (6.3%) grants were possibly related to critical care. Between 17.4% and 39.0% of total hospital costs were spent on critical care, and a total of between $121 and $263 billion was estimated to be spent on patients who required intensive care. This represents 5.2% to 11.2%, respectively, of total U.S. healthcare spending. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of research dollars spent on critical care is lower than the percentage of healthcare expenditures related to critical illness.

Vancomycin susceptibility trends and prevalence of heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus in clinical methicillin-resistant S. aureus isolates.

Due to the rise in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections and widespread use of vancomycin, MRSA isolates with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin are emerging (i.e., MIC creep). However, the prevalence of heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (hVISA) is unknown due to the difficulty in detecting this phenotype. Recently, Etest glycopeptide resistance detection (GRD) strips have been developed to detect hVISA. This study assessed vancomycin susceptibility in MRSA isolates and determined the prevalence of hVISA by Etest GRD and population analysis profile-area under the curve ratio (PAP-AUC). The genetic backgrounds of 167 MRSA isolates collected from 2000 to 2008 were identified by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. Vancomycin MICs were determined using Etest and two broth microdilution assays, MicroScan and Sensititre. Etest GRD was performed on all isolates, and those exhibiting a hVISA phenotype were further tested by PAP-AUC. The vancomycin MIC modes remained consistent at 1 µg/ml, as assessed by Sensititre and MicroScan. Etest reported a significant increase (mode MIC = 1.5 µg/ml) in the MIC between 2000 and 2008 (P < 0.01); however, this increase did not reflect a ≥ 2-fold change. In addition, the slight MIC increase did not increase linearly from 2000 to 2008, suggesting biological fluctuation, and is inconsistent with the concept of MIC creep. Etest GRD identified six hVISA isolates, two of which were confirmed to be hVISA by PAP-AUC. In conclusion, reduced vancomycin susceptibility was not detected in our hospital over a 9-year period using three different MIC methodologies, and the hVISA incidence was 1.2%, as determined by Etest GRD and PAP-AUC.

Antibiotic dosing during sustained low-efficiency dialysis: special considerations in adult critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVE: To address issues of antibiotic dosing during sustained low-efficiency dialysis by using available pharmacokinetic data, intermittent and continuous renal replacement therapy dialysis guidelines, and our experience with sustained low-efficiency dialysis. DATA RESOURCES: Published clinical trials, case reports, and reviews of antibiotic dosing in humans during sustained low-efficiency dialysis. DATA EXTRACTION: A search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, and Ovid) was conducted by using key words of extended daily dialysis, sustained low-efficiency dialysis, antibiotics, antimicrobial agents, and pharmacokinetics. MEDLINE identified 32 sustained low-efficiency dialysis articles, and PubMed identified 33 articles. All papers describing antibiotic clearance prospectively in patients were considered for this article. DATA SYNTHESIS: We identified nine original research articles and case reports that determined the impact of sustained low-efficiency dialysis on antibiotic clearance in patients. The blood and dialysate flow rates, duration of dialysis, type of filter, and the pharmacokinetic parameters were extracted from each article. If multiple articles on the same drug were published, they were compared for consistency with the aforementioned dialysis parameters and then compared with forms of continuous renal replacement therapy. Antibiotic clearance by sustained low-efficiency dialysis was determined to be similar or higher than continuous renal replacement therapy therapies. The estimated creatinine clearance during sustained low-efficiency dialysis was approximately 60 mL/min to 100 mL/min depending on the blood and dialysate flow rates and the type of filter used. CONCLUSIONS: The potential for significant drug removal during an 8-hr-or-longer sustained low-efficiency dialysis session is evident by the limited number of studies available. Because significant amounts of drug may be removed by sustained low-efficiency dialysis combined with altered pharmacokinetic variables in critically ill patients, the risk for suboptimal drug concentrations and pharmacodynamics must be considered. Appropriate dose and calculation of dosing intervals is essential to provide adequate antibiotic therapy in these patients. It is recommended that institutions who utilize sustained low-efficiency dialysis establish dosing guidelines for all pharmacists and physicians to follow to provide consistent delivery of antibiotics at adequate concentrations.

Hydromorphone Compared to Fentanyl in Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Fentanyl is commonly used in critically ill patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Fentanyl's lipophilicity and protein binding may contribute to a sequestration of the drug in the ECMO circuit. Hydromorphone lacks these characteristics potentially leading to a more predictable drug delivery and improved pain and sedation management among ECMO patients. This study compared hydromorphone to fentanyl in patients receiving ECMO. This retrospective study included adult patients receiving ECMO for ≥48 hours. Patients were excluded if they required neuromuscular blockade, received both fentanyl and hydromorphone during therapy, or had opioid use before hospitalization. Baseline characteristics included patient demographics, ECMO indication and settings, and details regarding mechanical ventilation. The primary outcome was opioid requirements at 48 hours post cannulation described in morphine milligram equivalent (MME). Secondary endpoints included 24-hour opioid requirements, concurrent sedative use, and differences in pain and sedation scores. No differences were noted between the patients receiving fentanyl (n = 32) or hydromorphone (n = 20). Patients receiving hydromorphone required lower MME compared to fentanyl at 24 hours (88 [37-121] vs. 131 [137-227], p < 0.01) and 48 hours (168 [80-281] vs. 325 [270-449], p < 0.01). The proportion of within-goal pain and sedation scores between groups was similar at 24 and 48 hours. Sedative requirements did not differ between the groups. Patients receiving hydromorphone required less MME compared to fentanyl without any differences in sedative requirements, or agitation-sedation scores at 48 hours. Prospective studies should be completed to validate these findings.