Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Age at the time of exposure to trauma modulates the psychopathological profile in early psychosis patients

Objective: To examine the potential differential impact of childhood trauma, according to the age at the time of exposure, on the psychopathological profile of patients with early psychosis treated in a specialized 3-year program during the early phase of the disease. Methods: 196 subjects with early psychosis aged 18-35 years were followed up prospectively over 36 months of treatment between 2004 and 2010. Patients who had faced at least 1 experience of abuse (physical, sexual, or emotional) or neglect (physical or emotional) were classified according to age at the time of the first exposure (early trauma: before 12 years of age; late trauma: from age 12 through 16 years) and then compared with unexposed patients (nontrauma). The level of symptoms was assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, the Young Mania Rating Scale, and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. Results: Exposure to 1 or more forms of trauma before 16 years of age was present in 31.63% of patients. Comparisons over the 3 years of treatment with the nontrauma patients revealed that (1) patients with early trauma showed consistently higher levels of positive (P = .006), depressive (P = .001), manic (P = .006), and negative (P = .029) symptoms and (2) patients with late trauma showed only more negative symptoms (P = .029). Conclusions: These results suggest that the age at the time of exposure to trauma has a modulating effect on symptoms in patients with early psychosis. Various biological and psychological hypotheses can be proposed to explain this observation, and they need to be investigated in an experimental setting in order to develop therapeutic avenues.

Adolescent Drug Abuse Diagnosis (ADAD) vs. Health of Nation Outcome Scale for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA) in clinical outcome measurement.

BACKGROUND: The Adolescent Drug Abuse Diagnosis (ADAD) and Health of Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents (HoNOSCA) are both measures of outcome for adolescent mental health services. AIMS: To compare the ADAD with HoNOSCA; to examine their clinical usefulness. METHODS: Comparison of the ADAD and HoNOSCA outcome measures of 20 adolescents attending a psychiatric day care unit. RESULTS: ADAD change was positively correlated with HoNOSCA change. HoNOSCA assesses the clinic's day-care programme more positively than the ADAD. The ADAD detects a group for which the mean score remains unchanged whereas HoNOSCA does not. CONCLUSIONS: A good convergent validity emerges between the two assessment tools. The ADAD allows an evidence-based assessment and generally enables a better subject discrimination than HoNOSCA. HoNOSCA gives a less refined evaluation but is more economic in time and possibly more sensitive to change. Both assessment tools give useful information and enabled the Day-care Unit for Adolescents to rethink the process of care and of outcome, which benefited both the institution and the patients.

Psychiatric comorbidity and additional abuse of drugs in maintenance treatment with l- and d,l-methadone.

Sixty d,l- or l-methadone treated patients in maintenance therapy were interviewed for additional drug abuse and psychiatric comorbidity; 51.7% of the entire population had a comorbid Axis-I disorder, with a higher prevalence in females (P=0.05). Comorbid patients tended to have higher abuse of benzodiazepines, alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine, but not of heroin. They had received a significantly lower d,l- (P<0.05) and l-methadone dose than non-comorbid subjects. The duration of maintenance treatment showed an inverse relationship to frequency of additional heroin intake (P<0.01). Patients with additional heroin intake over the past 30 days had been treated with a significantly lower l-methadone dosage (P<0.05) than patients without. Axis-I comorbidity appears to be decreased when relatively higher dosages of d,l- (and l-methadone) are administered; comorbid individuals, however, were on significantly lower dosages. Finally, l-, but not d,l-methadone seems to be more effective in reducing additional heroin abuse.

Stage of change of cigarette smoking in drug dependent patients.

Nicotine cessation programmes in Switzerland, which are commonly based on the stage of change model of Prochaska and DiClemente (1983), are rarely offered to patients with illicit drug dependence. This stands in contrast to the high smoking rates and the heavy burden of tobacco-related problems in these patients. The stage of change was therefore assessed by self-administered questionnaire in 100 inpatients attending an illegal drug withdrawal programme. Only 15% of the patients were in the contemplation or decision stage. 93% considered smoking cessation to be difficult or very difficult. These data show a discrepancy between the motivation to change illegal drug consumption habits and the motivation for smoking cessation. The high proportion of patients remaining in the precontemplation stage for smoking cessation, in spite of their motivation for illicit drug detoxification, may be due to the perception that cessation of smoking is more difficult than illicit drug abuse cessation.