197 resultados para 070701 Veterinary Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care
Resumo:
Objective: Examine the behavioural outcomes at age 3 years of late preterm infants (LPIs) who were admitted to neonatal intensive care (NIC) in comparison with LPIs who were not admitted.
Method: This cohort study prospectively recruited 225 children born late preterm (34–36+6 weeks gestation) in 2006 in Northern Ireland, now aged 3 years. Two groups were compared: LPIs who received NIC (study; n=103) and LPIs who did not receive NIC (control; n=122). Parents/guardians completed the Child Behaviour Checklist/1½-5. Descriptive maternal and infant data were also collected.
Results: As expected LPI children admitted to NIC had higher medical risk than the non-admitted comparison group (increased caesarean section, born at earlier gestation, lower birth weight and an episode of resuscitation at birth). LPIs admitted to NIC scored higher on the Child Behaviour Checklist/1½-5 compared with those who were not admitted indicating more behavioural problems; this was statistically significant for the Aggressive Behaviour Subscale (z=−2.36) and the Externalising Problems Scale (z=−2.42). The group difference on the Externalising Problems Scale was no longer significant after controlling for gender, gestational age and deprivation score.
Conclusions: This study provides valuable data on the behaviour at age 3 years of LPIs admitted to NIC compared with LPIs not admitted to NIC. Further research would be beneficial to explore medical and psychosocial explanations for observed differences between groups using large prospective cohort studies.
Resumo:
Background: Approximately 5-6% of all infective episodes in NICU are of viral origin. Previous studies suggest that human parechovirus (HPeV) infection presents most commonly in term infants, as a sepsis-like syndrome in which meningoencephalitis is prominent. Our aim was to study the infection rate and associated features of HPeV.
Methods: Blood samples were taken from NICU babies greater than 48 hours old, who were being investigated for late onset sepsis. Clinical and laboratory data were collected at the time of the suspected sepsis episode. Samples were tested using universal primers and probe directed at the 5'-untranslated region of the HPeV genome by reverse transcriptase PCR. Results were confirmed by electrophoresis and DNA sequencing.
Results: HPeV was detected in 11 of 84 samples (13%). These infants had a mean (interquartile range, IQR) gestational age of 28.9 (26.9 - 30.6) weeks and mean birth weight of 1.26 (SD = 0.72) kg. The median day of presentation was 16 (IQR: 11-27). These characteristics were similar to the infants without positive viral detection. Six infants presented with respiratory signs. One infant presented with signs of meningitis. Six of the 11 episodes of HPeV infection occurred during the winter months (December - February). No HPeV positive infants had abnormal findings on their 28-day cranial ultrasound examination.
Conclusions: We found a HPeV infection rate of 13% in infants being tested for late onset sepsis. HPeV should be considered as a possible cause of sepsis-like symptoms in preterm infants.
Resumo:
Background: Skeletal muscle wasting and weakness are significant complications of critical illness, associated with the degree of illness severity and periods of reduced mobility during mechanical ventilation. They contribute to the profound physical and functional deficits observed in survivors. These impairments may persist for many years following discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) and may markedly influence health-related quality of life. Rehabilitation is a key strategy in the recovery of patients following critical illness. Exercise based interventions are aimed at targeting this muscle wasting and weakness. Physical rehabilitation delivered during ICU admission has been systematically evaluated and shown to be beneficial. However its effectiveness when initiated after ICU discharge has yet to be established. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of exercise rehabilitation programmes, initiated after ICU discharge, on functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in adult ICU survivors who have been mechanically ventilated for more than 24 hours. Search methods:We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), OvidSP MEDLINE, Ovid SP EMBASE, and CINAHL via EBSCO host to 15th May 2014. We used a specific search strategy for each database. This included synonyms for ICU and critical illness, exercise training and rehabilitation. We searched the reference lists of included studies and contacted primary authors to obtain further information regarding potentially eligible studies. We also searched major clinical trials registries (Clinical Trials and Current Controlled Trials) and the personal libraries of the review authors. We applied no language or publication restriction. We reran the search in February 2015. We will deal with any studies of interest when we update the review. Selection criteria:We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that compared an exercise interventioninitiated after ICU discharge to any other intervention or a control or ‘usual care’ programme in adult (≥18years) survivors ofcritical illness. Data collection and analysis:We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Main results:We included six trials (483 adult ICU participants). Exercise-based interventions were delivered on the ward in two studies; both onthe ward and in the community in one study; and in the community in three studies. The duration of the intervention varied according to the length of stay in hospital following ICU discharge (up to a fixed duration of 12 weeks).Risk of bias was variable for all domains across all trials. High risk of bias was evident in all studies for performance bias, although blinding of participants and personnel in therapeutic rehabilitation trials can be pragmatically challenging. Low risk of bias was at least 50% for all other domains across all trials, although high risk of bias was present in one study for random sequence generation (selection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) and other sources. Risk of bias was unclear for remaining studies across the domains.All six studies measured effect on the primary outcome of functional exercise capacity, although there was wide variability in natureof intervention, outcome measures and associated metrics, and data reporting. Overall quality of the evidence was very low. Only two studies using the same outcome measure for functional exercise capacity, had the potential for pooling of data and assessment of heterogeneity. On statistical advice, this was considered inappropriate to perform this analysis and study findings were therefore qualitatively described. Individually, three studies reported positive results in favour of the intervention. A small benefit (versus. control)was evident in anaerobic threshold in one study (mean difference, MD (95% confidence interval, CI), 1.8 mlO2/kg/min (0.4 to 3.2),P value = 0.02), although this effect was short-term, and in a second study, both incremental (MD 4.7 (95% CI 1.69 to 7.75) Watts, P value = 0.003) and endurance (MD 4.12 (95% CI 0.68 to 7.56) minutes, P value = 0.021) exercise testing demonstrated improvement.Finally self-reported physical function increased significantly following a rehabilitation manual (P value = 0.006). Remaining studies found no effect of the intervention.Similar variability in with regard findings for the primary outcome of health-related quality of life were also evident. Only two studies evaluated this outcome. Following statistical advice, these data again were considered inappropriate for pooling to determine overall effect and assessment of heterogeneity. Qualitative description of findings was therefore undertaken. Individually, neither study reported differences between intervention and control groups for health-related quality of life as a result of the intervention. Overall quality of the evidence was very low.Mortality was reported by all studies, ranging from 0% to 18.8%. Only one non-mortality adverse event was reported across all patients in all studies (a minor musculoskeletal injury). Withdrawals, reported in four studies, ranged from 0% to 26.5% in control groups,and 8.2% to 27.6% in intervention groups. Loss to follow-up, reported in all studies, ranged from 0% to 14% in control groups, and 0% to 12.5% in intervention groups. Authors’ conclusions:We are unable, at this time, to determine an overall effect on functional exercise capacity, or health-related quality of life, of an exercise based intervention initiated after ICU discharge in survivors of critical illness. Meta-analysis of findings was not appropriate. This was due to insufficient study number and data. Individual study findings were inconsistent. Some studies reported a beneficial effect of the intervention on functional exercise capacity, and others not. No effect was reported on health-related quality of life. Methodological rigour was lacking across a number of domains influencing quality of the evidence. There was also wide variability in the characteristics of interventions, outcome measures and associated metrics, and data reporting.If further trials are identified, we may be able to determine the effect of exercise-based interventions following ICU discharge, on functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in survivors of critical illness.
Resumo:
Background: Comparative effectiveness research (CER) is intended to inform decision making in clinical practice, and is central to patientcentered outcomes research (PCOR). Purpose: To summarize key aspects of CER definitions and provide examples highlighting the complementary nature of efficacy and CER studies in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. Methods: An ad hoc working group of the American Thoracic Society with experience in clinical trials, health services research, quality improvement, and behavioral sciences in pulmonary, critical care, and sleepmedicinewas convened. The group used an iterative consensus process, including a reviewbyAmerican Thoracic Society committees and assemblies. Results: The traditional efficacy paradigm relies on clinical trials with high internal validity to evaluate interventions in narrowly defined populations and in research settings. Efficacy studies address the question, "Can it work in optimal conditions?" The CER paradigm employs a wide range of study designs to understand the effects of interventions in clinical settings. CER studies address the question, "Does it work in practice?" The results of efficacy and CER studies may or may not agree. CER incorporates many attributes of outcomes research and health services research, while placing greater emphasis on meeting the expressed needs of nonresearcher stakeholders (e.g., patients, clinicians, and others). Conclusions: CER complements traditional efficacy research by placing greater emphasis on the effects of interventions in practice, and developing evidence to address the needs of the many stakeholders involved in health care decisions. Stakeholder engagement is an important component of CER. Copyright © 2013 by the American Thoracic Society.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common clinical syndrome with high mortality and long-term morbidity. To date there is no effective pharmacological therapy. Aspirin therapy has recently been shown to reduce the risk of developing ARDS, but the effect of aspirin on established ARDS is unknown.
METHODS: In a single large regional medical and surgical ICU between December 2010 and July 2012, all patients with ARDS were prospectively identified and demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables were recorded retrospectively. Aspirin usage, both pre-hospital and during intensive care unit (ICU) stay, was included. The primary outcome was ICU mortality. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses to assess the impact of these variables on ICU mortality.
RESULTS: In total, 202 patients with ARDS were included; 56 (28%) of these received aspirin either pre-hospital, in the ICU, or both. Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, aspirin therapy, given either before or during hospital stay, was associated with a reduction in ICU mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.38 (0.15 to 0.96) P = 0.04). Additional factors that predicted ICU mortality for patients with ARDS were vasopressor use (OR 2.09 (1.05 to 4.18) P = 0.04) and APACHE II score (OR 1.07 (1.02 to 1.13) P = 0.01). There was no effect upon ICU length of stay or hospital mortality.
CONCLUSION: Aspirin therapy was associated with a reduced risk of ICU mortality. These data are the first to demonstrate a potential protective role for aspirin in patients with ARDS. Clinical trials to evaluate the role of aspirin as a pharmacological intervention for ARDS are needed.
Resumo:
Blood culture contamination (BCC) has been associated with unnecessary antibiotic use, additional laboratory tests and increased length of hospital stay thus incurring significant extra hospital costs. We set out to assess the impact of a staff educational intervention programme on decreasing intensive care unit (ICU) BCC rates to <3% (American Society for Microbiology standard). BCC rates during the pre-intervention period (January 2006-May 2011) were compared with the intervention period (June 2011-December 2012) using run chart and regression analysis. Monthly ICU BCC rates during the intervention period were reduced to a mean of 3·7%, compared to 9·5% during the baseline period (P < 0·001) with an estimated potential annual cost savings of about £250 100. The approach used was simple in design, flexible in delivery and efficient in outcomes, and may encourage its translation into clinical practice in different healthcare settings.
Resumo:
Rationale for the development of the Certificate in Health Studies: Intensive Care and High Dependency for Adults course developed at Queens University Belfast, Northern Ireland. Structure and content of clinical module reviewed. Clinical assessment strategy discussed. Focus on the utilization of a standardized portfolio, individualized learning contract and objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) to evaluate clinical competence. Evaluation of OSCE as an assessment tool and of the course provision.
Resumo:
Aim The aim of the study is to evaluate factors that enable or constrain the implementation and service delivery of early warnings systems or acute care training in practice. Background To date there is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of acute care initiatives (early warning systems, acute care training, outreach) in reducing the number of adverse events (cardiac arrest, death, unanticipated Intensive Care admission) through increased recognition and management of deteriorating ward based patients in hospital [1-3]. The reasons posited are that previous research primarily focused on measuring patient outcomes following the implementation of an intervention or programme without considering the social factors (the organisation, the people, external influences) which may have affected the process of implementation and hence measured end-points. Further research which considers the social processes is required in order to understand why a programme works, or does not work, in particular circumstances [4]. Method The design is a multiple case study approach of four general wards in two acute hospitals where Early Warning Systems (EWS) and Acute Life-threatening Events Recognition and Treatment (ALERT) course have been implemented. Various methods are being used to collect data about individual capacities, interpersonal relationships and institutional balance and infrastructures in order to understand the intended and unintended process outcomes of implementing EWS and ALERT in practice. This information will be gathered from individual and focus group interviews with key participants (ALERT facilitators, nursing and medical ALERT instructors, ward managers, doctors, ward nurses and health care assistants from each hospital); non-participant observation of ward organisation and structure; audit of patients' EWS charts and audit of the medical notes of patients who deteriorated during the study period to ascertain whether ALERT principles were followed. Discussion & progress to date This study commenced in January 2007. Ethical approval has been granted and data collection is ongoing with interviews being conducted with key stakeholders. The findings from this study will provide evidence for policy-makers to make informed decisions regarding the direction for strategic and service planning of acute care services to improve the level of care provided to acutely ill patients in hospital. References 1. Esmonde L, McDonnell A, Ball C, Waskett C, Morgan R, Rashidain A et al. Investigating the effectiveness of Critical Care Outreach Services: A systematic review. Intensive Care Medicine 2006; 32: 1713-1721 2. McGaughey J, Alderdice F, Fowler R, Kapila A, Mayhew A, Moutray M. Outreach and Early Warning Systems for the prevention of Intensive Care admission and death of critically ill patients on general hospital wards. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 3. www.thecochranelibrary.com 3. Winters BD, Pham JC, Hunt EA, Guallar E, Berenholtz S, Pronovost PJ (2007) Rapid Response Systems: A systematic review. Critical Care Medicine 2007; 35 (5): 1238-43 4. Pawson R and Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London; Sage: 1997
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Care of critically ill patients in intensive care units (ICUs) often requires potentially invasive or uncomfortable procedures, such as mechanical ventilation (MV). Sedation can alleviate pain and discomfort, provide protection from stressful or harmful events, prevent anxiety and promote sleep. Various sedative agents are available for use in ICUs. In the UK, the most commonly used sedatives are propofol (Diprivan(®), AstraZeneca), benzodiazepines [e.g. midazolam (Hypnovel(®), Roche) and lorazepam (Ativan(®), Pfizer)] and alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonists [e.g. dexmedetomidine (Dexdor(®), Orion Corporation) and clonidine (Catapres(®), Boehringer Ingelheim)]. Sedative agents vary in onset/duration of effects and in their side effects. The pattern of sedation of alpha-2 agonists is quite different from that of other sedatives in that patients can be aroused readily and their cognitive performance on psychometric tests is usually preserved. Moreover, respiratory depression is less frequent after alpha-2 agonists than after other sedative agents.
OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review to evaluate the comparative effects of alpha-2 agonists (dexmedetomidine and clonidine) and propofol or benzodiazepines (midazolam and lorazepam) in mechanically ventilated adults admitted to ICUs.
DATA SOURCES: We searched major electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE without revisions, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from 1999 to 2014.
METHODS: Evidence was considered from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing dexmedetomidine with clonidine or dexmedetomidine or clonidine with propofol or benzodiazepines such as midazolam, lorazepam and diazepam (Diazemuls(®), Actavis UK Limited). Primary outcomes included mortality, duration of MV, length of ICU stay and adverse events. One reviewer extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included trials. A second reviewer cross-checked all the data extracted. Random-effects meta-analyses were used for data synthesis.
RESULTS: Eighteen RCTs (2489 adult patients) were included. One trial at unclear risk of bias compared dexmedetomidine with clonidine and found that target sedation was achieved in a higher number of patients treated with dexmedetomidine with lesser need for additional sedation. The remaining 17 trials compared dexmedetomidine with propofol or benzodiazepines (midazolam or lorazepam). Trials varied considerably with regard to clinical population, type of comparators, dose of sedative agents, outcome measures and length of follow-up. Overall, risk of bias was generally high or unclear. In particular, few trials blinded outcome assessors. Compared with propofol or benzodiazepines (midazolam or lorazepam), dexmedetomidine had no significant effects on mortality [risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.24, I (2) = 0%; p = 0.78]. Length of ICU stay (mean difference -1.26 days, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.55 days, I (2) = 31%; p = 0.0004) and time to extubation (mean difference -1.85 days, 95% CI -2.61 to -1.09 days, I (2) = 0%; p < 0.00001) were significantly shorter among patients who received dexmedetomidine. No difference in time to target sedation range was observed between sedative interventions (I (2) = 0%; p = 0.14). Dexmedetomidine was associated with a higher risk of bradycardia (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.77, I (2) = 46%; p = 0.001).
LIMITATIONS: Trials varied considerably with regard to participants, type of comparators, dose of sedative agents, outcome measures and length of follow-up. Overall, risk of bias was generally high or unclear. In particular, few trials blinded assessors.
CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the use of clonidine in ICUs is very limited. Dexmedetomidine may be effective in reducing ICU length of stay and time to extubation in critically ill ICU patients. Risk of bradycardia but not of overall mortality is higher among patients treated with dexmedetomidine. Well-designed RCTs are needed to assess the use of clonidine in ICUs and identify subgroups of patients that are more likely to benefit from the use of dexmedetomidine.
STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014014101.
FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. The Health Services Research Unit is core funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates.
Resumo:
Skeletal muscle wasting and weakness are major complications of critical illness and underlie the profound physical and functional impairments experienced by survivors after discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU). Exercise-based rehabilitation has been shown to be beneficial when delivered during ICU admission. This review aimed to determine the effectiveness of exercise rehabilitation initiated after ICU discharge on primary outcomes of functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life. We sought randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized controlled trials, and controlled clinical trials comparing an exercise intervention commenced after ICU discharge vs. any other intervention or a control or ‘usual care’ programme in adult survivors of critical illness. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases were searched up to February 2015. Dual, independent screening of results, data extraction, and quality appraisal were performed. We included six trials involving 483 patients. Overall quality of evidence for both outcomes was very low. All studies evaluated functional exercise capacity, with three reporting positive effects in favour of the intervention. Only two studies evaluated health-related quality of life and neither reported differences between intervention and control groups. Meta-analyses of data were precluded due to variation in study design, types of interventions, and selection and reporting of outcome measurements. We were unable to determine an overall effect on functional exercise capacity or health-related quality of life of interventions initiated after ICU discharge for survivors of critical illness. Findings from ongoing studies are awaited. Future studies need to address methodological aspects of study design and conduct to enhance rigour, quality, and synthesis.