Development and simultaneous application of multiple care protocols in critical care: a multicenter feasibility study

OBJECTIVE: To test the feasibility of and interactions among three software-driven critical care protocols. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Intensive care units in six European and American university hospitals. PATIENTS: 174 cardiac surgery and 41 septic patients. INTERVENTIONS: Application of software-driven protocols for cardiovascular management, sedation, and weaning during the first 7 days of intensive care. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: All protocols were used simultaneously in 85% of the cardiac surgery and 44% of the septic patients, and any one of the protocols was used for 73 and 44% of study duration, respectively. Protocol use was discontinued in 12% of patients by the treating clinician and in 6% for technical/administrative reasons. The number of protocol steps per unit of time was similar in the two diagnostic groups (n.s. for all protocols). Initial hemodynamic stability (a protocol target) was achieved in 26+/-18 min (mean+/-SD) in cardiac surgery and in 24+/-18 min in septic patients. Sedation targets were reached in 2.4+/-0.2h in cardiac surgery and in 3.6 +/-0.2h in septic patients. Weaning protocol was started in 164 (94%; 154 extubated) cardiac surgery and in 25 (60%; 9 extubated) septic patients. The median (interquartile range) time from starting weaning to extubation (a protocol target) was 89 min (range 44-154 min) for the cardiac surgery patients and 96 min (range 56-205 min) for the septic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple software-driven treatment protocols can be simultaneously applied with high acceptance and rapid achievement of primary treatment goals. Time to reach these primary goals may provide a performance indicator.

General distress, hopelessness—suicidal ideation and worrying in adolescence: Concurrent and predictive validity of a symptom-level bifactor model for clinical diagnoses

BACKGROUND: Clinical disorders often share common symptoms and aetiological factors. Bifactor models acknowledge the role of an underlying general distress component and more specific sub-domains of psychopathology which specify the unique components of disorders over and above a general factor. METHODS: A bifactor model jointly calibrated data on subjective distress from The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire and the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale. The bifactor model encompassed a general distress factor, and specific factors for (a) hopelessness-suicidal ideation, (b) generalised worrying and (c) restlessness-fatigue at age 14 which were related to lifetime clinical diagnoses established by interviews at ages 14 (concurrent validity) and current diagnoses at 17 years (predictive validity) in a British population sample of 1159 adolescents. RESULTS: Diagnostic interviews confirmed the validity of a symptom-level bifactor model. The underlying general distress factor was a powerful but non-specific predictor of affective, anxiety and behaviour disorders. The specific factors for hopelessness-suicidal ideation and generalised worrying contributed to predictive specificity. Hopelessness-suicidal ideation predicted concurrent and future affective disorder; generalised worrying predicted concurrent and future anxiety, specifically concurrent generalised anxiety disorders. Generalised worrying was negatively associated with behaviour disorders. LIMITATIONS: The analyses of gender differences and the prediction of specific disorders was limited due to a low frequency of disorders other than depression. CONCLUSIONS: The bifactor model was able to differentiate concurrent and predict future clinical diagnoses. This can inform the development of targeted as well as non-specific interventions for prevention and treatment of different disorders.