Surviving sepsis campaign in Brazil

Severe sepsis and septic shock have long been a challenge in intensive care because of their common occurrence, high associated costs of care, and significant mortality. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) was developed in an attempt to address clinical inertia in the adoption of evidence-based strategies. The campaign relies on worldwide support from professional societies and has gained consensus on the management of patients with severe sepsis. The guidelines have subsequently been deployed into two bundles, with each bundle component sharing a common relationship in time. The widespread adoption of such evidence-based practice in clinical care has been disappointingly slow despite the quantifiable benefits regarding mortality. In Brazil, a country of continental dimensions with a heterogeneous population and unequal access to health services, this reality is no different. From 2004 to 2007, four prospective studies were published describing the country`s reality. In the multicenter Promoting Global Research Excellence in Severe Sepsis (PROGRESS) Study, the in-hospital mortality rate was higher in Brazil when compared with other countries: 56% against 30% in developed countries and 45% in other developing countries. During these 2.5 years of the campaign in Brazil, 43 hospitals have been receiving the necessary training to put in practice the recommended measures in all Brazilian regions, except for the North. The idea of the campaign is based on a 25% reduction in the relative risk of death from severe sepsis and septic shock within 5 years in the SSC-participating Brazilian hospitals. Ideally, the mortality rate should come to a 41.2% level subject to the 2009 deadline. This article aims to describe the actual scenario of the SSC implementation in Brazilian institutions and to report on some initiatives that have been used to overcome barriers.

Ethical issues in neuroscience research on substance dependence treatment and prevention

Previous chapters have presented the latest findings in neuroscience research, and have pointed to potential treatment and prevention strategies. However, there are many ethical implications of the research itself, as well as the treatment and prevention strategies, that must be considered. The rapid pace of change in the field of neuroscience brings with it a host of new ethical issues, which need to be addressed. This chapter considers the important ethical and human rights issues that are raised by neuroscience research on psychoactive substance dependence.