806 resultados para CRITICAL-CARE
Resumo:
Background: There is growing interest in the potential utility of real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in diagnosing bloodstream infection by detecting pathogen deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) in blood samples within a few hours. SeptiFast (Roche Diagnostics GmBH, Mannheim, Germany) is a multipathogen probe-based system targeting ribosomal DNA sequences of bacteria and fungi. It detects and identifies the commonest pathogens causing bloodstream infection. As background to this study, we report a systematic review of Phase III diagnostic accuracy studies of SeptiFast, which reveals uncertainty about its likely clinical utility based on widespread evidence of deficiencies in study design and reporting with a high risk of bias.
Objective: Determine the accuracy of SeptiFast real-time PCR for the detection of health-care-associated bloodstream infection, against standard microbiological culture.
Design: Prospective multicentre Phase III clinical diagnostic accuracy study using the standards for the reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies criteria.
Setting: Critical care departments within NHS hospitals in the north-west of England.
Participants: Adult patients requiring blood culture (BC) when developing new signs of systemic inflammation.
Main outcome measures: SeptiFast real-time PCR results at species/genus level compared with microbiological culture in association with independent adjudication of infection. Metrics of diagnostic accuracy were derived including sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Latent class analysis was used to explore the diagnostic performance of culture as a reference standard.
Results: Of 1006 new patient episodes of systemic inflammation in 853 patients, 922 (92%) met the inclusion criteria and provided sufficient information for analysis. Index test assay failure occurred on 69 (7%) occasions. Adult patients had been exposed to a median of 8 days (interquartile range 4–16 days) of hospital care, had high levels of organ support activities and recent antibiotic exposure. SeptiFast real-time PCR, when compared with culture-proven bloodstream infection at species/genus level, had better specificity (85.8%, 95% CI 83.3% to 88.1%) than sensitivity (50%, 95% CI 39.1% to 60.8%). When compared with pooled diagnostic metrics derived from our systematic review, our clinical study revealed lower test accuracy of SeptiFast real-time PCR, mainly as a result of low diagnostic sensitivity. There was a low prevalence of BC-proven pathogens in these patients (9.2%, 95% CI 7.4% to 11.2%) such that the post-test probabilities of both a positive (26.3%, 95% CI 19.8% to 33.7%) and a negative SeptiFast test (5.6%, 95% CI 4.1% to 7.4%) indicate the potential limitations of this technology in the diagnosis of bloodstream infection. However, latent class analysis indicates that BC has a low sensitivity, questioning its relevance as a reference test in this setting. Using this analysis approach, the sensitivity of the SeptiFast test was low but also appeared significantly better than BC. Blood samples identified as positive by either culture or SeptiFast real-time PCR were associated with a high probability (> 95%) of infection, indicating higher diagnostic rule-in utility than was apparent using conventional analyses of diagnostic accuracy.
Conclusion: SeptiFast real-time PCR on blood samples may have rapid rule-in utility for the diagnosis of health-care-associated bloodstream infection but the lack of sensitivity is a significant limiting factor. Innovations aimed at improved diagnostic sensitivity of real-time PCR in this setting are urgently required. Future work recommendations include technology developments to improve the efficiency of pathogen DNA extraction and the capacity to detect a much broader range of pathogens and drug resistance genes and the application of new statistical approaches able to more reliably assess test performance in situation where the reference standard (e.g. blood culture in the setting of high antimicrobial use) is prone to error.
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:
Purpose of review: Appropriate selection and definition of outcome measures are essential for clinical trials to be maximally informative. Core outcome sets (an agreed, standardized collection of outcomes measured and reported in all trials for a specific clinical area) were developed due to established inconsistencies in trial outcome selection. This review discusses the rationale for, and methods of, core outcome set development, as well as current initiatives in critical care.
Recent findings: Recent systematic reviews of reported outcomes and measurement instruments relevant to the critically ill highlight inconsistencies in outcome selection, definition, and measurement, thus establishing the need for core outcome sets. Current critical care initiatives include development of core outcome sets for trials aimed at reducing mechanical ventilation duration; rehabilitation following critical illness; long-term outcomes in acute respiratory failure; and epidemic and pandemic studies of severe acute respiratory infection.
Summary: Development and utilization of core outcome sets for studies relevant to the critically ill is in its infancy compared to other specialties. Notwithstanding, core outcome set development frameworks and guidelines are available, several sets are in various stages of development, and there is strong support from international investigator-led collaborations including the International Forum for Acute Care Trialists.
Resumo:
Organ and tissue dysfunction and failure cause high mortality rates around the world. Tissue and organs transplantation is an established, cost-effective, life-saving treatment for patients with organ failure. However, there is a large gap between the need for and the supply of donor organs. Acute and critical care nurses have a central role in the organ donation process, from identifying and assessing potential donors and supporting their families to involvement in logistics. Nurses with an in-depth knowledge of donation understand its clinical and technical aspects as well as the moral and legal considerations. Nurses have a major role to play in tackling organ and tissue shortages. Such a role cannot be adequately performed if nurses are not fully educated about donation and transplant. Such education could be incorporated into mandatory training and completed by all nurses.
Resumo:
Background Rapid Response Systems (RRS) consist of four interrelated and interdependent components; an event detection and trigger mechanism, a response strategy, a governance structure and process improvement system. These multiple components of the RRS pose problems in evaluation as the intervention is complex and cannot be evaluated using a traditional systematic review. Complex interventions in healthcare aimed at changing service delivery and related behaviour of health professionals require a different approach to summarising the evidence. Realist synthesis is such an approach to reviewing research evidence on complex interventions to provide an explanatory analysis of how and why an intervention works or doesn’t work in practice. The core principle is to make explicit the underlying assumptions about how an intervention is suppose to work (ie programme theory) and then use this theory to guide evaluation. Methods A realist synthesis process was used to explain those factors that enable or constrain the success of RRS programmes. Results The findings from the review include the articulation of the RRS programme theories, evaluation of whether these theories are supported or refuted by the research evidence and an evaluation of evidence to explain the underlying reasons why RRS works or doesn’t work in practice. Rival conjectured RRS programme theories were identified to explain the constraining factors regarding implementation of RRS in practice. These programme theories are presented using a logic model to highlight all the components which impact or influence the delivery of RRS programmes in the practice setting. The evidence from the realist synthesis provided the foundation for the development of hypothesis to test and refine the theories in the subsequent stages of the Realist Evaluation PhD study [1]. This information will be useful in providing evidence and direction for strategic and service planning of acute care to improve patient safety in hospital. References: McGaughey J, Blackwood B, O’Halloran P, Trinder T. J. & Porter S. (2010) Realistic Evaluation of Early Warning Systems and the Acute Life-threatening Events – Recognition and Treatment training course for early recognition and management of deteriorating ward-based patients: research protocol. Journal of Advanced Nursing 66 (4), 923-932.
Resumo:
Critically ill patients depend on artificial nutrition for the maintenance of their metabolic functions and lean body mass, as well as for limiting underfeeding-related complications. Current guidelines recommend enteral nutrition (EN), possibly within the first 48 hours, as the best way to provide the nutrients and prevent infections. EN may be difficult to realize or may be contraindicated in some patients, such as those presenting anatomic intestinal continuity problems or splanchnic ischemia. A series of contradictory trials regarding the best route and timing for feeding have left the medical community with great uncertainty regarding the place of parenteral nutrition (PN) in critically ill patients. Many of the deleterious effects attributed to PN result from inadequate indications, or from overfeeding. The latter is due firstly to the easier delivery of nutrients by PN compared with EN increasing the risk of overfeeding, and secondly to the use of approximate energy targets, generally based on predictive equations: these equations are static and inaccurate in about 70% of patients. Such high uncertainty about requirements compromises attempts at conducting nutrition trials without indirect calorimetry support because the results cannot be trusted; indeed, both underfeeding and overfeeding are equally deleterious. An individualized therapy is required. A pragmatic approach to feeding is proposed: at first to attempt EN whenever and as early as possible, then to use indirect calorimetry if available, and to monitor delivery and response to feeding, and finally to consider the option of combining EN with PN in case of insufficient EN from day 4 onwards.
Resumo:
The influx of nurses to the critical-care environment is continuous. In many workplaces, the nurses who are new to critical care are also newly graduated nurses. These new critical-care nurses and their critical-care nursing colleagues, who may have worked in critical care for many years, need to demonstrate expert judgment in order to optimize the potential for positive patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to explore critical-care nurses' perceptions about critical thinking and expert nursing judgment. Using grounded theory research design, I collected data from 1 1 critical-care nurses through focus groups, an interview, and postparticipation questionnaires. I have articulated a Critical-thinking Modelfor Expert Nursing Judgment. The educational model is directly relevant to practicing critical-care nurses and nursing leaders who guide critical-care nursing practice. The Critical-thinking Modelfor Expert Nursing Judgment contributes to educational theory by objectifying the substantive topic of critical thinking and expert judgment. The model has broad applicability within the domain of education and specific applicability within the domain of nursing education.
Resumo:
Nurse Managers need today more than ever instruments that can be used to justify the billions of dollars that are invested in the healthcare sector annually. The objective of the study was to establish the validity and reliability of the Nursing Intensity Critical Care Questionnaire (NICCQ) in a cardiac surgery intensive care unit (CSICU) of a tertiary hospital. An expert panel evaluated the questionnaire’s content validity while generalizability theory was used to estimate the G and D coefficients. Decision studies enabled the investigators to determine if the current ward functioning of having one nurse rate one patient is adequate. Also, exploratory factorial analyses (EFA) preceded by principal component analyses (PCA) looked at establishing the factorial structure for the NICCQ. Finally, the NICCQ was correlated with a severity of illness score known as the Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) to estimate the correlation between patient illness and nursing intensity of care. The NICCQ was used by nurses using a sample of patients who had undergone cardiac surgery and were hospitalized on a CSICU of a tertiary teaching hospital. A convenience sample of nurses and patients on the CSICU was used to reflect the procedures and usual functioning of the unit. Each item on the questionnaire measured nursing intensity of care using a three point ordinal scale (Light, Moderate, and Severe) for the first 11 items, and a five point ordinal scale for the global assessment item (including the intermediate categories light/moderate and moderate/severe). The questionnaire proved to be both valid and able to be generalized to all nurses working in the CSICU. Overall results showed that 94.4% of the item generalizability coefficients indicated acceptable to excellent reliability, with most (86.1%) being larger than .90. The EFA established a simple 4 factor structure that explained little of the variance (32%). A correlation coefficient of 0.36 indicated that patient’ severity of illness is somewhat correlated with nursing intensity of care. The study showed that the NICCQ is a valid questionnaire with a generalizability coefficient that is large enough to be used by nurses’ managers for administrative purposes. Further research using larger samples would be needed to further test the factor structure of the NICCQ.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Physiologic data display is essential to decision making in critical care. Current displays echo first-generation hemodynamic monitors dating to the 1970s and have not kept pace with new insights into physiology or the needs of clinicians who must make progressively more complex decisions about their patients. The effectiveness of any redesign must be tested before deployment. Tools that compare current displays with novel presentations of processed physiologic data are required. Regenerating conventional physiologic displays from archived physiologic data is an essential first step. OBJECTIVES: The purposes of the study were to (1) describe the SSSI (single sensor single indicator) paradigm that is currently used for physiologic signal displays, (2) identify and discuss possible extensions and enhancements of the SSSI paradigm, and (3) develop a general approach and a software prototype to construct such "extended SSSI displays" from raw data. RESULTS: We present Multi Wave Animator (MWA) framework-a set of open source MATLAB (MathWorks, Inc., Natick, MA, USA) scripts aimed to create dynamic visualizations (eg, video files in AVI format) of patient vital signs recorded from bedside (intensive care unit or operating room) monitors. Multi Wave Animator creates animations in which vital signs are displayed to mimic their appearance on current bedside monitors. The source code of MWA is freely available online together with a detailed tutorial and sample data sets.
Resumo:
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Family satisfaction in the ICU reflects the extent to which perceived needs and expectations of family members of critically ill patients are met by healthcare professionals. Here, we present recently developed tools to assess family satisfaction, with a special focus on their psychometric properties. Assessing family satisfaction, however, is not of much use if it is not followed by interpretation of the results and, if needed, consecutive measures to improve care of the patients and their families, or improvement in communication and decision-making. Accordingly, this review will outline recent findings in this field. Finally, possible areas of future research are addressed. RECENT FINDINGS: To assess family satisfaction in the ICU, several domains deserve attention. They include, among others, care of the patient, counseling and emotional support of family members, information and decision-making. Overall, communication between physicians or nurses and members of the family remains a key topic, and there are many opportunities to improve. They include not only communication style, timing and appropriate wording but also, for example, assessments to see if information was adequately received and also understood. Whether unfulfilled needs of individual members of the family or of the family as a social system result in negative long-term sequels remains an open question. SUMMARY: Assessing and analyzing family satisfaction in the ICU ultimately will support healthcare professionals in their continuing effort to improve care of critically ill patients and their families.
Resumo:
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Critical incident reporting alone does not necessarily improve patient safety or even patient outcomes. Substantial improvement has been made by focusing on the further two steps of critical incident monitoring, that is, the analysis of critical incidents and implementation of system changes. The system approach to patient safety had an impact on the view about the patient's role in safety. This review aims to analyse recent advances in the technique of reporting, the analysis of reported incidents, and the implementation of actual system improvements. It also explores how families should be approached about safety issues. RECENT FINDINGS: It is essential to make as many critical incidents as possible known to the intensive care team. Several factors have been shown to increase the reporting rate: anonymity, regular feedback about the errors reported, and the existence of a safety climate. Risk scoring of critical incident reports and root cause analysis may help in the analysis of incidents. Research suggests that patients can be successfully involved in safety. SUMMARY: A persisting high number of reported incidents is anticipated and regarded as continuing good safety culture. However, only the implementation of system changes, based on incident reports, and also involving the expertise of patients and their families, has the potential to improve patient outcome. Hard outcome criteria, such as standardized mortality ratio, have not yet been shown to improve as a result of critical incident monitoring.