Intensive Care Medicine最新文献

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate one-year outcomes of lower versus higher oxygenation targets in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and severe hypoxaemia.

Methods: We conducted pre-planned analyses of one-year mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in the Handling Oxygenation Targets in COVID-19 trial. The trial randomised 726 ICU patients with COVID-19 and hypoxaemia to partial pressure of arterial oxygen targets of 8 kPa (60 mmHg) versus 12 kPa (90 mmHg) during ICU stay up to 90 days, including readmissions. HRQoL was assessed using EuroQol visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) and 5-level 5-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). Outcomes were analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Non-survivors were assigned the worst possible score (zero), and multiple imputation was applied for missing EQ-VAS values.

Results: We obtained one-year vital status for 691/726 (95.2%) of patients and HRQoL data for 642/726 (88.4%). At one year, 117/348 (33.6%) of patients in the lower-oxygenation group had died compared to 134/343 (39.1%) in the higher-oxygenation group (adjusted risk ratio: 0.85; 98.6% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.09; p = 0.11). Median EQ-VAS was 50 (interquartile range, 0-80) versus 40 (0-75) (adjusted mean difference: 4.8; 98.6% CI  - 2.2 to 11.9; p = 0.09) and EQ-5D-5L index values were 0.61 (0-0.81) in the lower-oxygenation group versus 0.43 (0-0.79) (p = 0.20) in the higher-oxygenation group, respectively.

Conclusion: Among adult ICU patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxaemia, one-year mortality results were most compatible with benefit of the lower oxygenation target, which did not appear to result in more survivors with poor quality of life.

Purpose: Echocardiography is recommended as a first-line tool in the assessment of patients with shock. The current provision of echocardiography in critical care is poorly defined. The aims of this work were to evaluate the utilisation of echocardiography in patients presenting to critical care with shock, its impact on decision making, and adherence to governance guidelines.

Methods: We conducted a prospective, multi-centre, observational study in 178 critical care units across the United Kingdom (UK) and Crown Dependencies, led by the UK's Trainee Research in Intensive Care Network. Consecutive adult patients (≥ 18 years) admitted with shock were followed up for 72 h to ascertain whether they received an echocardiogram, the nature of any scan performed, and its effect on critical treatment decision making.

Results: 1015 patients with shock were included. An echocardiogram was performed on 545 (54%) patients within 72 h and 436 (43%) within 24 h of admission. Most scans were performed by the critical care team (n = 314, 58%). Echocardiography was reported to either reduce diagnostic uncertainty or change management in 291 (54%) cases. Patients with obstructive or cardiogenic shock had their management altered numerically more often by echocardiography (n = 15 [75%] and n = 100 [58%] respectively). Twenty-five percent of echocardiograms performed adhered to current national governance and image storage guidance.

Conclusion: Use of echocardiography in the assessment of patients with shock remains heterogenous. When echocardiography is used, it improves diagnostic certainty or changes management in most patients. Future research should explore barriers to increasing use of echocardiography in assessing patients presenting with shock.

Purpose

During the initial phase of the pandemic, healthcare professionals faced difficulties due to the limited availability of comprehensive learning resources on managing patients affected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The COVID-19 Skills Preparation Course (C19_SPACE) was tailored to meet the overwhelming demand for specialized training. The primary objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and impact of this program on enhancing clinical knowledge and to identify factors affecting this improvement.

Methods

As part of the project, data were collected prospectively to measure the baseline knowledge. After the descriptive statistics, multiple and multivariate logistic regression models were executed to identify the factors associated with knowledge increase.

Results

The final sample included 3140 medical doctors (MDs) and 3090 nurses (RNs). For the primary analysis, the mean value of the baseline knowledge test score of MDs was 62.41 (standard deviation, SD = 13.48), and it significantly (p < 0.001) increased to 84.65 (SD = 11.95). Factors influencing overall knowledge scores were female sex (AOR = 1.34 [1.04–1.73]), being a specialist qualified for intensive care medicine (adjusted odds ratio, AOR = 0.56, [0.33–0.96]), and performance on the pre-test (AOR = 0.91, [0.90–0.92]). As for the RNs, the mean value of the total knowledge score was 63.25 (SD = 13.53), which significantly (p < 0.001) increased to 81.51 (SD = 14.21). Factor associated with knowledge was performance on the pre-test (AOR = 0.92 [0.92–0.93]).

Conclusions

C19_SPACE effectively increased the clinical knowledge of doctors and nurses. The effect was more pronounced in the program’s target group of healthcare workers with less experience in the intensive care unit (ICU). Other factors associated with knowledge enhancement were sex and being a specialist in intensive care.