Intensive care medicine in 2050: preventing harm

Fully automated postoperative ventilation in cardiac surgery patients: a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Ensuring that lung-protective ventilation is achieved at scale is challenging in perioperative practice. Fully automated ventilation may be more effective in delivering lung-protective ventilation. Here, we compared automated lung-protective ventilation with conventional ventilation after elective cardiac surgery in haemodynamically stable patients.

METHODS

In this single-centre investigator-led study, patients were randomly assigned at the end of cardiac surgery to receive either automated (adaptive support ventilation) or conventional ventilation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of postoperative ventilation time characterised by exposure to predefined optimal, acceptable, and critical (injurious) ventilatory parameters in the first three postoperative hours. Secondary outcomes included severe hypoxaemia (Spo₂ <85%) and resumption of spontaneous breathing. Data are presented as mean (95% confidence intervals [CIs]).

RESULTS

We randomised 220 patients (30.4% females; age: 62-76 yr). Subjects randomised to automated ventilation (n=109) spent a 29.7% (95% CI: 22.1-37.4) higher mean proportion of postoperative ventilation time receiving optimal postoperative ventilation after surgery (P<0.001) compared with subjects receiving conventional postoperative ventilation (n=111). Automated ventilation also reduced the proportion of postoperative ventilation time that subjects were exposed to injurious ventilatory settings by 2.5% (95% CI: 1-4; P=0.003). Severe hypoxaemia was less likely in subjects randomised to automated ventilation (risk ratio: 0.26 [0.22-0.31]; P<0.01). Subjects resumed spontaneous breathing more rapidly when randomised to automated ventilation (hazard ratio: 1.38 [1.05-1.83]; P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Fully automated ventilation in haemodynamically stable patients after cardiac surgery optimised lung-protective ventilation during postoperative ventilation, with fewer episodes of severe hypoxaemia and an accelerated resumption of spontaneous breathing.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03180203.

White paper: statement on conflicts of interest

INTRODUCTION

Conflicts of interest are a normal part of human social intercourse. They become problematic when there is a power differential between participants in the setting of relationships requiring a high degree of trust, as in healthcare. In this white paper we consider how these conflicts may be detected and mitigated.

METHODS

Following Medline search and reference chaining, we undertook a narrative review of the literature with iterative discussion.

RESULTS

Conflicts of interest may be financial, professional or personal, and may operate at the level of the individual or the organisation. Unmanaged, they become a source of bias which places the interests of the professional or the organisation before those of the patient. Reported with increasing frequency, conflicts damage trust, harm patients, and defraud the health system. We make 15 recommendations for minimising conflicts of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

Nationally funded open-access registries should be established to permit complete disclosure of financial, professional, and personal relationships with the potential for driving bias in research, clinical practice, or health management. Governance of disclosure should be the responsibility of employing organisations through annual staff appraisals, audited by national research integrity committees. Research fraud should incur suspension of the license to practice. Organisations should monitor staff perceptions of ethical climate to enhance awareness of staff behaviours and the potential for misconduct driven by academic pressures. Clear separation of advisory and voting roles is needed in best practice guideline panels. Professional societies and scientific journals should display conflict of interest policies for their own staff and officers as well as for speakers and authors. Undergraduates should not be exposed to pharmaceutical promotions masquerading as education. Undergraduate and postgraduate training programmes should include teaching about managing conflicts of interest and identifying research misconduct.

Competing and conflicting interests in the care of critically ill patients

Medical professionals are expected to prioritize patient interests, and most patients trust physicians to act in their best interest. However, a single patient is never a physician's sole concern. The competing interests of other patients, clinicians, family members, hospital administrators, regulators, insurers, and trainees are omnipresent. While prioritizing patient interests is always a struggle, it is especially challenging and important in the ICU setting where most patients lack the ability to advocate for themselves or seek alternative sources of care. This review explores factors that increase the risk, or the perception, that an ICU physician will reason, recommend, or act in a way that is not in their patient's best interest and discusses steps that could help minimize the impact of these factors on patient care.