Factors associated with ABCDE bundle adherence in critically ill adults requiring mechanical ventilation: An observational design

Ethnic Disparities in Deep Sedation of Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in the United States: Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Trial

Rationale: Patients identified as Hispanic, the largest minority group in the United States, are more likely to die from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) than non-Hispanic patients. Mechanisms to explain this disparity remain unidentified. However, Hispanic patients may be at risk of overexposure to deep sedation because of language differences between patients and clinicians, and deep sedation is associated with higher ARDS mortality.Objective: We examined associations between Hispanic ethnicity and exposure to deep sedation among patients with ARDS.Methods: A secondary analysis was conducted of patients enrolled in the control arm of a randomized trial of neuromuscular blockade for ARDS across 48 U.S. hospitals. Exposure to deep sedation was measured over the first 5 days that a patient was alive and received mechanical ventilation. Multilevel mixed-effects models were used to evaluate associations between Hispanic ethnicity and exposure to deep sedation, controlling for patient characteristics.Results: Patients identified as Hispanic had approximately five times the odds of deep sedation (odds ratio, 4.98; 95% confidence interval, 2.02-12.28; P < 0.0001) on a given day, compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Hospitals with at least one enrolled Hispanic patient kept all enrolled patients deeply sedated longer than hospitals without any enrolled Hispanic patients (85.8% of ventilator-days vs. 65.5%; P < 0.001).Conclusions: Hispanic patients are at higher risk of exposure to deep sedation than non-Hispanic White patients. There is an urgent need to understand and address disparities in sedation delivery.

Effectiveness of a self-assessment application in evaluating the care coordination competency of intensive care unit nurses in managing patients on life support: An intervention study

AIM

To examine the effectiveness of the feedback from the Nurses' Care Coordination Competency Scale (NCCCS) application (app) used for self-assessing the care coordination competency of intensive care unit (ICU) nurses in managing patients on life support.

METHODS

A non-randomized open-label study was conducted in Japan from November 2021 to March 2022. Participants were 318 ICU nurses from acute hospitals in Japan. They were divided manually into two groups based on their certification status. The intervention was immediate feedback on the results of the care coordination competency self-assessment through the NCCCS app; the control group performed the NCCCS survey with no feedback. The primary outcome was an increase in the NCCCS score 1 month after the intervention. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the scores of the intervention and control groups. Wilcoxon's signed rank sum test was used to compare the scores in the first and second NCCCS surveys.

RESULTS

Forty-one participants were lost to follow-up, leaving 277 participants (intervention = 141, control = 136) for analysis. One month later, NCCCS scores similarly increased in both groups. For nurses with at least 5 years of ICU experience (n = 152), the NCCCS score increased in the intervention group (n = 75) (rising point mean: 4.8, standard deviation [SD]: 9.8) compared with that in the control group (n = 77) (rising point mean: 1.3, SD: 8.3) (p = .048).

CONCLUSIONS

Feedback from the NCCCS app can improve care coordination behavior. However, a certain level of ICU experience may be required to translate feedback into improved behavior.

Improving Outcomes in Mechanically Ventilated Adult ICU Patients Following Implementation of the ICU Liberation (ABCDEF) Bundle Across a Large Healthcare System

OBJECTIVES

To measure how the ICU Liberation Bundle (aka ABCDEF Bundle or the Bundle) affected clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated (MV) adult ICU patients, as well as bundle sustainability and spread across a healthcare system.

DESIGN

We conducted a multicenter, prospective, cohort observational study to measure bundle performance versus patient outcomes and sustainability in 11 adult ICUs at six community hospitals. We then prospectively measured bundle spread and performance across the other 28 hospitals of the healthcare system.

SETTING

A large community-based healthcare system.

PATIENTS

In 11 study ICUs, we enrolled 1,914 MV patients (baseline n = 925, bundle performance/outcomes n = 989), 3,019 non-MV patients (baseline n = 1,323, bundle performance/outcomes n = 1,696), and 2,332 MV patients (bundle sustainability). We enrolled 9,717 MV ICU patients in the other 28 hospitals to assess bundle spread.

INTERVENTIONS

We used evidence-based strategies to implement the bundle in all 34 hospitals.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We compared outcomes for the 12-month baseline and bundle performance periods. Bundle implementation reduced ICU length of stay (LOS) by 0.5 days (p = 0.02), MV duration by 0.6 days (p = 0.01), and ICU LOS greater than or equal to 7 days by 18.1% (p < 0.01). Performance period bundle compliance was compared with the preceding 3-month baseline compliance period. Compliance with pain management and spontaneous awakening trial (SAT) and spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) remained high, and reintubation rates remained low. Sedation assessments increased (p < 0.01) and benzodiazepine sedation use decreased (p < 0.01). Delirium assessments increased (p = 0.02) and delirium prevalence decreased (p = 0.02). Patient mobilization and ICU family engagement did not significantly improve. Bundle element sustainability varied. SAT/SBT compliance dropped by nearly half, benzodiazepine use remained low, sedation and delirium monitoring and management remained high, and patient mobility and family engagement remained low. Bundle compliance in ICUs across the healthcare system exceeded that of study ICUs.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICU Liberation Bundle improves outcomes in MV adult ICU patients. Evidence-based implementation strategies improve bundle performance, spread, and sustainability across large healthcare systems.

Using a real-time ABCDEF compliance tool to understand the role of bundle elements in mortality and delirium

BACKGROUND

ABC-123, a novel Epic electronic medical record real-time score, assigns 0 to 3 points per bundle element to assess ABCDEF bundle compliance. We sought to determine if maximum daily ABC-123 score (ABC-MAX), individual bundle elements, and mobility were associated with mortality and delirium-free/coma-free intensive care unit (DF/CF-ICU) days in critically injured patients.

METHODS

We reviewed 6 months of single-center data (demographics, Injury Severity Score [ISS], Abbreviated Injury Scale of the head [AIS-Head] score, ventilator and restraint use, Richmond Agitation Sedation Score, Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU, ABC-MAX, ABC-123 subscores, and mobility level). Hospital mortality and likelihood of DF/CF-ICU days were endpoints for logistic regression with ISS, AIS-Head, surgery, penetrating trauma, sex, age, restraint and ventilator use, ABC-MAX or individual ABC-123 subscores, and mobility level or a binary variable representing any improvement in mobility during admission.

RESULTS

We reviewed 172 patients (69.8% male; 16.3% penetrating; median age, 50.0 years [IQR, 32.0-64.8 years]; ISS, 17.0 [11.0-26.0]; AIS-Head, 2.0 [0.0-3.0]). Of all patients, 66.9% had delirium, 48.8% were restrained, 51.7% were ventilated, and 11.0% died. Age, ISS, AIS-Head, and penetrating mechanism were associated with increased mortality. Restraints were associated with more than 70% reduction in odds of DF/CF-ICU days. Maximum daily ABC-123 score and mobility level were associated with decreased odds of death and increased odds of DF/CF-ICU days. Any improvement in mobility during hospitalization was associated with an 83% reduction in mortality odds. A and C subscores were associated with increased mortality, and A was also associated with decreased DF/CF-ICU days. B and D subscores were associated with increased DF/CF-ICU days. D and E subscores were associated with decreased mortality.

CONCLUSION

Maximum daily ABC-123 score is associated with reduced mortality and delirium in critically injured patients, while mobility is associated with dramatic reduction in mortality. B and D subscores have the strongest positive effects on both mortality and delirium.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level III.

Informing the standardising of care for prolonged stay patients in the ICU: A scoping review of quality improvement tools

OBJECTIVES

To inform design of quality improvement (QI) tools specific to patients with prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay, we determined characteristics (format/content), development, implementation, and outcomes of published multi-component QI tools used in ICU irrespective of length of stay.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Scoping review searching electronic databases, trial registries and grey literature (January 2000 to January 2022).

RESULTS

We screened 58,378 citations, identifying 96 studies. All tools were designed for use commencing at ICU admission except 3 tools implemented at 3, 5 or 14 days. We identified 32 studies of locally developed checklists, 28 goal setting/structured communication templates, 23 care bundles, and 9 studies of mixed format tools. Most (43 %) tools were designed for use during rounds, fewer tools were designed for use throughout the ICU day (27 %) or stay (9 %). Most studies (55 %) reported process objectives i.e., improving communication, care standardisation, or rounding efficiency. Most common clinical processes QI tools were used to standardise were sedation (62, 65 %), ventilation and weaning (55, 57 %), and analgesia management (58, 60 %). 44 studies reported the effect of the tool on patient outcomes. Of these, only two identified a negative effect - increased ICU length of stay and increased ICU days with pain and delirium.

CONCLUSION

Although we identified numerous QI tools for use in ICU settings, few were designed to specifically address actionable processes of care relevant to the unique needs of prolonged ICU stay patients. Tools that address these needs are urgently required.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

The review protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/Z8MRE.

Monitoring of sedation in mechanically ventilated patients using remote technology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Two years of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted that excessive sedation in the ICU leading to coma and other adverse outcomes remains pervasive. There is a need to improve monitoring and management of sedation in mechanically ventilated patients. Remote technologies that are based on automated analysis of electroencephalogram (EEG) could enhance standard care and alert clinicians real-time when severe EEG suppression or other abnormal brain states are detected.

RECENT FINDINGS

High rates of drug-induced coma as well as delirium were found in several large cohorts of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, high doses of sedatives comparable to general anesthesia have been commonly administered without defined EEG endpoints. Continuous limited-channel EEG can reveal pathologic brain states such as burst suppression, that cannot be diagnosed by neurological examination alone. Recent studies documented that machine learning-based analysis of continuous EEG signal is feasible and that this approach can identify burst suppression as well as delirium with high specificity.

SUMMARY

Preventing oversedation in the ICU remains a challenge. Continuous monitoring of EEG activity, automated EEG analysis, and generation of alerts to clinicians may reduce drug-induced coma and potentially improve patient outcomes.

The ABCDE bundle implementation in an intensive care unit: Facilitators and barriers perceived by nurses and doctors

AIM

To describe the facilitators and barriers perceived by healthcare teams after the implementation of the Awakening, Breathing, Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management and Early mobility bundle in an intensive care unit in Italy. This multicomponent intervention strategy has been associated with lower probabilities of delirium, improved functional outcomes and shorter duration of mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

A survey study conducted between June 2015 and May 2016 explored variables related to intensive care unit team members: perceptions of delirium; knowledge of the Awakening, Breathing, Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management and Early mobility bundle; teamwork perception and resource availability.

RESULTS

Most of the participants affirmed having reasonable knowledge of delirium, outcomes of delirious episodes, Awakening, Breathing, Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management and Early mobility bundle components and their effectiveness. Low coordination between healthcare professionals was identified as a barrier. Overall, the time elapsing from the beginning of implementation of the bundle determined an increase in levels of awareness and confidence in the application of the bundle protocol and the Confusion Assessment Method Intensive Care Unit scale.

CONCLUSION

Issues with the Awakening, Breathing, Coordination, Delirium monitoring/management and Early mobility bundle relating to coordination, management and interdisciplinary ward rounds are critical and should be remedied and monitored. This study could provide the basis for improving bundle implementation strategies and surveying levels of progression in other intensive care units.

Benefits of Early Mobility on Sleep in the Intensive Care Unit

Patient mobility or immobility impacts sleep. Sleep is vital in the intensive care unit (ICU) for the healing process. Currently, the number of patients mobilized in the ICU is low. Nurses should prioritize interventions for their patients that promote movement. Mobility of ICU patients is proven to be safe and is recommended by current evidence-based clinical guidelines. Despite the established benefits of early mobility, there are potential barriers to its implementation in practice. Nurses need to collaborate with the interdisciplinary team to safely perform early and ongoing patient mobilization despite barriers.