The impact of ABCDE bundle implementation on patient outcomes: A nationwide cohort study

Analgosedation and delirium practices in critically ill patients in the Pan-American and Iberian setting, and factors associated with oversedation after the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from the PANDEMIC study

Oversedation has adverse effects on critically ill patients. The Analgosedation and Delirium Committee of the FEPIMCTI (Pan-American and Iberian Federation of Critical Care Medicine and Intensive Care) conducted a cross-sectional study through a survey addressed to ICU physicians: PANDEMIC (Pan-American and Iberian Study on the Management of Analgosedation and Delirium in Critical Care [fepImCti]). HYPOTHESIS: Worsening of these practices in the course of the pandemic and that continued afterwards, with further oversedation. OBJECTIVES: Perception of analgosedation and delirium practices in Pan-American and Iberian ICUs before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and factors associated with persistent oversedation after the pandemic. Of the 1008 respondents, 25% perceived oversedation after the pandemic (95%CI 22.4-27.8). This perception was higher in South America (35.8%, P < .001). Main risk factor: habit acquired during the pandemic (adjusted OR [aOR] 3.16, 95%CI 2.24-4.45, P < .001). Main protective factor: delirium monitoring before the pandemic (aOR 0.70, 95%CI 0.50-0.98, P = .038). The factors identified in this study provide a basis for targeting future interventions.

The impact of multidisciplinary collaborative bundled care on analgesia and sedation in ICU patients with endotracheal intubation

BACKGROUND

Effective analgesia and sedation management play a crucial role in reducing the intensity of coughing in patients with endotracheal intubation and improving clinical outcomes. However, current approaches are predominantly singular and lack comprehensive management strategies based on multidisciplinary collaboration. This study aims to evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary collaborative bundled care on analgesia and sedation in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with endotracheal intubation, providing evidence to inform clinical practice.

METHODS

Seventy ICU patients were enrolled with endotracheal intubation, admitted between January and August 2024. They were divided into a control group (n = 35) receiving routine care (admitted from January to April) and an intervention group (n = 35) receiving multidisciplinary collaborative bundled care (admitted from May to August). Outcomes measured included physical restraint use, analgesic dosage, cough strength, delirium incidence, and duration of mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

The intervention group had significantly lower doses of remifentanil (8.37 ± 1.50 mg) and midazolam (21.43 ± 3.74 mg) compared to the control group (9.92 ± 1.58 and 31.12 ± 7.89 mg; P < .05). The incidence of delirium was also lower in the intervention group (11.4%) than in the control group (31.4%; P < .05). Delirium onset was delayed in the intervention group (3.02 ± 1.05 days) compared to the control group (2.58 ± 0.79 days), and its duration was shorter (3.43 ± 1.74 vs 5.12 ± 1.89 days; P < .05). Additionally, physical restraints were significantly lower in the intervention group (22.9% vs 45.7%; P < .05). Cough strength was notably higher in the intervention group (4.74 ± 0.82 vs 3.36 ± 0.76; P < .05), and the duration of mechanical ventilation was reduced (4.77 ± 1.42 vs 5.92 ± 1.66 days; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Multidisciplinary collaborative bundled care improves sedation and analgesia outcomes in ICU patients with endotracheal intubation, reducing medication dosage, incidence of delirium, physical restraint use, and duration of mechanical ventilation while enhancing cough strength.

Delivery of evidence-based critical care practices across the United Kingdom: A UK-wide multi-site service evaluation in adult units

Background

The ICU Liberation Bundle was developed to improve outcomes for patients admitted to critical care. Despite a lack of Bundle adoption in the UK, the individual evidence-based practices (EBPs) within the bundle are defined as standards of care by the UK Intensive Care Society. There are limited data on the delivery of these EBPs.

Objective

To evaluate current delivery of the EBPs of the ICU Liberation bundle in a sample of hospitals in the UK National Health Service (NHS) presenting delivery of EBP's between hospitals, their stability of delivery across multiple weeks and in comparison to US hospitals in the original ICU Liberation Bundle study.

Methods

Multi-centre service evaluation, using modified definitions of compliance from the ICU Liberation Bundle study. We sampled six representative units from across the UK; data collection totalled 1116 patient days. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Across all six units, patients received a median of 42.9% (IQR 40%-60%) of all possible bundle EBPs. Unit bundle proportional compliance (number of components completed/eligible number of components) ranged from 40.0% (IQR 28.6%-50.0%) to 71.4% (IQR 57.1%-80.0%). Units completed spontaneous awakening trials most regularly in 80.1% of eligible patients (149/186). Delirium assessments were the least adhered to EBP with only 32.2% (359/1116) of patients receiving at least two validated delirium assessments per day. Full bundle compliance was lower in the UK cohort in comparison to the original trial (4% vs 8%).

Discussion

We identified substantial variation in the delivery of seven evidence-based practices that are considered standards of care in the UK. Variation existed between hospitals and within each hospital over time. These data begin to describe the current state of EBP adherence in a selection of critical care units.

Theory-based and evidence-based nursing interventions for the prevention of ICU-acquired weakness in the intensive care unit: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise and map the evidence of a theory- and evidence-based nursing intervention for the prevention of ICU-acquired weakness and evaluate its effectiveness in terms of the incidence of ICU-acquired weakness, incidence of delirium, and length of hospital stay.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Academic Search Complete, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from database inception to November 2023. The eligible studies focused on critically ill patients in the intensive care unit, used a theory- and evidence-based nursing intervention, and reported the incidence of ICU-acquired weakness and/or used the Medical Research Council Scale. The methodological quality of the included studies was critically appraised by two authors using the appropriate Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tool for randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and cohort studies. Additionally, the weighted kappa coefficient was used to assess inter-rater agreement of the quality assessment. Data were reported using a narrative synthesis. This systematic review was registered by the International Prospective Register of Systematic Review (PROSPERO; CRD42023477011).

RESULTS

A total of 5162 studies were initially retrieved, and 9 studies were eventually included after screening. This systematic review revealed that preventive nursing interventions for ICU-acquired weakness mainly include (a) physiotherapy, including neuromuscular electrical stimulation and early rehabilitation, and (b) nutritional support. In addition, (c) airway management, (d) sedation and analgesia management, (e) complication prevention (delirium, stress injury and deep vein thrombosis prevention), and (f) psychological care were also provided. The theories are dominated by goal-oriented theories, and the evidence is mainly the ABCDE bundle in the included studies. The results show that theory- or evidence-based nursing interventions are effective in reducing the incidence of ICU-acquired weakness (or improving the Medical Research Council Scale scores), decreasing the incidence of delirium, shortening the length of hospital stay, and improving patients' self-care and quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Theory- and evidence-based nursing interventions have good results in preventing ICU-acquired weakness in critically ill patients. Current nursing interventions favour a combination of multiple interventions rather than just a single intervention. Therefore, preventive measures for ICU-acquired weakness should be viewed as complex interventions and should be based on theory or evidence. This systematic review is based on a small number of trials. Thus, more high-quality randomised controlled trials are needed to draw definitive conclusions about the impact of theory- and evidence-based nursing interventions on the prevention of ICU-acquired weakness.

Practices of the ABCDEF care bundle in intensive care units as reported by nurses: A cross-sectional study from Turkey

BACKGROUND

Recent critical care guidelines recommended the evidence-based ABCDEF care bundle for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, limited information is available on the implementation of the bundle in Turkish ICUs.

AIM

To assess the current practices of the ABCDEF care bundle as reported by ICU nurses.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study using a web-based survey was conducted. Researchers invited nurses with at least 1 year of ICU experience to participate by sending the link to the research questionnaires they created in Google Forms to the one ICU nurse association and one communication group of which they are members.

RESULTS

A total of 342 ICU nurses completed the survey. Although 92% of the participants performed pain assessments in their ICUs, 52.7% reported not using protocols. Based on the responses of the nurses, spontaneous awakening and breathing trials are performed in 88.8% and 92.4%, respectively, of ICUs. Fewer than half of the participants reported following a sedation protocol in their ICUs. Only 54.7% of ICU nurses surveyed reported routinely monitoring patients for delirium. It was reported that early mobilization was practised in 68.7% of ICUs, but non-ventilated patients were mobilized more frequently (70.2%), and 9.7% of ICUs had mobilization teams. Family members were actively involved in 95% of ICUs; however, 9.7% used dedicated staff to support families and 3.5% reported that their unit was open 24 h/day for visits.

CONCLUSIONS

While the implementation of most pain and sedation evaluations in ICUs were reported by nurses, many of them did not use structured delirium assessments. There is a need to encourage early mobilization programs and family participation.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Health institutions can improve patient care and outcomes by establishing and standardizing a protocol for each component of the ABCDEF care bundle in ICUs.

Implementing pain, agitation, delirium, and sleep deprivation protocol in critically ill patients: A pilot study on pharmacological interventions

Critically ill patients frequently experience pain, agitation, delirium, and sleep deprivation, which have been linked to increased mortality and unfavorable clinical outcomes. To address these challenges, the Pain, Agitation, Delirium, and Sleep Deprivation (PADS) protocol was developed, aiming to mitigate mortality and improve clinical outcomes. This study focuses on assessing the protocol's impact using a robust before-and-after study design in the medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs) at Ramathibodi Hospital. Using an observational approach, this study compares clinical outcomes before and after implementing the PADS protocol in the ICUs. Two patient cohorts were identified: the "before" group, comprising 254 patients with retrospective data collected between May 2018 and September 2019, and the "after" group, consisting of 255 patients for whom prospective data was collected from May to September 2020. Analysis reveals improvements in the after group. Specifically, there was a significant increase in 14-day ICU-free days (9.95 days vs. 10.40 days, p value = 0.014), a decrease in delirium incidence (18.1% vs. 16.1%, p value < 0.001), and a significant reduction in benzodiazepine usage (38.6% vs. 24.6%, p value = 0.001) within the after group. This study emphasizes the protocol's potential to improve patient care and highlights its significance in the ICU context.

Evaluation of the Impact of ABCDEF Bundle Compliance Rates on Postintensive Care Syndrome: A Secondary Analysis Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to examine the association between ABCDEF bundles and long-term postintensive care syndrome (PICS)-related outcomes.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of the J-PICS study.

SETTING

This study was simultaneously conducted in 14 centers and 16 ICUs in Japan between April 1, 2019, and September 30, 2019.

PATIENTS

Adult ICU patients who were expected to be on a ventilator for at least 48 hours.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Bundle compliance for the last 24 hours was recorded using a checklist at 8:00 am The bundle compliance rate was defined as the 3-day average of the number of bundles performed each day divided by the total number of bundles. The relationship between the bundle compliance rate and PICS prevalence (defined by the 36-item Short Form Physical Component Scale, Mental Component Scale, and Short Memory Questionnaire) was examined. A total of 191 patients were included in this study. Of these, 33 patients (17.3%) died in-hospital and 48 (25.1%) died within 6 months. Of the 96 patients with 6-month outcome data, 61 patients (63.5%) had PICS and 35 (36.5%) were non-PICS. The total bundle compliance rate was 69.8%; the rate was significantly lower in the 6-month mortality group (66.6% vs 71.6%, p = 0.031). Bundle compliance rates in patients with and without PICS were 71.3% and 69.9%, respectively ( p = 0.61). After adjusting for confounding variables, bundle compliance rates were not significantly different in the context of PICS prevalence ( p = 0.56). A strong negative correlation between the bundle compliance rate and PICS prevalence ( r = -0.84, R 2 = 0.71, p = 0.035) was observed in high-volume centers.

CONCLUSIONS

The bundle compliance rate was not associated with PICS prevalence. However, 6-month mortality was lower with a higher bundle compliance rate. A trend toward a lower PICS prevalence was associated with higher bundle compliance in high-volume centers.