Association of ICU Admission and Outcomes in Sepsis and Acute Respiratory Failure

Variation in Sedative and Analgesic Use During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Providing analgesia and sedation is an essential component of caring for many mechanically ventilated patients. The selection of analgesic and sedative medications during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact of these sedation practices on patient outcomes, remain incompletely characterized.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What were the hospital patterns of analgesic and sedative use for patients with COVID-19 who received mechanical ventilation (MV), and what differences in clinical patient outcomes were observed across prevailing sedation practices?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted an observational cohort study of hospitalized adults who received MV for COVID-19 from February 2020 through April 2021 within the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study (VIRUS) COVID-19 Registry. To describe common sedation practices, we used hierarchical clustering to group hospitals based on the percentage of patients who received various analgesic and sedative medications. We then used multivariable regression models to evaluate the association between hospital analgesia and sedation cluster and duration of MV (with a placement of death [POD] approach to account for competing risks).

RESULTS

We identified 1,313 adults across 35 hospitals admitted with COVID-19 who received MV. Two clusters of analgesia and sedation practices were identified. Cluster 1 hospitals generally administered opioids and propofol with occasional use of additional sedatives (eg, benzodiazepines, alpha-agonists, and ketamine); cluster 2 hospitals predominantly used opioids and benzodiazepines without other sedatives. As compared with patients in cluster 2, patients admitted to cluster 1 hospitals underwent a shorter adjusted median duration of MV with POD (β-estimate, -5.9; 95% CI, -11.2 to -0.6; P = .03).

INTERPRETATION

Patients who received MV for COVID-19 in hospitals that prioritized opioids and propofol for analgesia and sedation experienced shorter adjusted median duration of MV with POD as compared with patients who received MV in hospitals that primarily used opioids and benzodiazepines.

The value of five scoring systems in predicting the prognosis of patients with sepsis-associated acute respiratory failure

Our study aimed to identify the optimal scoring system for predicting the prognosis of patients with sepsis-associated acute respiratory failure (SA-ARF). All data were taken from the fourth version of the Markets in Intensive Care Medicine (MIMIC-IV) database. Independent risk factors for death in hospitals were confirmed by regression analysis. The predictive value of the five scoring systems was evaluated by receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Kaplan‒Meier curves showed the impact of acute physiology score III (APSIII) on survival and prognosis in patients with SA-ARF. Decision curve analysis (DCA) identified a scoring system with the highest net clinical benefit. ROC curve analysis showed that APS III (AUC: 0.755, 95% Cl 0.714-0.768) and Logical Organ Dysfunction System (LODS) (AUC: 0.731, 95% Cl 0.717-0.7745) were better than Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) (AUC: 0.727, 95% CI 0.713-0.741), Oxford Acute Severity of Illness Score (OASIS) (AUC: 0.706, 95% CI 0.691-0.720) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) (AUC: 0.606, 95% CI 0.590-0.621) in assessing in-hospital mortality. Kaplan‒Meier survival analysis patients in the high-APS III score group had a considerably poorer median survival time. The DCA curve showed that APS III may provide better clinical benefits for patients. We demonstrated that the APS III score is an excellent predictor of in-hospital mortality.

SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS in the diagnosis of sepsis and prediction of adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We compared Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) for sepsis diagnosis and adverse outcomes prediction.

METHODS

Clinical studies that used SIRS, SOFA, qSOFA, and NEWS for sepsis diagnosis and prognosis assessment were included. Data were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed for outcome measures, including sepsis diagnosis, in-hospital mortality, 7/10/14-day mortality, 28/30-day mortality, and ICU admission.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven included studies showed good overall quality. Regarding sepsis prediction, SIRS demonstrated high sensitivity (0.85) but low specificity (0.41), qSOFA showed low sensitivity (0.42) but high specificity (0.98), and NEWS exhibited high sensitivity (0.71) and specificity (0.85). For predicting in-hospital mortality, SOFA demonstrated the highest sensitivity (0.89) and specificity (0.69). In terms of predicting 7/10/14-day mortality, SIRS exhibited high sensitivity (0.87), while qSOFA had high specificity (0.75). For predicting 28/30-day mortality, SOFA showed high sensitivity (0.97) but low specificity (0.14), whereas qSOFA displayed low sensitivity (0.41) but high specificity (0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

NEWS independently demonstrates good diagnostic capability for sepsis, especially in high-income countries. SOFA emerges as the optimal choice for predicting in-hospital mortality and can be employed as a screening tool for 28/30-day mortality in low-income countries.

Strategies to Assess the Effect of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure on Long-Term Clinically Important Outcomes among Patients with Symptomatic Obstructive Sleep Apnea: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the first-line treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Although CPAP improves symptoms (e.g., daytime sleepiness), there is a lack of high-quality evidence that CPAP prevents many long-term outcomes, including cognitive impairment, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Observational studies suggest that patients with symptoms may be particularly likely to experience these preventive benefits with CPAP, but ethical and practical concerns limited the participation of such patients in prior long-term randomized trials. As a result, there is uncertainty about the full benefits of CPAP, and resolving this uncertainty is a key priority for the field. This workshop assembled clinicians, researchers, ethicists, and patients to identify strategies to understand the causal effects of CPAP on long-term clinically important outcomes among patients with symptomatic OSA. Quasi-experimental designs can provide valuable information and are less time and resource intensive than trials. Under specific conditions and assumptions, quasi-experimental studies may be able to provide causal estimates of CPAP's effectiveness from generalizable observational cohorts. However, randomized trials represent the most reliable approach to understanding the causal effects of CPAP among patients with symptoms. Randomized trials of CPAP can ethically include patients with symptomatic OSA, as long as there is outcome-specific equipoise, adequate informed consent, and a plan to maximize safety while minimizing harm (e.g., monitoring for pathologic sleepiness). Furthermore, multiple strategies exist to ensure the generalizability and practicality of future randomized trials of CPAP. These strategies include reducing the burden of trial procedures, improving patient-centeredness, and engaging historically excluded and underserved populations.

ICU Mortality Across Prepandemic and Pandemic Cohorts in a Resource-Limited Setting: A Critical Care Resiliency Analysis From South Africa

BACKGROUND

Hospital adaptation and resiliency, required during public health emergencies to optimize outcomes, are understudied especially in resource-limited settings.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the prepandemic and pandemic critical illness outcomes in a resource-limited setting and in the context of capacity strain?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study among patients admitted to ICUs at two public hospitals in the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Health in South Africa preceding and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2017-2022). We used multivariate logistic regression to analyze the association between three patient cohorts (prepandemic non-COVID-19, pandemic non-COVID-19, and pandemic COVID-19) and ICU capacity strain and the primary outcome of ICU mortality.

RESULTS

Three thousand two hundred twenty-one patients were admitted to the ICU during the prepandemic period and 2,539 patients were admitted to the ICU during the pandemic period (n = 375 [14.8%] with COVID-19 and n = 2,164 [85.2%] without COVID-19). The prepandemic and pandemic non-COVID-19 cohorts were similar. Compared with the non-COVID-19 cohorts, the pandemic COVID-19 cohort showed older age, higher rates of chronic cardiovascular disease and diabetes, less extrapulmonary organ dysfunction, and longer ICU length of stay. Compared with the prepandemic non-COVID-19 cohort, the pandemic non-COVID-19 cohort showed similar odds of ICU mortality (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.90-1.25; P = .50) whereas the pandemic COVID-19 cohort showed significantly increased odds of ICU mortality (OR, 3.91; 95% CI, 3.03-5.05 P < .0005). ICU occupancy was not associated with ICU mortality in either the COVID-19 cohort (OR, 1.05 per 10% change in ICU occupancy; 95% CI, 0.96-1.14; P = .27) or the pooled non-COVID-19 cohort (OR, 1.01 per 10% change in ICU occupancy; 95% CI, 0.98-1.03; P = .52).

INTERPRETATION

Patients admitted to the ICU before and during the pandemic without COVID-19 were broadly similar in clinical characteristics and outcomes, suggesting critical care resiliency, whereas patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 showed important clinical differences and significantly higher mortality.

Racial Disparities in Length of Stay Among Severely Ill Patients Presenting With Sepsis and Acute Respiratory Failure

Importance

Although racial and ethnic minority patients with sepsis and acute respiratory failure (ARF) experience worse outcomes, how patient presentation characteristics, processes of care, and hospital resource delivery are associated with outcomes is not well understood.

Objective

To measure disparities in hospital length of stay (LOS) among patients at high risk of adverse outcomes who present with sepsis and/or ARF and do not immediately require life support and to quantify associations with patient- and hospital-level factors.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This matched retrospective cohort study used electronic health record data from 27 acute care teaching and community hospitals across the Philadelphia metropolitan and northern California areas between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2018. Matching analyses were performed between June 1 and July 31, 2022. The study included 102 362 adult patients who met clinical criteria for sepsis (n = 84 685) or ARF (n = 42 008) with a high risk of death at the time of presentation to the emergency department but without an immediate requirement for invasive life support.

Exposures

Racial or ethnic minority self-identification.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Hospital LOS, defined as the time from hospital admission to the time of discharge or inpatient death. Matches were stratified by racial and ethnic minority patient identity, comparing Asian and Pacific Islander patients, Black patients, Hispanic patients, and multiracial patients with White patients in stratified analyses.

Results

Among 102 362 patients, the median (IQR) age was 76 (65-85) years; 51.5% were male. A total of 10.2% of patients self-identified as Asian American or Pacific Islander, 13.7% as Black, 9.7% as Hispanic, 60.7% as White, and 5.7% as multiracial. After matching racial and ethnic minority patients to White patients on clinical presentation characteristics, hospital capacity strain, initial intensive care unit admission, and the occurrence of inpatient death, Black patients experienced longer LOS relative to White patients in fully adjusted matches (sepsis: 1.26 [95% CI, 0.68-1.84] days; ARF: 0.97 [95% CI, 0.05-1.89] days). Length of stay was shorter among Asian American and Pacific Islander patients with ARF (-0.61 [95% CI, -0.88 to -0.34] days) and Hispanic patients with sepsis (-0.22 [95% CI, -0.39 to -0.05] days) or ARF (-0.47 [-0.73 to -0.20] days).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, Black patients with severe illness who presented with sepsis and/or ARF experienced longer LOS than White patients. Hispanic patients with sepsis and Asian American and Pacific Islander and Hispanic patients with ARF both experienced shorter LOS. Because matched differences were independent of commonly implicated clinical presentation-related factors associated with disparities, identification of additional mechanisms that underlie these disparities is warranted.

Among-Hospital Variation in Intensive Care Unit Admission Practices and Associated Outcomes for Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure

Rationale: We have previously shown that hospital strain is associated with intensive care unit (ICU) admission and that ICU admission, compared with ward admission, may benefit certain patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Objectives: To understand how strain-process-outcomes relationships in patients with ARF may vary among hospitals and what hospital practice differences may account for such variation. Methods: We examined high-acuity patients with ARF who did not require mechanical ventilation or vasopressors in the emergency department (ED) and were admitted to 27 U.S. hospitals from 2013 to 2018. Stratifying by hospital, we compared hospital strain-ICU admission relationships and hospital length of stay (LOS) and mortality among patients initially admitted to the ICU versus the ward using hospital strain as a previously validated instrumental variable. We also surveyed hospital practices and, in exploratory analyses, evaluated their associations with the above processes and outcomes. Results: There was significant among-hospital variation in ICU admission rates, in hospital strain-ICU admission relationships, and in the association of ICU admission with hospital LOS and hospital mortality. Overall, ED patients with ARF (n = 45,339) experienced a 0.82-day shorter median hospital LOS if admitted initially to the ICU compared with the ward, but among the 27 hospitals (n = 224-3,324), this effect varied from 5.85 days shorter (95% confidence interval [CI], -8.84 to -2.86; P < 0.001) to 4.38 days longer (95% CI, 1.86-6.90; P = 0.001). Corresponding ranges for in-hospital mortality with ICU compared with ward admission revealed odds ratios from 0.08 (95% CI, 0.01-0.56; P < 0.007) to 8.89 (95% CI, 1.60-79.85; P = 0.016) among patients with ARF (pooled odds ratio, 0.75). In exploratory analyses, only a small number of measured hospital practices-the presence of a sepsis ED disposition guideline and maximum ED patient capacity-were potentially associated with hospital strain-ICU admission relationships. Conclusions: Hospitals vary considerably in ICU admission rates, the sensitivity of those rates to hospital capacity strain, and the benefits of ICU admission for patients with ARF not requiring life support therapies in the ED. Future work is needed to more fully identify hospital-level factors contributing to these relationships.

Hospital Strain and Variation in Sepsis ICU Admission Practices and Associated Outcomes

To understand how strain-process-outcome relationships in patients with sepsis may vary among hospitals.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using a validated hospital capacity strain index as a within-hospital instrumental variable governing ICU versus ward admission, stratified by hospital.

SETTING

Twenty-seven U.S. hospitals from 2013 to 2018.

PATIENTS

High-acuity emergency department patients with sepsis who do not require life support therapies.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The mean predicted probability of ICU admission across strain deciles ranged from 4.9% (lowest ICU-utilizing hospital for sepsis without life support) to 61.2% (highest ICU-utilizing hospital for sepsis without life support). The difference in the predicted probabilities of ICU admission between the lowest and highest strain deciles ranged from 9.0% (least strain-sensitive hospital) to 45.2% (most strain-sensitive hospital). In pooled analyses, emergency department patients with sepsis (n = 90,150) experienced a 1.3-day longer median hospital length of stay (LOS) if admitted initially to the ICU compared with the ward, but across the 27 study hospitals (n = 517-6,564), this effect varied from 9.0 days shorter (95% CI, -10.8 to -7.2; p < 0.001) to 19.0 days longer (95% CI, 16.7-21.3; p < 0.001). Corresponding ranges for inhospital mortality with ICU compared with ward admission revealed odds ratios (ORs) from 0.16 (95% CI, 0.03-0.99; p = 0.04) to 4.62 (95% CI, 1.16-18.22; p = 0.02) among patients with sepsis (pooled OR = 1.48).

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant among-hospital variation in ICU admission rates for patients with sepsis not requiring life support therapies, how sensitive those ICU admission decisions are to hospital capacity strain, and the association of ICU admission with hospital LOS and hospital mortality. Hospital-level heterogeneity should be considered alongside patient-level heterogeneity in critical and acute care study design and interpretation.

Hemodynamic and Rhythmologic Effects of Push-Dose Landiolol in Critical Care-A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

The highly β1-selective beta-blocker Landiolol is known to facilitate efficient and safe rate control in non-compensatory tachycardia or dysrhythmia when administered continuously. However, efficacy and safety data of the also-available bolus formulation in critically ill patients are scarce.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study on a real-life cohort of critical care patients, who had been treated with push-dose Landiolol due to sudden-onset non-compensatory supraventricular tachycardia. Continuous hemodynamic data had been acquired via invasive blood pressure monitoring.

RESULTS

Thirty patients and 49 bolus applications were analyzed. Successful heart rate control was accomplished in 20 (41%) cases, rhythm control was achieved in 13 (27%) episodes, and 16 (33%) applications showed no effect. Overall, the heart rate was significantly lower (145 (130-150) vs. 105 (100-125) bpm, p < 0.001) in a 90 min post-application observational period in all subgroups. The median changes in blood pressure after the bolus application did not reach clinical significance. Compared with the ventilation settings before the bolus application, the respiratory settings including the required FiO2 after the bolus application did not differ significantly. No serious adverse events were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Push-dose Landiolol was safe and effective in critically ill ICU patients. No clinically relevant impact on blood pressure was noted.

Characterizing Equity of Intensive Care Unit Admissions for Sepsis and Acute Respiratory Failure

Rationale: Patients who identify as from racial or ethnic minority groups who have sepsis or acute respiratory failure (ARF) experience worse outcomes relative to nonminority patients, but processes of care accounting for disparities are not well-characterized. Objectives: Determine whether reductions in intensive care unit (ICU) admission during hospital-wide capacity strain occur preferentially among patients who identify with racial or ethnic minority groups. Methods: This retrospective cohort among 27 hospitals across the Philadelphia metropolitan area and Northern California between 2013 and 2018 included adult patients with sepsis and/or ARF who did not require life support at the time of hospital admission. An updated model of hospital-wide capacity strain was developed that permitted determination of relationships between patient race, ethnicity, ICU admission, and strain. Results: After adjustment for demographics, disease severity, and study hospital, patients who identified as Asian or Pacific Islander had the highest adjusted ICU admission odds relative to patients who identified as White in both the sepsis and ARF populations (odds ratio, 1.09; P = 0.006 and 1.26; P < 0.001). ICU admission was also elevated for patients with ARF who identified as Hispanic (odds ratio, 1.11; P = 0.020). Capacity strain did not modify differences in ICU admission for patients who identified with a minority group in either disease population (all interactions, P > 0.05). Conclusions: Systematic differences in ICU admission patterns were observed for patients that identified as Asian, Pacific Islander, and Hispanic. However, ICU admission was not restricted from these groups, and capacity strain did not preferentially reduce ICU admission from patients identifying with minority groups. Further characterization of provider decision-making can help contextualize these findings as the result of disparate decision-making or a mechanism of equitable care.

Association of multiple sclerosis with mortality in sepsis: a population-level analysis

Background

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is associated with increased risk of sepsis and higher sepsis-related mortality, compared to the general population. However, the evidence on the prognostic impact of MS in sepsis has been scarce. We aimed to evaluate the population-level association of MS with short-term mortality in sepsis.

Methods

We performed a retrospective population-based cohort study using a statewide data set to identify hospitalizations aged ≥ 18 years in Texas with sepsis, with and without MS during 2010–2017. Multilevel logistic models were fit to estimate the association of MS with short-term mortality among all sepsis hospitalizations, and for sensitivity analyses among hospitalizations with septic shock and those admitted to ICU.

Results

Among 283,025 sepsis hospitalizations, 1687 (0.6%) had MS. Compared to sepsis hospitalizations without MS, those with MS were younger (aged ≥ 65 years 35.0% vs 56.8%), less commonly racial/ethnic minority (36.2% vs 48.1%), and had lower mean Deyo comorbidity index (1.6 vs 2.7). The rates of septic shock and ICU admission were similar for sepsis hospitalizations with and without MS (58.7% vs 59.6% and 46.7% vs 46.0%, respectively). The unadjusted short-term mortality among sepsis hospitalizations with and without MS for the whole cohort, among those with septic shock, and among ICU admissions were 20.2% vs 31.3%, 25.6% vs 40.0%, and 24.0% vs 34.8%, respectively. On adjusted analyses, MS was associated with 17% lower odds of short-term mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.828 [95% CI 0.723–0.947]). Similar findings were observed on sensitivity analyses of patients with septic shock (aOR 0.764 [95% CI 0.651–0.896]), but MS was not associated with mortality among sepsis hospitalizations admitted to ICU (aOR 0.914 [95% CI 0.759–1.101]).

Conclusions

MS was associated with lower short-term mortality among septic patients, with findings consistent among the subset with septic shock. Among septic patients admitted to ICU, MS was not associated with mortality.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40560-022-00628-1.

Defining Physiological Decompensation: An Expert Consensus and Retrospective Outcome Validation

Physiological decompensation of hospitalized patients is common and is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Research surrounding patient decompensation has been hampered by the absence of a robust definition of decompensation and lack of standardized clinical criteria with which to identify patients who have decompensated. We aimed to: 1) develop a consensus definition of physiological decompensation and 2) to develop clinical criteria to identify patients who have decompensated.