Sepsis and septic shock: Pathogenesis and treatment perspectives

The majority of bacteremias do not develop to sepsis: bacteria are cleared from the bloodstream. Oxygen released from erythrocytes and humoral immunity kill bacteria in the bloodstream. Sepsis develops if bacteria are resistant to oxidation and proliferate in erythrocytes. Bacteria provoke oxygen release from erythrocytes to arterial blood. Abundant release of oxygen to the plasma triggers a cascade of events that cause: 1. oxygen delivery failure to cells; 2. oxidation of plasma components that impairs humoral regulation and inactivates immune complexes; 3. disseminated intravascular coagulation and multiple organs' failure. Bacterial reservoir inside erythrocytes provides the long-term survival of bacteria and is the cause of ineffectiveness of antibiotics and host immune reactions. Treatment perspectives that include different aspects of sepsis development are discussed.

Implementation of the physical function ICU test tool in a resource constrained intensive care unit to promote early mobilisation of critically ill patients- a feasibility study

Background

The shift of focus in outcome measures from mortality to assessment of functional status in intensive care unit (ICU) patients has resulted in the emergence of mobilisation of critically ill patients as a standard physiotherapy practice in most medium and high income countries. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of an early mobilisation program and to report on the changes in patient clinical outcomes following the intervention in a low income country.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was carried out at one public hospital. An adult cohort of 35 patients was recruited within 24 h of being admitted into the unit, irrespective of ventilation method over a period of three months. An early mobilisation programme was implemented and prescribed using the Physical Function ICU Test (PFIT-s) which commenced in either the ICU or high dependent unit.

Results

The median age of the 35 patients was 29 years (IQR = 24–45 years). More than half of the patients had undergone surgery due to either gastrointestinal problems or obstetrical complications. A total of 94 out of a possible of 219 exercise sessions were delivered to the patients (43.0 %). The tool was implemented in 32 (91.4 %) patients on the initial PFIT-s measurement and 16 (45.7 %) of the patients required the assistance of two people to stand. The Initial PFIT-s mean score was 5.3 ± 1.8. On final PFIT-s measurement, out of the 30 (85.7 %) patients seen, 15 (42.9 %) of the patients did not require any assistance to stand and the final PFIT-s mean score was 7.0 ± 1.9. There was a significant difference in both the initial PFIT-s total score (t-value = 2.34, df = 30, p = .03) and the final PFIT-s score (t-value = 3.66, df = 28, p = .001) between males and females. During the treatment, no adverse event occurred in any of the patients.

Conclusion

An early mobilisation program using PFIT-s was feasible and safe. There was a difference in functional capability based on gender, with males being more functionally active. Specific inclusion and exclusion criteria can lead to a delayed early mobilisation activities in ICU patients.

Trial registration

Pan African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201408000829202. Registered 15 August 2014.

Early mobilization in the critical care unit: A review of adult and pediatric literature

Early mobilization of critically ill patients is beneficial, suggesting that it should be incorporated into daily clinical practice. Early passive, active, and combined progressive mobilizations can be safely initiated in intensive care units (ICUs). Adult patients receiving early mobilization have fewer ventilator-dependent days, shorter ICU and hospital stays, and better functional outcomes. Pediatric ICU data are limited, but recent studies also suggest that early mobilization is achievable without increasing patient risk. In this review, we provide a current and comprehensive appraisal of ICU mobilization techniques in both adult and pediatric critically ill patients. Contraindications and perceived barriers to early mobilization, including cost and health care provider views, are identified. Methods of overcoming barriers to early mobilization and enhancing sustainability of mobilization programs are discussed. Optimization of patient outcomes will require further studies on mobilization timing and intensity, particularly within specific ICU populations.

IMPOSE (IMProving Outcomes after Sepsis)-the effect of a multidisciplinary follow-up service on health-related quality of life in patients postsepsis syndromes-a double-blinded randomised controlled trial: protocol

INTRODUCTION

Patients post sepsis syndromes have a poor quality of life and a high rate of recurring illness or mortality. Follow-up clinics have been instituted for patients postgeneral intensive care but evidence is sparse, and there has been no clinic specifically for survivors of sepsis. The aim of this trial is to investigate if targeted screening and appropriate intervention to these patients can result in an improved quality of life (Short Form 36 health survey (SF36V.2)), decreased mortality in the first 12 months, decreased readmission to hospital and/or decreased use of health resources.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

204 patients postsepsis syndromes will be randomised to one of the two groups. The intervention group will attend an outpatient clinic two monthly for 6 months and receive screening and targeted intervention. The usual care group will remain under the care of their physician. To analyse the results, a baseline comparison will be carried out between each group. Generalised estimating equations will compare the SF36 domain scores between groups and across time points. Mortality will be compared between groups using a Cox proportional hazards (time until death) analysis. Time to first readmission will be compared between groups by a survival analysis. Healthcare costs will be compared between groups using a generalised linear model. Economic (health resource) evaluation will be a within-trial incremental cost utility analysis with a societal perspective.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted by the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC; HREC/13/QRBW/17), The University of Queensland HREC (2013000543), Griffith University (RHS/08/14/HREC) and the Australian Government Department of Health (26/2013). The results of this study will be submitted to peer-reviewed intensive care journals and presented at national and international intensive care and/or rehabilitation conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613000528752.

Clinical review: early patient mobilization in the ICU

Early mobilization (EM) of ICU patients is a physiologically logical intervention to attenuate critical illness-associated muscle weakness. However, its long-term value remains controversial. We performed a detailed analytical review of the literature using multiple relevant key terms in order to provide a comprehensive assessment of current knowledge on EM in critically ill patients. We found that the term EM remains undefined and encompasses a range of heterogeneous interventions that have been used alone or in combination. Nonetheless, several studies suggest that different forms of EM may be both safe and feasible in ICU patients, including those receiving mechanical ventilation. Unfortunately, these studies of EM are mostly single center in design, have limited external validity and have highly variable control treatments. In addition, new technology to facilitate EM such as cycle ergometry, transcutaneous electrical muscle stimulation and video therapy are increasingly being used to achieve such EM despite limited evidence of efficacy. We conclude that although preliminary low-level evidence suggests that EM in the ICU is safe, feasible and may yield clinical benefits, EM is also labor-intensive and requires appropriate staffing models and equipment. More research is thus required to identify current standard practice, optimal EM techniques and appropriate outcome measures before EM can be introduced into the routine care of critically ill patients.