Crit Care Resusc
-
Objective: To determine whether contemporaneous practices are adequately represented in recent critical care comparative effectiveness research studies. Design: All critical care comparative effectiveness research trials published in the New England Journal of Medicine from April 2019 to March 2020 were identified. To examine studies published in other high impact medical journals during the same period, such trials were subsequently also identified in the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet. ⋯ In the other four of these trials, common practices influencing treatment choice were not reflected in the trial design, despite a prior effort to characterise usual care. Conclusion: One-third of critical care comparative effectiveness research trials published in widely read medical journals during a recent year did not include a designated control arm or comparable therapies representative of contemporary practices. Failure to incorporate contemporary practices into critical care comparative effectiveness trials appears to be a widespread design weakness.
-
Objective: To investigate the long term survival of medical emergency team (MET) patients at an Australian regional hospital and describe associated patient and MET call characteristics. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Data linkage to the statewide death registry was performed to allow for long term survival analysis, including multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression and production of Kaplan-Meier survival curves. ⋯ Among patients aged ≥ 75 years, factors independently associated with significantly higher long term mortality included age (HR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.29-1.65]; for patients aged ≥ 85 years), male sex (HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.66-0.83]; for females), and altered MET criteria (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.03-1.71). Conclusions: Long term survival probabilities of MET call patients are affected by factors including age, sex, and limitation of medical therapy status. These data may be useful for clinicians conducting end-of-life discussions with patients.
-
Objectives: To evaluate the epidemiology of rapid response team (RRT) reviews that led to intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and to evaluate the frequency of in-hospital cardiac arrests (IHCAs) among ICU patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Australia. Design: Multicentre, retrospective cohort study. Setting: 48 public and private ICUs in Australia. ⋯ Overall, IHCA occurred in 1.9% (8/413) of ICU patients with COVID-19, and most IHCAs (6/8, 75%) occurred during ICU admission. There were no differences in IHCA rates or in ICU or hospital mortality rates based on whether a patient had a prior RRT review or not. Conclusions: This study found that RRT reviews were a common way for deteriorating ward patients with COVID-19 to be admitted to the ICU, and that IHCA was rare among ICU patients with COVID-19.
-
Background: Intravenous vitamin C is known to interfere with some point-of-care blood glucose meters. We aimed to determine the concentrations at which ascorbate interferes with glucose concentrations measured using a point-of-care blood glucose meter. We also compared the point-of-care meter and an arterial blood gas (ABG) analyser in the intensive care unit with laboratory glucose monitoring in septic patients receiving intravenous vitamin C infusions. ⋯ One patient had severe renal impairment, which contributed to elevated plasma vitamin C concentrations (median, 0.95 mmol/L; range, 0.64-1.10 mmol/L), resulting in elevated Accu-Chek readings and presenting a moderate clinical risk for the highest value. Conclusions: Vitamin C concentrations < 0.8 mmol/L do not interfere with point-of-care glucose monitoring. Intravenous vitamin C infusion of 25 mg/kg every 6 hours does not interfere with point-of-care glucose monitoring unless the patient has renal impairment, in which case laboratory glucose tests should be used.
-
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.51893/2021.3. OA3.].