Dataset Information

The current temperature: A survey of post-resuscitation care across Australian and New Zealand intensive care units.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Targeted temperature management (TTM) in post-resuscitation care has changed dramatically over the last two decades. However, uptake across Australian and New Zealand (NZ) intensive care units (ICUs) is unclear. We aimed to describe post-resuscitation care in our region, with a focus on TTM, and to gain insights into clinician's opinions about the level of evidence supporting TTM.

Methods

In December 2017, we sent an online survey to 163 ICU medical directors in Australia (n = 141) and NZ (n = 22).

Results

Sixty-one ICU medical directors responded (50 from Australia and 11 from NZ). Two respondents were excluded from analysis as their Private ICUs did not admit post-arrest patients. The majority of remaining respondents stated their ICU followed a post-resuscitation care clinical guideline (n = 41/59, 70%). TTM was used in 57 (of 59, 97%) ICUs, of these only 64% had a specific TTM clinical guideline/policy and there was variation in the types of patients treated, temperatures targeted (range = 33-37.5 °C), methods for cooling and duration of cooling (range = 12-72 h). The majority of respondents stated that their ICU (n = 45/57, 88%) changed TTM practice following the TTM trial: with 28% targeting temperatures >36 °C, and 23 (of 46, 50%) respondents expressed concerns with current level of evidence for TTM. Only 38% of post-resuscitation guidelines included prognostication procedures, few ICUs reported the use of electrophysiological tests.

Conclusions

In Australian and New Zealand ICUs there is widespread variation in post-resuscitation care, including TTM practice and prognostication. There also seems to be concerns with current TTM evidence and recommendations.

SUBMITTER: Bray JE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8244479 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: The Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Adult Patient Database (APD) collects voluntary data on patient admissions to Australian and New Zealand intensive care units (ICUs). This paper presents an in-depth statistical analysis of risk-adjusted mortality of ICU admissions from 2000 to 2010 for the purpose of identifying ICUs with unusual performance. METHODS: A cohort of 523,462 patients from 144 ICUs was analysed. For each ICU, the natural logarithm of the standardised mortality ratio (log-SMR) was estimated from a risk-adjusted, three-level hierarchical model. This is the first time a three-level model has been fitted to such a large ICU database anywhere. The analysis was conducted in three stages which included the estimation of a null distribution to describe usual ICU performance. Log-SMRs with appropriate estimates of standard errors are presented in a funnel plot using 5% false discovery rate thresholds. False coverage-statement rate confidence intervals are also presented. The observed numbers of deaths for ICUs identified as unusual are compared to the predicted true worst numbers of deaths under the model for usual ICU performance. RESULTS: Seven ICUs were identified as performing unusually over the period 2000 to 2010, in particular, demonstrating high risk-adjusted mortality compared to the majority of ICUs. Four of the seven were ICUs in private hospitals. Our three-stage approach to the analysis detected outlying ICUs which were not identified in a conventional (single) risk-adjusted model for mortality using SMRs to compare ICUs. We also observed a significant linear decline in mortality over the decade. Distinct yearly and weekly respiratory seasonal effects were observed across regions of Australia and New Zealand for the first time. CONCLUSIONS: The statistical approach proposed in this paper is intended to be used for the review of observed ICU and hospital mortality. Two important messages from our study are firstly, that comprehensive risk-adjustment is essential in modelling patient mortality for comparing performance, and secondly, that the appropriate statistical analysis is complicated.

Project description:Background Based on the early international COVID-19 experience, it was anticipated that intensive care services and workforces in Australia would be placed under similar pressure. While surge capacity of medical and nursing workforces was estimated, little was known about baseline allied health staffing making it difficult to estimate surge capacity and coordinate planning. Objectives The purpose of this study was to 1) capture baseline allied health staffing levels in Australian adult ICUs prior to the COVID-19 pandemic emergence in Australia; and 2) describe the allied health pandemic planning and surge response in Australian ICUs during the early waves of the pandemic. Methods This was a cross-sectional, investigator-devised, prospective survey study. The survey was administered via the national chief allied health network to a convenience sample of senior ICU allied health clinicians at hospitals throughout Australia. Results A total of 40 responses were received from tertiary and metropolitan hospitals; physiotherapists 12 (30%) and occupational therapists eight (20%) were the most frequent respondents. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 28 (70 %) of allied health respondents had a mean (IQR) of 1.74 (2.00) full-time equivalent (FTE) staff designated to the ICU, where these ICUs had a mean of 21.53 (15.00) ventilator beds. Few respondents serviced their ICU on a referral-only basis and did not have dedicated ICU FTE 12 (20%). Surge planning was mostly determined by discussion within the ICU, allied health department, and/or respective disciplines. This approach meant that allied health staffing and associated decision-making was ad hoc at a local level. Conclusions The baseline rate of allied health coverage in Australian ICUs remains unknown and the variability across allied health and within the specific disciplines is undetermined. Further research infrastructure to capture ICU allied health workforce data is urgently needed to guide future pandemic preparedness.

Project description:Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies for ICU staff (first evaluation in December 2020 when previous versions of consensus-based guidelines (S2k) were published) and question selected aspects of guideline adherence of standard care for patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey among German intensive care staff from 11 October 2021 to 11 November 2021. We distributed the survey via e-mail in intensive care facilities and requested redirection to additional intensive care staff (snowball sampling). Results: There was a difference between the professional groups in the number, selection and qualitative assessment of information sources about COVID-19. Standard operating procedures were most frequently used by all occupational groups and received a high quality rating. Physicians preferred sources for active information search (e.g., medical journals), while nurses predominantly used passive consumable sources (e.g., every-day media). Despite differences in usage behaviour, the sources were rated similarly in terms of the quality of the information on COVID-19. The trusted organizations have not changed over time. The use of guidelines was frequently stated and highly recommended. The majority of the participants reported guideline-compliant treatment. Nevertheless, there were certain variations in the use of medication as well as the criteria chosen for discontinuing non-invasive ventilation (NIV) compared to guideline recommendations. Conclusions: An adequate external source of information for nursing staff is lacking, the usual sources of physicians are only appropriate for the minority of nursing staff. The self-reported use of guidelines is high.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) has recently become a useful tool that intensivists are incorporating into clinical practice. However, the incorporation of ultrasonography in critical care in developing countries is not straightforward. METHODS:Our objective was to investigate current practice and education regarding POCUS among Brazilian intensivists. A national survey was administered to Brazilian intensivists using an electronic questionnaire. Questions were selected by the Delphi method and assessed topics included organizational issues, POCUS technique and training patterns, machine availability, and main applications of POCUS in daily practice. RESULTS:Of 1533 intensivists who received the questionnaire, 322 responded from all of Brazil's regions. Two hundred and five (63.8%) reported having access to an ultrasound machine dedicated to the intensive care unit (ICU); however, this was more likely in university hospitals than in non-university hospitals (80.6 vs. 59.6%; risk ratio [RR]?=?1.35 [1.16-1.58], p?=?0.002). The main applications of POCUS were ultrasound-guided central vein catheterization (49.4%) and bedside echocardiographic assessment (33.9%). Two hundred and fifty-eight (80.0%) reported having at least one POCUS-trained intensivist in their staff (trained units). Trained units were more likely to perform routine ultrasound-guided jugular vein catheterization than non-trained units (38.6 vs. 16.4%; RR?=?2.35 [1.31-4.23], p?=?0.001). The proportion of POCUS-trained intensivists and availability of a dedicated ultrasound machine were both independently associated with performing ultrasound-guided jugular vein catheterization (RR?=?1.91 [1.32-2.77], p?=?0.001) and (RR?=?2.20 [1.26-3.29], p?=?0.005), respectively. CONCLUSIONS:A significant proportion of Brazilian ICUs had at least one intensivist with POCUS capability in their staff. Although ultrasound-guided central vein catheterization constitutes the main application of POCUS, adherence to guideline recommendations is still suboptimal.