Louzon, Patricia

RATIONALE: Critically ill adults are at risk for a variety of distressing and consequential symptoms both during and after an ICU stay. Management of these symptoms can directly influence outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to update and expand the Society of Critical Care Medicine’s 2018 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU. PANEL DESIGN: The interprofessional inclusive guidelines task force was composed of 24 individuals including nurses, physicians, pharmacists, physiotherapists, psychologists, and ICU survivors. The task force developed evidence-based recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Conflict-of-interest policies were strictly followed in all phases of the guidelines, including task force selection and voting. METHODS: The task force focused on five main content areas as they pertain to adult ICU patients: anxiety (new topic), agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption. Using the GRADE approach, we conducted a rigorous systematic review for each population, intervention, control, and outcome question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, assessed the quality of evidence, and then performed the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations. RESULTS: The task force issued five statements related to the management of anxiety, agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption in adults admitted to the ICU. In adult patients admitted to the ICU, the task force issued conditional recommendations to use dexmedetomidine over propofol for sedation, provide enhanced mobilization/rehabilitation over usual mobilization/rehabilitation, and administer melatonin. The task force was unable to issue recommendations on the administration of benzodiazepines to treat anxiety, and the use of antipsychotics to treat delirium. CONCLUSIONS: The guidelines task force provided recommendations for pharmacologic management of agitation/sedation and sleep, and nonpharmacologic management of immobility in critically ill adults. These recommendations are intended for consideration along with the patient’s clinical status.

Objectives: Experiences with utilizing a visiting clinical professor program to mentor institutions and collaborate on best practices in critical care pharmacy are described to provide a framework for these services and a synopsis of key outcomes. Design: The Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology Section implemented a visiting clinical professor program to address the need for collaboration, idea-sharing, mentorship, and diffusion of innovation to clinicians in critical care practice. Setting: Critical care pharmacy departments at 12 medical centers. Subjects: Twelve visiting clinical professors and host institutions from 2007-2018. Intervention: After an application is submitted to the section steering committee, an experienced clinician is paired with an institution, and a site visit is planned in collaboration with the visiting clinical professor program coordinators. The expert clinician visits the institution to share their insights and best practices based on visit goals and objectives. Reflective debriefing with both the host institution and the visiting clinical professor occurs after the visit. Measurements and Main Results: The program has demonstrated numerous benefits including shared best practices related to critical care clinical services, expansion and refinement of care delivery models, development and optimization of research programs, and advancement of new training programs including specialty pharmacy residencies. Both the site and visiting professor find these partnerships beneficial, which has resulted in sustained success of the program over an 11-year period. Key resultant deliverables after visits have included new pharmacist positions, advancement of pharmacy services, and expanded access to academic opportunities. Conclusions: A professional organization led visiting clinical professor program is viable, sustainable, and yields clear benefit for critical care pharmacy programs across the country. Application of this framework to other areas of pharmacy practice may be an avenue to share best practices and advance pharmacy services.