Festić, Emir

Purpose: Oxygen saturation to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio (SpO 2 /FiO 2 ) has been validated as a surrogate marker for partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen ratio among mechanically ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The validity of SpO 2 /FiO 2 measurements in predicting ARDS has not been studied. Recently, a Lung Injury Prediction Score (LIPS) has been developed to help identify patients at risk of developing ARDS. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the LIPS-1 cohort. A multivariate logistic regression included all established variables for LIPS, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation 2, age, and comorbid conditions that could affect SpO 2 /FiO 2 . The primary outcome was development of ARDS in the hospital. The secondary outcomes included hospital mortality, hospital day of ARDS development, and hospital day of death. Results: Of the 5584 patients, we evaluated all 4646 with recorded SpO 2 /FiO 2 values. Median SpO 2 /FiO 2 in those who did and did not develop ARDS was 254 (100, 438) and 452 (329, 467), respectively. There was a significant association between SpO 2 /FiO 2 and ARDS ( P ≤ .001). The SpO 2 /FiO 2 was found to be an independent predictor of ARDS in a “dose-dependent” manner; for SpO 2 /FiO 2 < 100—odds ratios (OR) 2.49 (1.69-3.64, P < .001), for SpO 2 /FiO 2 100 < 200—OR 1.75 (1.16-2.58, P = .007), and for SpO 2 /FiO 2 200 < 300—OR 1.62 (1.06-2.42, P = .025). The discriminatory characteristics of the multivariable model and SpO 2 /FiO 2 as a single variable demonstrated area under the curve (AUC) of 0.81 and AUC of 0.74, respectively. Conclusions: The SpO 2 /FiO 2 , measured within the first 6 hours after hospital admission, is an independent indicator of ARDS development among patients at risk.

Sepsis represents a major challenge in medicine. It begins as a systemic response to infection that can affect virtually any organ system, including the central and peripheral nervous systems. Akin to management of stroke, early recognition and treatment of sepsis are just as crucial to a successful outcome. Sepsis can precipitate myasthenic crisis and lead to encephalopathy and critical illness neuropathy. Stroke and traumatic brain injury can predispose a patient to develop sepsis, whereas Guillain-Barré syndrome is similarly not uncommon following infection. This review article will first describe the essential principles of sepsis recognition, pathophysiology, and management and will then briefly cover the neurologic aspects associated with sepsis. Vigilant awareness of the clinical features of sepsis and timeliness of intervention can help clinicians prevent progression of this disease to a multisystem organ failure, which can be difficult to reverse even after the original source of infection is under control.

Context: The delivery of end-of-life care (EOLC) in the intensive care unit (ICU) varies widely among medical care providers. The differing opinions of nurses and physicians regarding EOLC may help identify areas of improvement. Objective: To explore the differences of physicians and nurses on EOLC in the ICU and how these differences vary according to self-reported proficiency level and primary work unit. Design: Cross-sectional survey of 69 ICU physicians and 629 ICU nurses. Setting: Single tertiary care academic medical institution. Results: A total of 50 physicians (72%) and 331 nurses (53%) participated in the survey. Significant differences between physicians and nurses were noted in the following areas: ability to safely raise concerns, do not resuscitate (DNR) decision making, discussion of health care directives, timely hospice referral, spiritual assessment documentation, utilization of social services, and the availability of EOLC education. In every domain of EOLC, physicians reported a more positive perception than nurses. Additional differences were noted among physicians based on experience, as well as among nurses based on their primary work unit and self-reported proficiency level. Conclusions: Even with an increased focus on improving EOLC, significant differences continue to exist between the perspectives of nurses and physicians, as well as physicians among themselves and nurses among themselves. These differences may represent significant barriers toward providing comprehensive, consistent, and coordinated EOLC in the ICU.

Abstract Rationale Accurate, early identification of patients at risk for developing acute lung injury (ALI) provides the opportunity to test and implement secondary prevention strategies. Objectives To determine the frequency and outcome of ALI development in patients at risk and validate a lung injury prediction score (LIPS). Methods In this prospective multicenter observational cohort study, predisposing conditions and risk modifiers predictive of ALI development were identified from routine clinical data available during initial evaluation. The discrimination of the model was assessed with area under receiver operating curve (AUC). The risk of death from ALI was determined after adjustment for severity of illness and predisposing conditions. Measurements and Main Results Twenty-two hospitals enrolled 5,584 patients at risk. ALI developed a median of 2 (interquartile range 1–4) days after initial evaluation in 377 (6.8%; 148 ALI-only, 229 adult respiratory distress syndrome) patients. The frequency of ALI varied according to predisposing conditions (from 3% in pancreatitis to 26% after smoke inhalation). LIPS discriminated patients who developed ALI from those who did not with an AUC of 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.78–0.82). When adjusted for severity of illness and predisposing conditions, development of ALI increased the risk of in-hospital death (odds ratio, 4.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.9–5.7). Conclusions ALI occurrence varies according to predisposing conditions and carries an independently poor prognosis. Using routinely available clinical data, LIPS identifies patients at high risk for ALI early in the course of their illness. This model will alert clinicians about the risk of ALI and facilitate testing and implementation of ALI prevention strategies. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00889772).