Pieterick, Sarah E

Prolonged durations of hypotension during septic shock promote organ injury and mortality. Empirical evidence suggests that earlier vasopressin initiation may improve outcomes in septic shock. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of a ready-to-use vasopressin formulation availability in intensive care unit automated dispensing cabinets on outcomes in septic shock. This was a pre-post quasi experimental study of adults admitted for septic shock who received vasopressin as a second line vasopressor after norepinephrine. Inverse probability of treatment weighting with propensity scores was used to balance baseline covariates between those who received the ready-to-use vasopressin product and the traditional pharmacy-compounded vasopressin product. Outcomes included time from vasopressin order to administration, time to target mean arterial pressure, length of stay, and mortality. A total of 1104 patients with septic shock were included. After propensity score adjustment, the ready-to-use group was associated with faster time to vasopressin administration (17 vs 41 min, P < 0.001), faster time to target mean arterial pressure (hazard ratio 1.29, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.47, P < 0.001), and a shorter length of intensive care unit stay (hazard ratio 1.23, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.43, P = 0.006) as the compounded group. Mortality was not significantly different. In patients with septic shock, availability of a ready-to-use vasopressin product in the intensive care unit automated medication dispensing cabinet was associated with faster time to administration, improved time to target mean arterial pressure, and reduced duration of intensive care.

Empirical evidence suggests direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) produce more favorable hemostatic outcomes than heparin in patients supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), yet the exact mechanisms responsible are unknown. We systematically searched databases and registers for studies comparing DTIs to heparin in humans receiving ECMO. A total of 28 studies were identified, most of which (n = 25) used bivalirudin, while the rest (n = 3) used argatroban. In random-effects meta-analysis, DTIs achieved the therapeutic anticoagulation range faster (mean difference = −6.96 hours, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −11.98 to −1.95, p = 0.006) and maintained the therapeutic range for a greater proportion of time (mean difference = 18.6%, 95% CI = 8.78–28.42, p < 0.001) than heparin. Subgroup analysis revealed these effects were similarly significant in adult patients and when bivalirudin was the DTI; however, they were not significant in pediatric patients or when argatroban was the DTI. Sensitivity analysis confirmed robustness of the primary findings in only low-risk of bias studies and in only studies published as full papers. In summary, DTIs—specifically bivalirudin—were associated with faster time to therapeutic anticoagulation and maintained the goal range for a greater percentage of time than heparin during ECMO support.

IMPORTANCE: Initial Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Viral Infection and Respiratory illness Universal Study (VIRUS) Registry analysis suggested that improvements in critical care processes offered the greatest modifiable opportunity to improve critically ill COVID-19 patient outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The Structured Team-based Optimal Patient-Centered Care for Virus COVID-19 ICU Collaborative was created to identify and speed implementation of best evidence based COVID-19 practices. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This 6-month project included volunteer interprofessional teams from VIRUS Registry sites, who received online training on the Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and iNjury approach, a structured and systematic method for delivering evidence based critical care. Collaborators participated in weekly 1-hour videoconference sessions on high impact topics, monthly quality improvement (QI) coaching sessions, and received extensive additional resources for asynchronous learning. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Outcomes included learner engagement, satisfaction, and number of QI projects initiated by participating teams. RESULTS: Eleven of 13 initial sites participated in the Collaborative from March 2, 2021, to September 29, 2021. A total of 67 learners participated in the Collaborative, including 23 nurses, 22 physicians, 10 pharmacists, nine respiratory therapists, and three nonclinicians. Site attendance among the 11 sites in the 25 videoconference sessions ranged between 82% and 100%, with three sites providing at least one team member for 100% of sessions. The majority reported that topics matched their scope of practice (69%) and would highly recommend the program to colleagues (77%). A total of nine QI projects were initiated across three clinical domains and focused on improving adherence to established critical care practice bundles, reducing nosocomial complications, and strengthening patient- and family-centered care in the ICU. Major factors impacting successful Collaborative engagement included an engaged interprofessional team; an established culture of engagement; opportunities to benchmark performance and accelerate institutional innovation, networking, and acclaim; and ready access to data that could be leveraged for QI purposes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Use of a virtual platform to establish a learning collaborative to accelerate the identification, dissemination, and implementation of critical care best practices for COVID-19 is feasible. Our experience offers important lessons for future collaborative efforts focused on improving ICU processes of care.