Schears, Gregory J.

Objective: The Society of Critical Care Medicine PICU Liberation ABCDEF (A–F) Campaign Collaborative aimed to implement best practices for analgesia (A), breathing (B), comfort/consciousness (C), delirium (D), early mobilization (E), and family engagement and empowerment (F). Our post hoc study of Mayo Clinic data sought to compare the pre-implementation rounding process, which used a nursing script organized by organ systems, with a novel, liberation-focused rounding process emphasizing A–F bundle elements. Design: Secondary analysis of pre- vs. post-implementation surveys collected by independent observers during rounds. Setting: Medical/surgical PICU in a quaternary-care, academic medical center during April to July 2017. Subjects: The observed participants included PICU physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, pharmacists, and dietitians. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Survey responses from 145 team members pre-implementation and 67 post-implementation showed improved team satisfaction, communication, and understanding of daily plans (all p < 0.05). Respondents reported an increased frequency of discussions on bundle components A–E (all p < 0.01). Observations of 41 pre-implementation and 46 post-implementation rounds showed an increase in the frequency of discussion of all components of the bundle (all p < 0.01). However, this finding was not at the expense of increased duration of individual rounds since we failed to find a difference in pre- vs. post-implementation duration per patient (480 vs. 544 s per patient, p = 0.20). Conclusions: In 2017, around the time of introducing the nurse-led PICU Liberation rounding process to our practice, we found that after implementation, there was an associated increase in discussions about bundle elements and improved communications and satisfaction in team members.

Abstract Background Nearly 50% of post-insertion catheter-related infections are due to microbial ingress from needleless connectors (NC), widely used devices which connect to the end of catheters or infusion sets and enable access for injection of medications and attachment of infusions. Infections arising from NC could result in central line associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI). The clinical guideline for disinfecting NC is to wipe the hub of the NC with a 70% alcohol and to manually scrub the connector surface for at least 15 seconds. Unfortunately, multiple studies have found low compliance with the 15 second disinfection scrub. Methods In this study, we investigated the efficacy of 1 second of ultraviolet light-C exposure in the reduction of the 3 most common CLABSI associated organisms: Staphylococcus aureus, Candida albicans, Candida auris, and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). We tested a total of 30 NC samples for each organism with 3 positive controls and 1 negative control. Results The log reductions were 5.68, 5.05, 4.41, and 6.38 for S. aureus, C. albicans, C. auris and MRSA, respectively. Growth of Candida albicans with and without UV-C exposure for 1 second. The figure shows the observed growth of Candida albicans from the surface of the connector with and without UV-C exposure for 1 second, displaying no growth on the agar plate for samples that were exposed to 1 second of UV-C disinfection. Log reduction of tested organisms after exposure of UV-C for 1 second. Table 1 displays the overall log reduction of tested organisms after 1 second of UV-C exposure. The results are shown for positive control concentration and log reduction for the test organisms Staphylococcus aureus, Candida albicans, Candida auras, and Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Conclusion Our findings demonstrate greater than 4 log reduction of common CLABSI-associated organisms with 1 second of UV-C exposure, which we believe would decrease CLABSI rates, increase aseptic technique compliance, and reduce disruption in hospital workflow. Disclosures Julia Rasooly, MS, Puracath Medical, Inc: Board Member|Puracath Medical, Inc: Stocks/Bonds Michael Fourkas, MS, Puracath Medical, Inc: Grant/Research Support Gregory Schears, MD, Puracath Medical, Inc: Advisor/Consultant|Puracath Medical, Inc: Stocks/Bonds.

Background: Although extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used for hemodynamic support for in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI), there are limited data on the outcomes stratified by the timing of initiation of this strategy. Methods: Adult (>18 years) AMI admissions with IHCA were identified using the National Inpatient Sample (2000–2017) and the timing of ECMO with relation to IHCA was identified. Same-day vs. non-simultaneous ECMO support for IHCA were compared. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, temporal trends, hospitalization costs, and length of stay. Results: Of the 11.6 million AMI admissions, IHCA was noted in 1.5% with 914 (<0.01%) receiving ECMO support. The cohort receiving same-day ECMO (N = 795) was on average female, with lower comorbidity, higher rates of ST-segment-elevation AMI, shockable rhythm, and higher rates of complications. Compared to non-simultaneous ECMO, the same-day ECMO cohort had higher rates of coronary angiography (67.5% vs. 51.3%; p = 0.001) and comparable rates of percutaneous coronary intervention (58.9% vs. 63.9%; p = 0.32). The same-day ECMO cohort had higher in-hospital mortality (63.1% vs. 44.5%; adjusted odds ratio 3.98 (95% confidence interval 2.34–6.77); p < 0.001), shorter length of stay, and lower hospitalization costs. Older age, minority race, non-ST-segment elevation AMI, multiorgan failure, and complications independently predicted higher in-hospital mortality in IHCA complicating AMI. Conclusions: Same-day ECMO support for IHCA was associated with higher in-hospital mortality compared to those receiving non-simultaneous ECMO support. Though ECMO-assisted CPR is being increasingly used, careful candidate selection is key to improving outcomes in this population.

Background: Peripherally inserted central catheters and centrally inserted central catheters have numerous benefits but can be associated with risks. This meta-analysis compared central catheters for relevant clinical outcomes using recent studies more likely to coincide with practice guidelines. Methods: Several databases, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and EBM Reviews were searched for articles (2006–2018) that compared central catheters. Analyses were limited to peer-reviewed studies comparing peripherally inserted central catheters to centrally inserted central catheters for deep vein thrombosis and/or central line–associated bloodstream infections. Subgroup, sensitivity analyses, and patient-reported measures were included. Risk ratios, incidence rate ratios, and weighted event risks were reported. Study quality assessment was conducted using Newcastle–Ottawa and Cochrane Risk of Bias scales. Results: Of 4609 screened abstracts, 31 studies were included in these meta-analyses. Across studies, peripherally inserted central catheters were protective for central line–associated bloodstream infection (incidence rate ratio = 0.52, 95% confidence interval: 0.30–0.92), with consistent results across subgroups. Peripherally inserted central catheters were associated with an increased risk of deep vein thrombosis (risk ratio = 2.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.47–2.94); however, smaller diameter and single-lumen peripherally inserted central catheters were no longer associated with increased risk. The absolute risk of deep vein thrombosis was calculated to 2.3% and 3.9% for smaller diameter peripherally inserted central catheters and centrally inserted central catheters, respectively. On average, peripherally inserted central catheter patients had 11.6 more catheter days than centrally inserted central catheter patients ( p = 0.064). Patient outcomes favored peripherally inserted central catheters. Conclusion: When adhering to best practices, this study demonstrated that concerns related to peripherally inserted central catheters and deep vein thrombosis risk are minimized. Dramatic changes to clinical practice over the last 10 years have helped to address past issues with central catheters and complication risk. Given the lower rate of complications when following current guidelines, clinicians should prioritize central line choice based on patient therapeutic needs, rather than fear of complications. Future research should continue to consider contemporary literature over antiquated data, such that it recognizes the implications of best practices in modern central catheterization.

BACKGROUND: ARDS remains a source of significant morbidity and mortality in the critically ill patient. The mainstay of therapy entails invasive mechanical ventilation utilizing a lung-protective strategy designed to limit lung injury associated with excessive stress and strain while the underlying etiology of respiratory failure is identified and treated. Less is understood about what to do once conventional ventilation parameters have been optimized but the patient's respiratory status remains unchanged or worsens. In 2015, a protocolized, stepwise approach to mechanical ventilation with partially automated and clearly defined thresholds for management changes was implemented at our institution. We hypothesized that, by identifying appropriate patients earlier, time-to-escalation and rescue therapy implementation would be shortened. METHODS: Subjects with severe ARDS, treated with prone positioning based on our institution's protocolized approach from December 2013 to August 2016 were included. Their baseline characteristics, severity of illness scores, and mechanical ventilation parameters were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics, tidal volumes, P aO 2 / F IO 2 , duration of ventilation after proning, and mortality were similar in both groups. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) PEEP at the time of proning was higher after the protocol implementation (12.5 cm H 2 O [IQR 6.5–19.4] vs 18 cm H 2 O [IQR 10–22], P = .386), and mean (IQR) respiratory system driving pressure was lower (16 cm H 2 O [IQR 13–36.2] vs 12 cm H 2 O [IQR 9–19.6], P = .029). Median (IQR) time from refractory hypoxemia identification to proning was shorter after protocol implementation (42.2 h [IQR 6.83–347.2] vs 16.3 h [IQR 1–99.7], I = .02), and P aO 2 / F IO 2 at 1 h after proning was higher. ICU and hospital LOS were shorter after the protocol implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Following the implementation of an early, evidence-based, protocolized approach to optimizing mechanical ventilation, subjects with true refractory hypoxemia were identified earlier and time to proning was significantly shorter. Despite improvement in the evaluation and management of refractory hypoxemia as well as time to initiation of prone positioning, mortality was unchanged and there was variation in the duration of the position.

Background: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is increasingly used in acute myocardial infarction (AMI); however, there are limited large-scale national data. Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample database from 2000 to 2014, a retrospective cohort of AMI utilizing ECMO was identified. Use of percutaneous coronary intervention, intra-aortic balloon pump, and percutaneous left ventricular assist device (LVAD) was also identified in this population. Outcomes of interest included temporal trends in utilization of ECMO alone and with concomitant procedures (percutaneous coronary intervention, intra-aortic balloon pump, and percutaneous LVAD), in-hospital mortality, and resource utilization. Results: In ≈9 million AMI admissions, ECMO was used in 2962 (<0.01%) and implanted a median of 1 day after admission. ECMO was used in 0.5% and 0.3% AMI admissions complicated by cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest, respectively. ECMO was used more commonly in admissions that were younger, nonwhite, and with less comorbidity. ECMO use was 11× higher in 2014 as compared with 2000 (odds ratio, 11.37 [95% CI, 7.20–17.97]). Same-day percutaneous coronary intervention was performed in 23.1%; intra-aortic balloon pump/percutaneous LVAD was used in 57.9%, of which 30.3% were placed concomitantly. In-hospital mortality with ECMO was 59.2% overall but decreased from 100% (2000) to 45.1% (2014). Durable LVAD and cardiac transplantation were performed in 11.7% as an exit strategy. Of the hospital survivors, 40.8% were discharged to skilled nursing facilities. Older age, male sex, nonwhite race, and lower socioeconomic status were independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality with ECMO use. Conclusions: In AMI admissions, a steady increase was noted in the utilization of ECMO alone and with concomitant procedures (percutaneous coronary intervention, intra-aortic balloon pump, and percutaneous LVAD). In-hospital mortality remained high in AMI admissions treated with ECMO.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used to treat severe hypoxemic respiratory failure and as a rescue therapy for patients with cardiopulmonary arrest within a narrow window of time. A failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) was conducted to analyze the clinical and operational processes leading to delays in initiating ECMO. FMEA determined these highest-risk failure modes that were contributing to process failure: (1) ECMO candidacy not determined in time, (2) no or incomplete evaluation for ECMO prior to consult or arrest, (3) ECMO team not immediately available, and (4) cannulation not completed in time. When implemented collectively, a total of 4 interventions addressed more than 95% of the system failures. These interventions were (1) ECMO response pager held by a team required for decision, (2) distribution of institutionally defined inclusion/exclusion criteria, (3) educational training for clinicians consulting the ECMO team, and (4) establishment of a mobile ECMO insertion cart.