Citations

Abstract Background Although diagnostic error (DE) is a significant problem, it remains challenging for clinicians to identify it reliably and to recognize its contribution to the clinical trajectory of their patients. The purpose of this work was to evaluate the reliability of real-time electronic health record (EHR) reviews using a search strategy for the identification of DE as a contributor to the rapid response team (RRT) activation. Objectives Early and accurate recognition of critical illness is of paramount importance. The objective of this study was to test the feasibility and reliability of prospective, real-time EHR reviews as a means of identification of DE. Methods We conducted this prospective observational study in June 2019 and included consecutive adult patients experiencing their first RRT activation. An EHR search strategy and a standard operating procedure were refined based on the literature and expert clinician inputs. Two physician-investigators independently reviewed eligible patient EHRs for the evidence of DE within 24 hours after RRT activation. In cases of disagreement, a secondary review of the EHR using a taxonomy approach was applied. The reviewers categorized patient experience of DE as Yes/No/Uncertain. Results We reviewed 112 patient records. DE was identified in 15% of cases by both reviewers. Kappa agreement with the initial review was 0.23 and with the secondary review 0.65. No evidence of DE was detected in 60% of patients. In 25% of cases, the reviewers could not determine whether DE was present or absent. Conclusion EHR review is of limited value in the real-time identification of DE in hospitalized patients. Alternative approaches are needed for research and quality improvement efforts in this field.

Abstract Evidence-based medicine asks us to integrate the best available evidence with clinical experience and patient values. In the modern intensive care unit, the primary focus is on complex technology and electronic health records, often away from the bedside. Excess interventionism is the norm. The term “intensivist” itself implies an intensive management strategy, which can lead us away from a patient-centered practice and toward iatrogenic harm. Under the hashtag #zentensivist, an international, multiprofessional group of clinicians has begun to discuss via Twitter how to apply key principles of history taking, physical examination, physiology, pharmacology, and clinical research in a competent, compassionate, and minimalist fashion. The term “zentensivist” intentionally combines concepts seemingly at odds—Zen philosophy and intensive care—to describe a holistic approach to the art of caring for the critically ill. We describe the key tenets of zentensivist practice and how we may inspire these actions in those we lead and educate.

ABSTRACT Background Implementation of checklists has been shown to be effective in improving patient safety. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation of a checklist for daily care processes into clinical practice of pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) with limited resources. Methods Prospective before–after study in eight PICUs from China, Congo, Croatia, Fiji, and India after implementation of a daily checklist into the ICU rounds. Results Seven hundred and thirty-five patients from eight centers were enrolled between 2015 and 2017. Baseline stage had 292 patients and post-implementation 443. The ICU length of stay post-implementation decreased significantly [9.4 (4–15.5) vs. 7.3 (3.4–13.4) days, p = 0.01], with a nominal improvement in the hospital length of stay [15.4 (8.4–25) vs. 12.6 (7.5–24.4) days, p = 0.055]. The hospital mortality and ICU mortality between baseline group and post-implementation group did not show a significant difference, 14.4% vs. 11.3%; p = 0.22 for each. There was a variable impact of checklist implementation on adherence to various processes of care recommendations. A decreased exposure in days was noticed for; mechanical ventilation from 42.6% to 33.8%, p < 0.01; central line from 31.3% to 25.3%, p < 0.01; and urinary catheter from 30.6% to 24.4%, p < 0.01. Although there was an increased utilization of antimicrobials (89.9–93.2%, p < 0.01). Conclusions Checklists for the treatment of acute illness and injury in the PICU setting marginally impacted the outcome and processes of care. The intervention led to increasing adherence with guidelines in multiple ICU processes and led to decreased length of stay.

Background: Little is known about the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) as a key element of social determinants of health on intensive care unit (ICU) outcomes for adults. Objective: We assessed whether a validated individual SES index termed HOUSES (HOUsing-based SocioEconomic status index) derived from housing features was associated with short-term outcomes of critical illness including ICU mortality, ICU-free days, hospital-free days, and ICU readmission. Methods: We performed a population-based cohort study of adult patients living in Olmsted County, Minnesota, admitted to 7 intensive care units at Mayo Clinic from 2011 to 2014. We compared outcomes between the lowest SES group (HOUSES quartile 1 [Q1]) and the higher SES group (HOUSES Q2-4). We stratified the cohort based on age (<50 years old and ≥50 years old). Results: Among 4134 eligible patients, 3378 (82%) patients had SES successfully measured by the HOUSES index. Baseline characteristics, severity of illness, and reason for ICU admission were similar among the different SES groups as measured by HOUSES except for larger number of intoxications and overdoses in younger patients from the lowest SES. In all adult patients, there were no overall differences in mortality, ICU-free days, hospital-free days, or ICU readmissions in patients with higher SES compared to lower SES. Among older patients (>50 years), those with higher SES (HOUSES Q2-4) compared to those with lower SES (HOUSES Q1) had lower mortality rates (hazard ratio = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.56-0.93; adjusted P = .01), increased ICU-free days (mean 1.08 days; 95% CI: 0.34-1.84; adjusted P = .004), and increased hospital-free days (mean 1.20 days; 95% CI: 0.45-1.96; adjusted P = .002). There were no differences in ICU readmission rates (OR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.55-1.00; P = .051). Conclusion: Individual-level SES may be an important determinant or predictor of critical care outcomes in older adults. Housing-based socioeconomic status may be a useful tool for enhancing critical care research and practice.

2054 Background: Systematic reviews that summarize the toxicity of Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) become outdated very soon after publication. Therefore, we reported results of a toxicity meta-analysis at 2019 ASCO meeting and informed the intent to create a living systematic review (LSR). LSRs combine human and machine effort and support rapid evidence synthesis and living clinical practice guidelines. Now, we report our experience maintaining a LSR on toxicity of ICIs. Methods: Steps include quarterly literature searches to identify new clinical trials reporting ICI-associated adverse events (AEs), AI-enabled screening of new citations which meet the inclusion criteria, automated cumulative meta-analysis and an online reporting platform. Standard data formats and protocols were designed for inputting text, tables and graphics. Software was written to interpret these data and output the information in the appropriate format, such as a forest plot and summary tables. Finally, a dynamic interface that enables user inputs and displays the associated output was designed. Results: The LSR is continuously updated incorporating toxicity data from new clinical trials as it becomes available. We have screened 8000 relevant citations and summarized the odds of Grade 3 or higher AEs and AEs of special interest in patient receiving ICIs. The results are updated on quarterly basis and are available online. The results are updated on quarterly basis and will be available on a website at the time of publication. Prototype with dummy data is available at this link . This interface can also be manipulated via user input to organize and sort data tables and forest plots by type of cancer, name or mechanism (PD-1 or PD-L1) of ICI agent, single agent or combination, type of control arm, line of treatment and several other clinically relevant filters. For example, a user can instantaneously generate a meta-analysis summarizing the risk of colitis or pneumonitis in metastatic lung cancer trials with pembrolizmuab. Conclusions: This LSR engine can prospectively synthesize toxicity data from ICI trials in an efficient manner providing accurate and timely information for advanced clinical decision support at point-of-care. Efforts are ongoing to improve efficiency of screening, improve AI-enabled processes for automated screening and data abstraction, and test across multiple clinical questions.

Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has disproportionally strained intensive care services worldwide. Large areas of uncertainly regarding epidemiology, physiology, practice patterns, and resource demands for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 require rapid collection and dissemination of data. We describe the conception and implementation of an intensive care database rapidly developed and designed to meet data analytic needs in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic—the multicenter, international Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Network Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study. Design: Prospective cohort study and disease registry. Setting: Multinational cohort of ICUs. Patients: Critically ill patients with a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Within 2 weeks of conception of the Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Network Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study, study leadership was convened, registry case report forms were designed, electronic data entry set up, and more than 250 centers had submitted the protocol for institutional review board approval, with more than 100 cases entered. Conclusions: The Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery Network Viral Infection and Respiratory Illness Universal Study provides an example of a rapidly deployed, international, pandemic registry that seeks to provide near real-time analytics and information regarding intensive care treatments and outcomes for patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

Objectives: Critically ill surgical patients may receive concomitant aspirin and therapeutic anticoagulation postoperatively, yet the safety of this practice remains unknown. We evaluated the risk of major bleeding with concomitant therapy compared with anticoagulation alone. Design: Observational cohort study. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to assess the association between concomitant therapy and a primary outcome of major bleeding. Setting: Postoperative ICUs at an academic medical center. Patients: Adults (≥ 18 yr old) receiving anticoagulation during postoperative ICU admission between 2007 and 2016. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Nine thousand five hundred eighteen anticoagulated patients were included, including 3,237 (34%) receiving aspirin. A total of 1,874 unique patients (19.7%) experienced a major bleeding event. In inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses, concomitant therapy was associated with increased odds for major bleeding (odds ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.05–1.36; p = 0.006) compared with anticoagulation alone. An interaction test suggested a differential relationship between aspirin use and major bleeding based on aspirin use in the 7 days prior to anticoagulation, such that a strong association between aspirin and major bleeding was observed for recent initiators of aspirin (1.40; 1.13–1.72;p = 0.002) but not for those continuing prior aspirin use. Aspirin use prior to anticoagulation did not modify the relationship between concomitant therapy and new myocardial infarction or stroke (i.e., rates were not increased with aspirin discontinuation prior to anticoagulation). Conclusions: Concomitant aspirin and anticoagulation in critically ill surgical patients was associated with an increased rate of major bleeding. Future investigations are warranted to further define optimal management of antiplatelet therapy during anticoagulation in surgical patients.