Citations

AbstractBackgroundNoncardiac organ failure has been associated with worse outcomes among a cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) population.HypothesisWe hypothesized that early organ failure based on the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score would be associated with mortality in CICU patients.MethodsAdult CICU patients from 2007 to 2015 were reviewed. Organ failure was defined as any SOFA organ subscore ≥3 on the first CICU day. Organ failure was evaluated as a predictor of hospital mortality and postdischarge survival after adjustment for illness severity and comorbidities.ResultsWe included 10 004 patients with a mean age of 67 ± 15 years (37% female). Admission diagnoses included acute coronary syndrome in 43%, heart failure in 46%, cardiac arrest in 12%, and cardiogenic shock in 11%. Organ failure was present in 31%, including multiorgan failure in 12%. Hospital mortality was higher in patients with organ failure (22% vs 3%, adjusted OR 3.0, 95% CI 2.5‐3.7, P < .001). After adjustment, each failing organ system predicted twofold higher odds of hospital mortality (adjusted OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1‐2.1, P < .001). Mortality risk was highest with cardiovascular, coagulation and liver failure. Among hospital survivors, organ failure was associated with higher adjusted postdischarge mortality risk (P < .001); multiorgan failure did not confer added long‐term mortality risk.ConclusionsEarly noncardiovascular organ failure, especially multiorgan failure, is associated with increased hospital mortality in CICU patients, and this risk continues after hospital discharge, emphasizing the need to promote early recognition of organ failure in CICU patients.

BACKGROUND: The relationships between the ratios of transfused allogeneic blood products and clinical outcomes in patients with acute intraoperative hemorrhage are poorly defined. METHODS: To better define these ratios, we undertook a single-center, observational cohort study of all surgical patients (≥18 years) who received rapid transfusion defined by a critical administration threshold of 3 or more units of red blood cells (RBCs) intraoperatively within 1 hour between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015. Multivariable regression analyses were used to assess relationships between ratios of plasma to RBCs and platelets to RBCs at 3, 12, and 24 hours and clinical outcomes. The primary outcome was hospital mortality, with secondary outcomes of intensive care unit and hospital-free days. RESULTS: The study included 2385 patients, of whom 14.9% had a plasma-to-RBC ratio of 1.0+, and 47.6% had a platelet-to-RBC ratio of 1.0+. Higher plasma-to-RBC and platelet-to-RBC ratios were observed for patients who underwent cardiac, transplant, and vascular surgery and in patients with greater derangements in hemostatic laboratory values. Ratios did not differ by patient age or severity of illness. Higher ratios were not associated with improved clinical outcomes. Mortality differed by platelet-to-RBC but not plasma-to-RBC ratio, with the highest mortality observed with a platelet-to-RBC ratio of 0.1–0.9 at 24 hours (odds ratio, 3.34 [1.62–6.88]) versus no platelets ( P = .001). Higher plasma-to-RBC ratios were associated with decreased hospital-free days, although differences in clinical outcomes were not significant after exclusion of patients receiving only RBCs without component therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Transfusion ratios in surgical patients with critical intraoperative hemorrhage were largely related to surgical and hemostatic features rather than baseline patient characteristics. Higher ratios were not associated with improved outcomes.

Abstract Background: The Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury (CERTAIN) study is a before-and-after clinical quality improvement study involving 20 countries. Our aim was to describe the challenges and solutions for study implementation across various intensive care units.Methods: After local institutional review board approval, each study center had a setup period before patient data were collected. Each center was required to accomplish 4 stages: baseline data collection, remote simulation training, local implementation, and postimplementation data collection and maintenance of process of care. We measured the time required to complete each study stage and used the Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control (DMAIC) framework to identify the challenges encountered during each stage and guide improvement strategies to facilitate implementation of CERTAIN.Results: Between June 2012 and December 2017, 55 centers from 20 countries were recruited to participate. The time to complete each stage at different centers varied significantly. The most common domains in which challenges occurred were 1) leadership support and team building, 2) communication, 3) work environment culture, 4) language barriers, 5) infrastructure and technology, and 6) sustainability. Obstacles in these 6 areas delayed reaching major milestones of the study. Different strategies were deployed to overcome these barriers: engaging leadership for support, using native-speaking clinicians during training sessions, using various communication platforms, providing personal computers to local hospitals, making in-person site visits, offering flexible training time, and supporting local centers’ grant applications. Centers that enrolled during the control phase, compared with those that enrolled earlier, had significantly shorter times and less variation in times for each study stage and for the total study time.Conclusions: By using the DMAIC method, we identified the predominant 6 domains in which challenges occurred during implementation of the global CERTAIN study and developed targeted strategies to overcome the challenges and shorten the duration of the study. The DMAIC method would be useful in improving the efficiency of other large-scale multinational quality improvement projects.