Effect of shoulder positioning on ultrasonic visualisation of the subclavian vein in healthy adults: A prospective observational study

Introduction:

Ultrasound guidance is commonly used during central venous cannulation. Subclavian vein is a commonly chosen site, but previous studies found varying results in the ideal positioning of the shoulder for subclavian vein cannulation. The objective of this study is to determine which shoulder position results in the greatest cross-sectional area of the right subclavian vein for cannulation.

Methods:

In this prospective observational study, ultrasound was performed on healthy adult volunteers to visualise the right subclavian vein in three different shoulder positions: neutral, abduction and retraction. A blinded independent investigator measured the cross-sectional areas by computer software using planimetry method. Statistical analysis was performed by one-way repeated measures analysis of variance.

Results:

Forty-four adults participated in the study. The mean cross-sectional area of the right subclavian vein in shoulder neutral, abduction and retraction positions were 1.05 ± 0.33 cm2, 1.01 ± 0.31 cm2 and 0.82 ± 0.28 cm2, respectively. When compared to shoulder retraction, the cross-sectional areas were significantly increased in shoulder neutral ( P < 0.01) and abduction ( P < 0.01) positions. There was no significant difference between shoulder neutral and abduction position ( P = 0.71).

Conclusion:

Positioning the shoulder in neutral or abduction results in the greatest cross-sectional area of the right subclavian vein and may be more ideal for ultrasound guided cannulation.

Impact of a Sepsis Guideline in Emergency Department on Outcome of Patients with Severe Sepsis

Objective

A dedicated program with guideline to enhance sepsis care was launched in July 2014 in Emergency Department (ED) of two regional hospitals. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventional program for severe sepsis patients, in antibiotic delivery rate and survival outcome.

Methods

It is a before-and-after interventional study with data from July to December 2013 and August 2014 to January 2015. A dedicated program for severe sepsis patients was introduced in July 2014. The outcome measures were blood culture rate, antibiotic administration rate in ED and mortality. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test was used for comparison of the survival. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to predict time to mortality adjusted for covariates.

Results

64 patients were included, 31 patients were in the pre-intervention group whereas 33 post-intervention. Both blood culture rate (29% vs 72.7%; p<0.001) and antibiotics administration in ED (38.7% vs 72.7%, p=0.0011) were significantly increased. Survival outcome was significantly improved in patients receiving timely antibiotics in ED (log-rank test p=0.016). Antibiotics administered in ED had hazard ratio of 0.178 (95% CI 0.053 to 0.595; p=0.005) in the Cox Proportional hazard regression model with adjustment of covariates. Age (adjusted odds ratio 1.06, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.12, p=0.033) and initial hypotension (adjusted odds ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, p=0.005) were significant predictors of mortality.

Conclusion

A dedicated guideline for severe sepsis management could improve blood culture rate, early antibiotics administration in the emergency department. Patients received early antibiotic had better outcome and survival.

Early goal-directed therapy in severe sepsis and septic shock: insights and comparisons to ProCESS, ProMISe, and ARISE

Prior to 2001 there was no standard for early management of severe sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department. In the presence of standard or usual care, the prevailing mortality was over 40-50 %. In response, a systems-based approach, similar to that in acute myocardial infarction, stroke and trauma, called early goal-directed therapy was compared to standard care and this clinical trial resulted in a significant mortality reduction. Since the publication of that trial, similar outcome benefits have been reported in over 70 observational and randomized controlled studies comprising over 70,000 patients. As a result, early goal-directed therapy was largely incorporated into the first 6 hours of sepsis management (resuscitation bundle) adopted by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign and disseminated internationally as the standard of care for early sepsis management. Recently a trio of trials (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe), while reporting an all-time low sepsis mortality, question the continued need for all of the elements of early goal-directed therapy or the need for protocolized care for patients with severe and septic shock. A review of the early hemodynamic pathogenesis, historical development, and definition of early goal-directed therapy, comparing trial conduction methodology and the changing landscape of sepsis mortality, are essential for an appropriate interpretation of these trials and their conclusions.