Adjudication of a primary trial outcome: Results of a calibration exercise and protocol for a large international trial

Background

Ascertainment of the severity of the primary outcome of upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is integral to stress ulcer prophylaxis trials. This protocol outlines the adjudication process for GI bleeding events in an international trial comparing pantoprazole to placebo in critically ill patients (REVISE: Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions). The primary objective of the adjudication process is to assess episodes submitted by participating sites to determine which fulfil the definition of the primary efficacy outcome of clinically important upper GI bleeding. Secondary objectives are to categorize the bleeding severity if deemed not clinically important, and adjudicate the bleeding site, timing, investigations, and treatments.

Methods

Research coordinators follow patients daily for any suspected clinically important upper GI bleeding, and submit case report forms, doctors' and nurses' notes, laboratory, imaging, and procedural reports to the methods center. An international central adjudication committee reflecting diverse specialty backgrounds conducted an initial calibration exercise to delineate the scope of the adjudication process, review components of the definition, and agree on how each criterion will be considered fulfilled. Henceforth, bleeding events will be stratified by study drug, and randomly assigned to adjudicator pairs (blinded to treatment allocation, and study center).

Results

Crude agreement, chance-corrected agreement, or chance-independent agreement if data have a skewed distribution will be calculated.

Conclusions

Focusing on consistency and accuracy, central independent blinded duplicate adjudication of suspected clinically important upper GI bleeding events will determine which events fulfil the definition of the primary efficacy outcome for this stress ulcer prophylaxis trial.

Registration

NCT03374800 (REVISE: Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions).

Durability of COVID-19 humoral immunity post infection and different SARS-COV-2 vaccines

BACKGROUND

The global challenge posed by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been a major concern for the healthcare sector in recent years. Healthcare workers have a relatively high risk of encountering COVID-19 patients, making protective immunity against SARS-CoV-2 is a priority for them. This study aims to evaluate the longitudinal measurement of SARS-CoV-2 IgG spike protein antibodies in healthcare workers (HCWs) after COVID-19 infection and after receiving the first and second doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, including Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) and Oxford-AstraZeneca (AZD1222).

METHODS

This longitudinal cohort study involved 311 healthcare workers working in two tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia. All participants were followed between July 2020 and July 2022 after completing the study questionnaire. A total of 3 ml of the blood samples were collected at four intervals: before/after vaccination.

RESULTS

HCWs post-infection had lower mean SARS-CoV-2 IgG levels three months post-infection than post-vaccination. 92.2% had positive IgG levels two weeks after the first dose and reached 100% after the second dose. Over 98% had positive antibodies nine months after the second dose, regardless of vaccine type. The number of neutralizing antibodies decreased and was around 50% at nine months after the second dose.

CONCLUSION

The results show different antibody patterns between infected and vaccinated HCWs. A high proportion of participants had positive antibodies after vaccination, with high levels persisting nine months after the second dose. Neutralizing antibodies decreased over time, with only about 50% of participants having positive antibodies nine months after the second dose. These results contribute to our understanding of immunity in healthcare workers and highlight the need for the continuous monitoring and possible booster strategies.

Critical care bed capacity in Asian countries and regions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the importance of critical care. The aim of the current study was to compare the number of adult critical care beds in relation to population size in Asian countries and regions before (2017) and during (2022) the pandemic.

Methods

This observational study collected data closest to 2022 on critical care beds (intensive care units and intermediate care units) in 12 middle-income and 7 high-income economies (using the 2022-2023 World Bank classification), through a mix of methods including government sources, national critical care societies, personal contacts, and data extrapolation. Data were compared with a prior study from 2017 of the same countries and regions.

Findings

The cumulative number of critical care beds per 100,000 population increased from 3.0 in 2017 to 9.4 in 2022 (p = 0.003). The median figure for middle-income economies increased from 2.6 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.7-7.8) to 6.6 (IQR 2.2-13.3), and that for high-income economies increased from 11.4 (IQR 7.3-22.8) to 13.9 (IQR 10.7-21.7). Only 3 countries did not see a rise in bed capacity. Where data were available in 2022, 10.9% of critical care beds were in single rooms (median 5.0% in middle-income and 20.3% in high-income economies), and 5.3% had negative pressure (median 0.7% in middle-income and 18.5% in high-income economies).

Interpretation

Critical care bed capacity in the studied Asian countries and regions increased close to three-fold from 2017 to 2022. Much of this increase was attributed to middle-income economies, but substantial heterogeneity exists.

Funding

None.

Mechanical ventilation practices in Asian intensive care units: A multicenter cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

This study investigated current practices of mechanical ventilation in Asian intensive care units, focusing on tidal volume, plateau pressure, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this multicenter cross-sectional study, data on mechanical ventilation and clinical outcomes were collected. Predictors of mortality were analyzed by univariate and multivariable logistic regression. A scoring system was generated to predict 28-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 1408 patients were enrolled. In 138 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), 65.9% were on a tidal volume ≤ 8 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW), and 71.3% were on sufficient PEEP. In 1270 patients without ARDS, 88.8% were on a tidal volume ≤ 10 ml/kg PBW. A plateau pressure < 30 cmH2O was measured in 92.2% of patients. Mortality rates increased from 13% to 74% as the generated predictive score increased from 5 to ≥8.5. Income classification, age, SOFA score, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, plateau pressure, number of vasopressors, and steroid use were associated with mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In Asia, low tidal volume ventilation and sufficient PEEP were underused in patients with ARDS. The majority of patients without ARDS were on intermediate tidal volumes. Country income, age, and severity of illness were associated with mortality.

Prognostic evaluation of quick sequential organ failure assessment score in ICU patients with sepsis across different income settings

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence on association between quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and sepsis mortality in ICU patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the association between qSOFA and 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. Association of qSOFA with early (3-day), medium (28-day), late (90-day) mortality was assessed in low and lower middle income (LLMIC), upper middle income (UMIC) and high income (HIC) countries/regions.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of the MOSAICS II study, an international prospective observational study on sepsis epidemiology in Asian ICUs. Associations between qSOFA at ICU admission and mortality were separately assessed in LLMIC, UMIC and HIC countries/regions. Modified Poisson regression was used to determine the adjusted relative risk (RR) of qSOFA score on mortality at 28 days with adjustments for confounders identified in the MOSAICS II study.

RESULTS

Among the MOSAICS II study cohort of 4980 patients, 4826 patients from 343 ICUs and 22 countries were included in this secondary analysis. Higher qSOFA was associated with increasing 28-day mortality, but this was only observed in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) and not HIC (p = 0.220) countries/regions. Similarly, higher 90-day mortality was associated with increased qSOFA in LLMIC (p < 0.001) and UMIC (p < 0.001) only. In contrast, higher 3-day mortality with increasing qSOFA score was observed across all income countries/regions (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that qSOFA remained associated with 28-day mortality (adjusted RR 1.09 (1.00-1.18), p = 0.038) even after adjustments for covariates including APACHE II, SOFA, income country/region and administration of antibiotics within 3 h.

CONCLUSIONS

qSOFA was independently associated with 28-day mortality in ICU patients admitted for sepsis. In LLMIC and UMIC countries/regions, qSOFA was associated with early to late mortality but only early mortality in HIC countries/regions.

Diagnosis and management of autoimmune diseases in the ICU

Autoimmune diseases encompass a broad spectrum of disorders characterized by disturbed immunoregulation leading to the development of specific autoantibodies, resulting in inflammation and multiple organ involvement. A distinction should be made between connective tissue diseases (mainly systemic lupus erythematosus, systemic scleroderma, inflammatory muscle diseases, and rheumatoid arthritis) and vasculitides (mainly small-vessel vasculitis such as antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis and immune-complex mediated vasculitis). Admission of patients with autoimmune diseases to the intensive care unit (ICU) is often triggered by disease flare-ups, infections, and organ failure and is associated with high mortality rates. Management of these patients is complex, including prompt disease identification, immunosuppressive treatment initiation, and life-sustaining therapies, and requires multi-disciplinary involvement. Data about autoimmune diseases in the ICU are limited and there is a need for multicenter, international collaboration to improve patients' diagnosis, management, and outcomes. The objective of this narrative review is to summarize the epidemiology, clinical features, and selected management of severe systemic autoimmune diseases.

Intravenous Vitamin C for Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: Two Harmonized Randomized Clinical Trials

Importance

The efficacy of vitamin C for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is uncertain.

Objective

To determine whether vitamin C improves outcomes for patients with COVID-19.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Two prospectively harmonized randomized clinical trials enrolled critically ill patients receiving organ support in intensive care units (90 sites) and patients who were not critically ill (40 sites) between July 23, 2020, and July 15, 2022, on 4 continents.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to receive vitamin C administered intravenously or control (placebo or no vitamin C) every 6 hours for 96 hours (maximum of 16 doses).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was a composite of organ support-free days defined as days alive and free of respiratory and cardiovascular organ support in the intensive care unit up to day 21 and survival to hospital discharge. Values ranged from -1 organ support-free days for patients experiencing in-hospital death to 22 organ support-free days for those who survived without needing organ support. The primary analysis used a bayesian cumulative logistic model. An odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 represented efficacy (improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both), an OR less than 1 represented harm, and an OR less than 1.2 represented futility.

Results

Enrollment was terminated after statistical triggers for harm and futility were met. The trials had primary outcome data for 1568 critically ill patients (1037 in the vitamin C group and 531 in the control group; median age, 60 years [IQR, 50-70 years]; 35.9% were female) and 1022 patients who were not critically ill (456 in the vitamin C group and 566 in the control group; median age, 62 years [IQR, 51-72 years]; 39.6% were female). Among critically ill patients, the median number of organ support-free days was 7 (IQR, -1 to 17 days) for the vitamin C group vs 10 (IQR, -1 to 17 days) for the control group (adjusted proportional OR, 0.88 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.73 to 1.06]) and the posterior probabilities were 8.6% (efficacy), 91.4% (harm), and 99.9% (futility). Among patients who were not critically ill, the median number of organ support-free days was 22 (IQR, 18 to 22 days) for the vitamin C group vs 22 (IQR, 21 to 22 days) for the control group (adjusted proportional OR, 0.80 [95% CrI, 0.60 to 1.01]) and the posterior probabilities were 2.9% (efficacy), 97.1% (harm), and greater than 99.9% (futility). Among critically ill patients, survival to hospital discharge was 61.9% (642/1037) for the vitamin C group vs 64.6% (343/531) for the control group (adjusted OR, 0.92 [95% CrI, 0.73 to 1.17]) and the posterior probability was 24.0% for efficacy. Among patients who were not critically ill, survival to hospital discharge was 85.1% (388/456) for the vitamin C group vs 86.6% (490/566) for the control group (adjusted OR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.61 to 1.17]) and the posterior probability was 17.8% for efficacy.

Conclusions and Relevance

In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, vitamin C had low probability of improving the primary composite outcome of organ support-free days and hospital survival.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04401150 (LOVIT-COVID) and NCT02735707 (REMAP-CAP).

Outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit with community-acquired pneumonia in a tertiary care center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of intensive care unit (ICU) morbidity and mortality. Despite extensive international epidemiological and clinical studies to improve those patients' outcomes, local statistics in Saudi Arabia are limited. The objective of this study is to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted to the ICU with the diagnosis of CAP reflecting the experience of a tertiary center over an 18-year period.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study included all consecutive adult ICU patients diagnosed with CAP between 1999 and 2017. Baseline demographics, patients' risk factors, and initial admission laboratory investigations were compared between survivors and nonsurvivors. A multivariate regression model was used to predict mortality.

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 3438 patients admitted to the ICU with CAP (median age 67 [Quartile 1, 3 (Q1, Q3) 51, 76] years) and 54.4% were males, of whom 1007 (29.2%) died. The survivors compared with nonsurvivors were younger (65 vs. 70 years), less likely to have chronic liver disease (2.4% vs. 10.5%), chronic renal failure (8.1% vs. 14.4%), and be immunocompromised (10.2% vs. 18.2%), and less frequently required mechanical ventilation or vasopressors (46.2% vs. 80.5% and 29.6% vs. 55.9%, respectively). Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score was significantly higher among nonsurvivors (median score 26 vs. 20) with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU stay. Using a multivariate regression model, age, APACHE II score, bilirubin level, vasopressors, and mechanical ventilation were significantly associated with increased mortality, while diabetes was associated with lower mortality.

CONCLUSION

Around one-third of patients admitted to the ICU with CAP died. Mortality was significantly associated with age, APACHE II score, vasopressor use, and mechanical ventilation. A comprehensive national registry is needed to enhance epidemiological data and to guide initiatives for improving CAP patients' outcomes.

Rate of Change of Rapid Shallow Breathing Index and Extubation Outcome in Mechanically Ventilated Patients

Background

Rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) has been widely used as a predictor of extubation outcome in mechanically ventilated patients. We hypothesize that the rate of change of RSBI between the beginning and end of a 120-minute spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) could be a better predictor of extubation outcome than a single RSBI measured at the end of SBT in mechanically ventilated patients. Methodology. In this prospective observational study, we enrolled 193 patients who met the inclusion criteria, of whom 33 patients were unable to tolerate a 120-minute SBT and were excluded from the study. The study population consisted of 160 patients, categorized into three subgroups: patients with normal lung (no reported history of respiratory diseases), patients with airway disease, and patients with parenchymal disease who completed 120 minutes of SBT on low levels of pressure support ventilation. RSBI was obtained from the ventilator display at the 5th and the 120th minutes of SBT. The rate of change of RSBI (RSBI 5-120) was calculated as (RSBI 2-RSBI 1)/RSBI 1 × 100. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted for RSBI 5-120 and RSBI 120 in all patients and among the three subgroups (normal group, airway group, and parenchymal group) to compare the superiority of their best thresholds in predicting extubation failure.

Results

The RSBI 5-120 threshold for extubation failure in the entire patient group was 23% with an overall accuracy of 88% (AUC = 0.933, sensitivity = 91%, and specificity = 86%) and the threshold of RSBI 120 for extubation failure in the entire patient group was 70 breaths/min/L with an overall accuracy of 82% (AUC = 0.899, sensitivity = 85%, and specificity = 81%). In patients in the normal lung group, the threshold of RSBI 5-120 was 22%, with an overall accuracy of 89% (AUC = 0.892, sensitivity = 87.5%, and specificity = 90%), and the RSBI 120 threshold was 70 breaths/min/L, with an overall accuracy of 89% (AUC = 0.956, sensitivity = 88%, and specificity = 90%). The RSBI 5-120 threshold in patients with airway disease was 25% with an accuracy of 86% (AUC = 0.892, sensitivity = 85%, and specificity = 86%) and the threshold of RSBI 120 was 73 breaths/min/L with an accuracy of 83% (AUC = 0.874, sensitivity = 85%, and specificity = 82%). In patients in the parenchymal disease group, the threshold of RSBI 5-120 was 24%, with an accuracy of 90% (AUC = 0.966, sensitivity = 92%, and specificity = 89%) and RSBI 120 threshold was 71 breaths/min/L, which was 88% accurate (AUC = 0.893, sensitivity = 85%, and specificity = 89%).

Conclusion

The rate of change of RSBI between the 5th and 120th minutes was moderately more accurate than the single value of RSBI measured at the 120th minute in predicting extubation outcome.

Atrial Fibrillation (AFIB) in the ICU: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes: The International AFIB-ICU Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the ICU and to describe current practice in the management of AF.

DESIGN

Multicenter, prospective, inception cohort study.

SETTING

Forty-four ICUs in 12 countries in four geographical regions.

SUBJECTS

Adult, acutely admitted ICU patients without a history of persistent/permanent AF or recent cardiac surgery were enrolled; inception periods were from October 2020 to June 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We included 1,423 ICU patients and analyzed 1,415 (99.4%), among whom 221 patients had 539 episodes of AF. Most (59%) episodes were diagnosed with continuous electrocardiogram monitoring. The incidence of AF was 15.6% (95% CI, 13.8-17.6), of which newly developed AF was 13.3% (11.5-15.1). A history of arterial hypertension, paroxysmal AF, sepsis, or high disease severity at ICU admission was associated with AF. Used interventions to manage AF were fluid bolus 19% (95% CI 16-23), magnesium 16% (13-20), potassium 15% (12-19), amiodarone 51% (47-55), beta-1 selective blockers 34% (30-38), calcium channel blockers 4% (2-6), digoxin 16% (12-19), and direct current cardioversion in 4% (2-6). Patients with AF had more ischemic, thromboembolic (13.6% vs 7.9%), and severe bleeding events (5.9% vs 2.1%), and higher mortality (41.2% vs 25.2%) than those without AF. The adjusted cause-specific hazard ratio for 90-day mortality by AF was 1.38 (95% CI, 0.95-1.99).

CONCLUSIONS

In ICU patients, AF occurred in one of six and was associated with different conditions. AF was associated with worse outcomes while not statistically significantly associated with 90-day mortality in the adjusted analyses. We observed variations in the diagnostic and management strategies for AF.

WHO O2CoV2: oxygen requirements and respiratory support in patients with COVID-19 in low-and-middle income countries-protocol for a multicountry, prospective, observational cohort study

INTRODUCTION

SARS-CoV-2 has been identified as the cause of the disease officially named COVID-19, primarily a respiratory illness. COVID-19 was characterised as a pandemic on 11 March 2020. It has been estimated that approximately 20% of people with COVID-19 require oxygen therapy. Oxygen has been listed on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines List and Essential Medicines List for Children for almost two decades. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted, more than ever, the acute need for scale-up of oxygen therapy. Detailed data on the use of oxygen therapy in low-and-middle income countries at the patient and facility level are needed to target interventions better globally.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We aim to describe the requirements and use of oxygen at the facility and patient level of approximately 4500 patients with COVID-19 in 30 countries. Our objectives are specifically to characterise type and duration of different modalities of oxygen therapy delivered to patients; describe demographics and outcomes of hospitalised patients with COVID-19; and describe facility-level oxygen production and support. Primary analyses will be descriptive in nature. Respiratory support transitions will be described in Sankey plots, and Kaplan-Meier models will be used to estimate probability of each transition. A multistate model will be used to study the course of hospital stay of the study population, evaluating transitions of escalating respiratory support transitions to the absorbing states.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

WHO Ad Hoc COVID-19 Research Ethics Review Committee (ERC) has approved this global protocol. When this protocol is adopted at specific country sites, national ERCs may make require adjustments in accordance with their respective national research ethics guidelines. Dissemination of this protocol and global findings will be open access through peer-reviewed scientific journals, study website, press and online media.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04918875.

Replacing protein via enteral nutrition in a stepwise approach in critically ill patients: the REPLENISH randomized clinical trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Protein intake is recommended in critically ill patients to mitigate the negative effects of critical illness-induced catabolism and muscle wasting. However, the optimal dose of enteral protein remains unknown. We hypothesize that supplemental enteral protein (1.2 g/kg/day) added to standard enteral nutrition formula to achieve high amount of enteral protein (range 2-2.4 g/kg/day) given from ICU day 5 until ICU discharge or ICU day 90 as compared to no supplemental enteral protein to achieve moderate amount enteral protein (0.8-1.2 g/kg/day) would reduce all-cause 90-day mortality in adult critically ill mechanically ventilated patients.

METHODS

The REPLENISH (Replacing Protein Via Enteral Nutrition in a Stepwise Approach in Critically Ill Patients) trial is an open-label, multicenter randomized clinical trial. Patients will be randomized to the supplemental protein group or the control group. Patients in both groups will receive the primary enteral formula as per the treating team, which includes a maximum protein 1.2 g/kg/day. The supplemental protein group will receive, in addition, supplemental protein at 1.2 g/kg/day starting the fifth ICU day. The control group will receive the primary formula without supplemental protein. The primary outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Other outcomes include functional and quality of life assessments at 90 days. The trial will enroll 2502 patients.

DISCUSSION

The study has been initiated in September 2021. Interim analysis is planned at one third and two thirds of the target sample size. The study is expected to be completed by the end of 2025.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04475666 . Registered on July 17, 2020.

ESICM guidelines on acute respiratory distress syndrome: definition, phenotyping and respiratory support strategies

The aim of these guidelines is to update the 2017 clinical practice guideline (CPG) of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). The scope of this CPG is limited to adult patients and to non-pharmacological respiratory support strategies across different aspects of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), including ARDS due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These guidelines were formulated by an international panel of clinical experts, one methodologist and patients' representatives on behalf of the ESICM. The review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement recommendations. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the certainty of evidence and grade recommendations and the quality of reporting of each study based on the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) network guidelines. The CPG addressed 21 questions and formulates 21 recommendations on the following domains: (1) definition; (2) phenotyping, and respiratory support strategies including (3) high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNO); (4) non-invasive ventilation (NIV); (5) tidal volume setting; (6) positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers (RM); (7) prone positioning; (8) neuromuscular blockade, and (9) extracorporeal life support (ECLS). In addition, the CPG includes expert opinion on clinical practice and identifies the areas of future research.

The effect of recombinant erythropoietin on long-term outcome after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury

PURPOSE

Recombinant erythropoietin (EPO) administered for traumatic brain injury (TBI) may increase short-term survival, but the long-term effect is unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a pre-planned long-term follow-up of patients in the multicentre erythropoietin in TBI trial (2010-2015). We invited survivors to follow-up and evaluated survival and functional outcome with the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) (categories 5-8 = good outcome), and secondly, with good outcome determined relative to baseline function (sliding scale). We used survival analysis to assess time to death and absolute risk differences (ARD) to assess favorable outcomes. We categorized TBI severity with the International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI model. Heterogeneity of treatment effects were assessed with interaction p-values based on the following a priori defined subgroups, the severity of TBI, and the presence of an intracranial mass lesion and multi-trauma in addition to TBI.

RESULTS

Of 603 patients in the original trial, 487 patients had survival data; 356 were included in the follow-up at a median of 6 years from injury. There was no difference between treatment groups for patient survival [EPO vs placebo hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 (0.47-1.14) p = 0.17]. Good outcome rates were 110/175 (63%) in the EPO group vs 100/181 (55%) in the placebo group (ARD 8%, 95% CI [Formula: see text] 3 to 18%, p = 0.14). When good outcome was determined relative to baseline risk, the EPO groups had better GOSE (sliding scale ARD 12%, 95% CI 2-22%, p = 0.02). When considering long-term patient survival, there was no evidence for heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) according to severity of TBI (p = 0.85), presence of an intracranial mass lesion (p = 0.48), or whether the patient had multi-trauma in addition to TBI (p = 0.08). Similarly, no evidence of treatment heterogeneity was seen for the effect of EPO on functional outcome.

CONCLUSION

EPO neither decreased overall long-term mortality nor improved functional outcome in moderate or severe TBI patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). The limited sample size makes it difficult to make final conclusions about the use of EPO in TBI.

Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Low-Dose Hydrocortisone in Adults with Septic Shock

Low-Dose Hydrocortisone and Septic ShockCorticosteroids have been evaluated as a therapy for septic shock for more than 50 years. However, uncertainty persists about their effects on mortality. Pirracchio and colleagues undertake a patient-level meta-analysis to answer this important question.

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the mega randomised registry trial comparing conservative vs. liberal oxygenation targets in adults with sepsis in the intensive care unit (Mega-ROX Sepsis)

Background

The effect of conservative vs. liberal oxygen therapy on 90-day in-hospital mortality in adults with sepsis receiving unplanned invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) is uncertain.

Objective

The objective of this study was to summarise the protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Mega-ROX Sepsis trial.

Design setting and participants

The Mega-ROX Sepsis trial is an international randomised clinical trial that will be conducted within an overarching 40,000-patient registry-embedded clinical trial comparing conservative and liberal ICU oxygen therapy regimens. We anticipate that between 10,000 and 13,000 patients with sepsis who are receiving unplanned invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU will be enrolled in this trial.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome is in-hospital all-cause mortality up to 90 days from the date of randomisation. Secondary outcomes include duration of survival, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, and the proportion of patients discharged home.

Results and conclusions

Mega-ROX Sepsis will compare the effect of conservative vs. liberal oxygen therapy on 90-day in-hospital mortality in adults with sepsis who are receiving unplanned invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU. The protocol and a prespecified approach to analyses are reported here to mitigate analysis bias.

Saudi Critical Care Society clinical practice guidelines on the prevention of venous thromboembolism in adults with trauma: reviewed for evidence-based integrity and endorsed by the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine

BACKGROUND

To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention in adults with trauma in inpatient settings.

METHODS

The Saudi Critical Care Society (SCCS) sponsored guidelines development and included 22 multidisciplinary panel members who completed conflict-of-interest forms. The panel developed and answered structured guidelines questions. For each question, the literature was searched for relevant studies. To summarize treatment effects, meta-analyses were conducted or updated. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, then the evidence-to-decision (EtD) framework was used to generate recommendations. Recommendations covered the following prioritized domains: timing of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis initiation in non-operative blunt solid organ injuries; isolated blunt traumatic brain injury (TBI); isolated blunt spine trauma or fracture and/or spinal cord injury (SCI); type and dose of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis; mechanical VTE prophylaxis; routine duplex ultrasonography (US) surveillance; and inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs).

RESULTS

The panel issued 12 clinical practice recommendations-one, a strong recommendation, 10 weak, and one with no recommendation due to insufficient evidence. The panel suggests starting early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis for non-operative blunt solid organ injuries, isolated blunt TBIs, and SCIs. The panel suggests using low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) over unfractionated heparin (UFH) and suggests either intermediate-high dose LMWH or conventional dosing LMWH. For adults with trauma who are not pharmacologic candidates, the panel strongly recommends using mechanical VTE prophylaxis with intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC). The panel suggests using either combined VTE prophylaxis with mechanical and pharmacologic methods or pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis alone. Additionally, the panel suggests routine bilateral lower extremity US in adults with trauma with elevated risk of VTE who are ineligible for pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis and suggests against the routine placement of prophylactic IVCFs. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel did not issue any recommendation on the use of early pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in adults with isolated blunt TBI requiring neurosurgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

The SCCS guidelines for VTE prevention in adults with trauma were based on the best available evidence and identified areas for further research. The framework may facilitate adaptation of recommendations by national/international guideline policymakers.

Effect of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor and Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Initiation on Organ Support-Free Days in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19.

Objective

To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non-critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022).

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was organ support-free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes.

RESULTS

On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support-free days among critically ill patients was 10 (-1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (-1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support-free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.

Type I interferon autoantibodies in hospitalized patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome and association with outcomes and treatment effect of interferon beta‐1b in MIRACLE clinical trial

Background

Type I interferons (IFNs) are essential antiviral cytokines induced upon respiratory exposure to coronaviruses. Defects in type I IFN signaling can result in severe disease upon exposure to respiratory viral infection and are associated with worse clinical outcomes. Neutralizing autoantibodies (auto‐Abs) to type I IFNs were reported as a risk factor for life‐threatening COVID‐19, but their presence has not been evaluated in patients with severe Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS).

Methods

We evaluated the prevalence of type I IFN auto‐Abs in a cohort of hospitalized patients with MERS who were enrolled in a placebo‐controlled clinical trial for treatment with IFN‐β1b and lopinavir‐ritonavir (MIRACLE trial). Samples were tested for type I IFN auto‐Abs using a multiplex particle‐based assay.

Results

Among the 62 enrolled patients, 15 (24.2%) were positive for immunoglobulin G auto‐Abs for at least one subtype of type I IFNs. Auto‐Abs positive patients were not different from auto‐Abs negative patients in age, sex, or comorbidities. However, the majority (93.3%) of patients who were auto‐Abs positive were critically ill and admitted to the ICU at the time of enrollment compared to 66% in the auto‐Abs negative patients. The effect of treatment with IFN‐β1b and lopinavir‐ritonavir did not significantly differ between the two groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates the presence of type I IFN auto‐Abs in hospitalized patients with MERS.

Tocilizumab Outcomes in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the ICU and the Role of Non-Tocilizumab COVID-19-Specific Medical Therapeutics

Background: Tocilizumab is a monoclonal antibody proposed to manage cytokine release syndrome (CRS) associated with severe COVID-19. Previously published reports have shown that tocilizumab may improve the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. However, no precise data about the role of other medical therapeutics concurrently used for COVID-19 on this outcome have been published. Objectives: We aimed to compare the overall outcome of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU who received tocilizumab with the outcome of matched patients who did not receive tocilizumab while controlling for other confounders, including medical therapeutics for critically ill patients admitted to ICUs. Methods: A prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study was conducted among critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU of 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia between 1 March 2020, and October 31, 2020. Propensity-score matching was utilized to compare patients who received tocilizumab to patients who did not. In addition, the log-rank test was used to compare the 28 day hospital survival of patients who received tocilizumab with those who did not. Then, a multivariate logistic regression analysis of the matched groups was performed to evaluate the impact of the remaining concurrent medical therapeutics that could not be excluded via matching 28 day hospital survival rates. The primary outcome measure was patients’ overall 28 day hospital survival, and the secondary outcomes were ICU length of stay and ICU survival to hospital discharge. Results: A total of 1470 unmatched patients were included, of whom 426 received tocilizumab. The total number of propensity-matched patients was 1278. Overall, 28 day hospital survival revealed a significant difference between the unmatched non-tocilizumab group (586; 56.1%) and the tocilizumab group (269; 63.1%) (p-value = 0.016), and this difference increased even more in the propensity-matched analysis between the non-tocilizumab group (466.7; 54.6%) and the tocilizumab group (269; 63.1%) (p-value = 0.005). The matching model successfully matched the two groups’ common medical therapeutics used to treat COVID-19. Two medical therapeutics remained significantly different, favoring the tocilizumab group. A multivariate logistic regression was performed for the 28 day hospital survival in the propensity-matched patients. It showed that neither steroids (OR: 1.07 (95% CI: 0.75–1.53)) (p = 0.697) nor favipiravir (OR: 1.08 (95% CI: 0.61–1.9)) (p = 0.799) remained as a predictor for an increase in 28 day survival. Conclusion: The tocilizumab treatment in critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU improved the overall 28 day hospital survival, which might not be influenced by the concurrent use of other COVID-19 medical therapeutics, although further research is needed to confirm this.

Association of early mobility with the incidence of deep-vein thrombosis and mortality among critically ill patients: a post hoc analysis of PREVENT trial

BACKGROUND

This study assessed the mobility levels among critically ill patients and the association of early mobility with incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of the multicenter PREVENT trial, which evaluated adjunctive intermittent pneumatic compression in critically ill patients receiving pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h and found no effect on the primary outcome of incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis. Mobility levels were documented daily up to day 28 in the ICU using a tool with an 8-point ordinal scale. We categorized patients according to mobility levels within the first 3 ICU days into three groups: early mobility level 4-7 (at least active standing), 1-3 (passive transfer from bed to chair or active sitting), and 0 (passive range of motion). We evaluated the association of early mobility and incident lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis and 90-day mortality by Cox proportional models adjusting for randomization and other co-variables.

RESULTS

Of 1708 patients, only 85 (5.0%) had early mobility level 4-7 and 356 (20.8%) level 1-3, while 1267 (74.2%) had early mobility level 0. Patients with early mobility levels 4-7 and 1-3 had less illness severity, femoral central venous catheters, and organ support compared to patients with mobility level 0. Incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis occurred in 1/85 (1.3%) patients in the early mobility 4-7 group, 7/348 (2.0%) patients in mobility 1-3 group, and 50/1230 (4.1%) patients in mobility 0 group. Compared with early mobility group 0, mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 were not associated with differences in incident proximal lower-limb deep-vein thrombosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16, 8.90; p = 0.87 and 0.91, 95% CI 0.39, 2.12; p = 0.83, respectively). However, early mobility groups 4-7 and 1-3 had lower 90-day mortality (aHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 1.01; p = 0.052, and 0.43, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62; p < 0.0001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a small proportion of critically ill patients with an expected ICU stay ≥ 72 h were mobilized early. Early mobility was associated with reduced mortality, but not with different incidence of deep-vein thrombosis. This association does not establish causality, and randomized controlled trials are required to assess whether and to what extent this association is modifiable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The PREVENT trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02040103 (registered on 3 November 2013) and Current controlled trials, ID: ISRCTN44653506 (registered on 30 October 2013).

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the mega randomised registry trial comparing conservative vs. liberal oxygenation targets in adults with nonhypoxic ischaemic acute brain injuries and conditions in the intensive care unit (Mega-ROX Brains)

Background

The effect of conservative vs. liberal oxygen therapy on 90-day in-hospital mortality in adults who have nonhypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy acute brain injuries and conditions and are receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) is uncertain.

Objective

The objective of this study was to summarise the protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Mega-ROX Brains trial.

Design setting and participants

Mega-ROX Brains is an international randomised clinical trial, which will be conducted within an overarching 40,000-participant, registry-embedded clinical trial comparing conservative and liberal ICU oxygen therapy regimens. We expect to enrol between 7500 and 9500 participants with nonhypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy acute brain injuries and conditions who are receiving unplanned invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome is in-hospital all-cause mortality up to 90 d from the date of randomisation. Secondary outcomes include duration of survival, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, and the proportion of participants discharged home.

Results and conclusions

Mega-ROX Brains will compare the effect of conservative vs. liberal oxygen therapy regimens on 90-day in-hospital mortality in adults in the ICU with acute brain injuries and conditions. The protocol and planned analyses are reported here to mitigate analysis bias.

Trial Registration

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12620000391976).

Awake proning in patients with COVID-19-related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: A rapid practice guideline

This rapid practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the use of awake proning in adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19. The panel included 20 experts from 12 countries, including one patient representative, and used a strict conflict of interest policy for potential financial and intellectual conflicts of interest. Methodological support was provided by the guidelines in intensive care, development, and evaluation (GUIDE) group. Based on an updated systematic review, and the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method we evaluated the certainty of evidence and developed recommendations using the Evidence-to-Decision framework. We conducted an electronic vote, requiring >80% agreement amongst the panel for a recommendation to be adopted. The panel made a strong recommendation for a trial of awake proning in adult patients with COVID-19 related hypoxemic acute respiratory failure who are not invasively ventilated. Awake proning appears to reduce the risk of tracheal intubation, although it may not reduce mortality. The panel judged that most patients would want a trial of awake proning, although this may not be feasible in some patients and some patients may not tolerate it. However, given the high risk of clinical deterioration amongst these patients, awake proning should be conducted in an area where patients can be monitored by staff experienced in rapidly detecting and managing clinical deterioration. This RPG panel recommends a trial of awake prone positioning in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19.

Clostridioides difficile infection in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: A nested cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a serious complication of critical illness. The objective of the study was to determine its incidence, prevalence, timing, severity, predictors, and outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a prospective nested cohort study of CDI within a randomized trial comparing Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG to placebo. We adjudicated cases of CDI using standardized definitions, assessed timing (pre-ICU, in ICU, post-ICU) and severity. We analyzed risk factors and outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 2650 patients, 86 were diagnosed with CDI during 90,833 hospital-days (0.95/1000 hospital-days); CDI prevalence was 3.2%. CDI incidence varied in timing; 0.3% patients had CDI pre-ICU, 2.2% in the ICU; an 0.8% developed CDI post-ICU. Relapse or recurrence of CDI was documented in 9.3% patients. Infections were mild/moderate in severity. Complications included septic shock (26.7%), organ failure (16.3%), and toxic megacolon requiring colectomy (1.2%). No risk factors for CDI were identified. CDI was not associated with hospital mortality. The duration of hospital stay was longer for those who had CDI compared those who did not, CONCLUSION: CDI was uncommon, severity was mild to moderate and not associated with mortality however CDI was associated with a longer hospital stay.

Long-term (180-Day) Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19 in the REMAP-CAP Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The longer-term effects of therapies for the treatment of critically ill patients with COVID-19 are unknown.

Objective

To determine the effect of multiple interventions for critically ill adults with COVID-19 on longer-term outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prespecified secondary analysis of an ongoing adaptive platform trial (REMAP-CAP) testing interventions within multiple therapeutic domains in which 4869 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 were enrolled between March 9, 2020, and June 22, 2021, from 197 sites in 14 countries. The final 180-day follow-up was completed on March 2, 2022.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to receive 1 or more interventions within 6 treatment domains: immune modulators (n = 2274), convalescent plasma (n = 2011), antiplatelet therapy (n = 1557), anticoagulation (n = 1033), antivirals (n = 726), and corticosteroids (n = 401).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was survival through day 180, analyzed using a bayesian piecewise exponential model. A hazard ratio (HR) less than 1 represented improved survival (superiority), while an HR greater than 1 represented worsened survival (harm); futility was represented by a relative improvement less than 20% in outcome, shown by an HR greater than 0.83.

Results

Among 4869 randomized patients (mean age, 59.3 years; 1537 [32.1%] women), 4107 (84.3%) had known vital status and 2590 (63.1%) were alive at day 180. IL-6 receptor antagonists had a greater than 99.9% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.61-0.90]) and antiplatelet agents had a 95% probability of improving 6-month survival (adjusted HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.71-1.03]) compared with the control, while the probability of trial-defined statistical futility (HR >0.83) was high for therapeutic anticoagulation (99.9%; HR, 1.13 [95% CrI, 0.93-1.42]), convalescent plasma (99.2%; HR, 0.99 [95% CrI, 0.86-1.14]), and lopinavir-ritonavir (96.6%; HR, 1.06 [95% CrI, 0.82-1.38]) and the probabilities of harm from hydroxychloroquine (96.9%; HR, 1.51 [95% CrI, 0.98-2.29]) and the combination of lopinavir-ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine (96.8%; HR, 1.61 [95% CrI, 0.97-2.67]) were high. The corticosteroid domain was stopped early prior to reaching a predefined statistical trigger; there was a 57.1% to 61.6% probability of improving 6-month survival across varying hydrocortisone dosing strategies.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among critically ill patients with COVID-19 randomized to receive 1 or more therapeutic interventions, treatment with an IL-6 receptor antagonist had a greater than 99.9% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control, and treatment with an antiplatelet had a 95.0% probability of improved 180-day mortality compared with patients randomized to the control. Overall, when considered with previously reported short-term results, the findings indicate that initial in-hospital treatment effects were consistent for most therapies through 6 months.

Impact of a national collaborative project to improve the care of mechanically ventilated patients

This prospective quasi-experimental study from the NASAM (National Approach to Standardize and Improve Mechanical Ventilation) collaborative assessed the impact of evidence-based practices including subglottic suctioning, daily assessment for spontaneous awakening trial (SAT), spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), head of bed elevation, and avoidance of neuromuscular blockers unless otherwise indicated. The study outcomes included VAE (primary) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Changes in daily care process measures and outcomes were evaluated using repeated measures mixed modeling. The results were reported as incident rate ratio (IRR) for each additional month with 95% confidence interval (CI). A comprehensive program that included education on evidence-based practices for optimal care of mechanically ventilated patients with real-time benchmarking of daily care process measures to drive improvement in forty-two ICUs from 26 hospitals in Saudi Arabia (>27,000 days of observation). Compliance with subglottic suctioning, SAT and SBT increased monthly during the project by 3.5%, 2.1% and 1.9%, respectively (IRR 1.035, 95%CI 1.007-1.064, p = 0.0148; 1.021, 95% CI 1.010-1.032, p = 0.0003; and 1.019, 95%CI 1.009-1.029, p = 0.0001, respectively). The use of neuromuscular blockers decreased monthly by 2.5% (IRR 0.975, 95%CI 0.953-0.998, p = 0.0341). The compliance with head of bed elevation was high at baseline and did not change over time. Based on data for 83153 ventilator days, VAE rate was 15.2/1000 ventilator day (95%CI 12.6-18.1) at baseline and did not change during the project (IRR 1.019, 95%CI 0.985-1.053, p = 0.2812). Based on data for 8523 patients; the mortality was 30.4% (95%CI 27.4-33.6) at baseline, and decreased monthly during the project by 1.6% (IRR 0.984, 95%CI 0.973-0.996, p = 0.0067). A national quality improvement collaborative was associated with improvements in daily care processes. These changes were associated with a reduction in mortality but not VAEs. Registration The study is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03790150).

Efficacy of awake prone positioning in patients with covid-19 related hypoxemic respiratory failure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety of awake prone positioning versus usual care in non-intubated adults with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to covid-19.

DESIGN

Systematic review with frequentist and bayesian meta-analyses.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY

Randomized trials comparing awake prone positioning versus usual care in adults with covid-19 related hypoxemic respiratory failure. Information sources were Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 4 March 2022.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were performed for the primary and secondary outcomes. Bayesian meta-analyses were performed for endotracheal intubation and mortality outcomes. GRADE certainty of evidence was assessed for outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes were mortality, ventilator-free days, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay, escalation of oxygen modality, change in oxygenation and respiratory rate, and adverse events.

RESULTS

17 trials (2931 patients) met the eligibility criteria. 12 trials were at low risk of bias, three had some concerns, and two were at high risk. Awake prone positioning reduced the risk of endotracheal intubation compared with usual care (crude average 24.2% v 29.8%, relative risk 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to 0.94; high certainty). This translates to 55 fewer intubations per 1000 patients (95% confidence interval 87 to 19 fewer intubations). Awake prone positioning did not significantly affect secondary outcomes, including mortality (15.6% v 17.2%, relative risk 0.90, 0.76 to 1.07; high certainty), ventilator-free days (mean difference 0.97 days, 95% confidence interval -0.5 to 3.4; low certainty), ICU length of stay (-2.1 days, -4.5 to 0.4; low certainty), hospital length of stay (-0.09 days, -0.69 to 0.51; moderate certainty), and escalation of oxygen modality (21.4% v 23.0%, relative risk 1.04, 0.74 to 1.44; low certainty). Adverse events related to awake prone positioning were uncommon. Bayesian meta-analysis showed a high probability of benefit with awake prone positioning for endotracheal intubation (non-informative prior, mean relative risk 0.83, 95% credible interval 0.70 to 0.97; posterior probability for relative risk <0.95=96%) but lower probability for mortality (0.90, 0.73 to 1.13; <0.95=68%).

CONCLUSIONS

Awake prone positioning compared with usual care reduces the risk of endotracheal intubation in adults with hypoxemic respiratory failure due to covid-19 but probably has little to no effect on mortality or other outcomes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022314856.

Combination of norepinephrine with phenylephrine versus norepinephrine with vasopressin in critically ill patients with septic shock: A retrospective study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcomes of patients with septic shock treated with a combination of norepinephrine with phenylephrine compared to norepinephrine with vasopressin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study including adults admitted between 2002 and 2017 with septic shock according to the Sepsis 3 criteria. We compared outcomes of patients treated with norepinephrine with phenylephrine to those treated with norepinephrine with vasopressin. Multivariate analysis was carried out to evaluate the association of norepinephrine with phenylephrine compared to norepinephrine with vasopressin with in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

During the study period, 158 patients with septic shock were treated with norepinephrine with phenylephrine and 129 with norepinephrine with vasopressin. Crude in-hospital mortality was not different between the two groups [91/158 (57.6%) versus 80/129 (62.5%), p = 0.40]. There was also no difference in ICU length of stay or hospital length of stay. Multivariate analysis demonstrated no significant association of norepinephrine with phenylephrine with in-hospital mortality compared to norepinephrine with vasopressin (OR 0.62 (95% confidence interval 0.31, 1.23, p = 0.17).

CONCLUSION

Phenylephrine used as a second-line vasoactive agent combined with norepinephrine may be a reasonable option compared to vasopressin. However, this finding needs to be validated in a randomized controlled trial.

Health economic evaluation alongside the Probiotics to Prevent Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial (E-PROSPECT): a cost-effectiveness analysis

PURPOSE

We sought to compare the cost-effectiveness of probiotics and usual care with usual care without probiotics in mechanically ventilated, intensive care unit patients alongside the Probiotics to Prevent Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial (PROSPECT).

METHODS

We conducted a health economic evaluation alongside the PROSPECT randomized control trial (October 2013-March 2019). We adopted a public healthcare payer's perspective. Forty-four intensive care units in three countries (Canada/USA/Saudi Arabia) with adult critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients (N = 2,650) were included. Interventions were probiotics (Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG) vs placebo administered enterally twice daily. We collected healthcare resource use and estimated unit costs in 2019 United States dollars (USD) over a time horizon from randomization to hospital discharge/death. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) comparing probiotics vs usual care. The primary outcome was incremental cost per ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) event averted; secondary outcomes were costs per Clostridioides difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD), antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD), and mortality averted. Uncertainty was investigated using nonparametric bootstrapping and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Mean (standard deviation [SD]) cost per patient was USD 66,914 (91,098) for patients randomized to probiotics, with a median [interquartile range (IQR)] of USD 42,947 [22,239 to 76,205]. By comparison, for those not receiving probiotics, mean (SD) cost per patient was USD 62,701 (78,676) (median [IQR], USD 41,102 [23,170 to 75,140]; incremental cost, USD 4,213; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2,269 to 10,708). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for VAP or AAD events averted, probiotics were dominated by usual care (more expensive, with similar effectiveness). The ICERs were USD 1,473,400 per CDAD event averted (95% CI, undefined) and USD 396,764 per death averted (95% CI, undefined). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves reveal that probiotics were not cost-effective across wide ranges of plausible willingness-to-pay thresholds. Sensitivity analyses did not change the conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Probiotics for VAP prevention among critically ill patients were not cost-effective. Study registration data www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov (NCT01782755); registered 4 February 2013.

Exome-wide association study to identify rare variants influencing COVID-19 outcomes: Results from the Host Genetics Initiative

Host genetics is a key determinant of COVID-19 outcomes. Previously, the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative genome-wide association study used common variants to identify multiple loci associated with COVID-19 outcomes. However, variants with the largest impact on COVID-19 outcomes are expected to be rare in the population. Hence, studying rare variants may provide additional insights into disease susceptibility and pathogenesis, thereby informing therapeutics development. Here, we combined whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing from 21 cohorts across 12 countries and performed rare variant exome-wide burden analyses for COVID-19 outcomes. In an analysis of 5,085 severe disease cases and 571,737 controls, we observed that carrying a rare deleterious variant in the SARS-CoV-2 sensor toll-like receptor TLR7 (on chromosome X) was associated with a 5.3-fold increase in severe disease (95% CI: 2.75-10.05, p = 5.41x10-7). This association was consistent across sexes. These results further support TLR7 as a genetic determinant of severe disease and suggest that larger studies on rare variants influencing COVID-19 outcomes could provide additional insights.

Epidemiology, Management, and Outcomes of Sepsis in ICUs among Countries of Differing National Wealth across Asia

Rationale: Directly comparative data on sepsis epidemiology and sepsis bundle implementation in countries of differing national wealth remain sparse. Objectives: To evaluate across countries/regions of differing income status in Asia 1) the prevalence, causes, and outcomes of sepsis as a reason for ICU admission and 2) sepsis bundle (antibiotic administration, blood culture, and lactate measurement) compliance and its association with hospital mortality. Methods: A prospective point prevalence study was conducted among 386 adult ICUs from 22 Asian countries/regions. Adult ICU participants admitted for sepsis on four separate days (representing the seasons of 2019) were recruited. Measurements and Main Results: The overall prevalence of sepsis in ICUs was 22.4% (20.9%, 24.5%, and 21.3% in low-income countries/regions [LICs]/lower middle-income countries/regions [LMICs], upper middle-income countries/regions, and high-income countries/regions [HICs], respectively; P < 0.001). Patients were younger and had lower severity of illness in LICs/LMICs. Hospital mortality was 32.6% and marginally significantly higher in LICs/LMICs than HICs on multivariable generalized mixed model analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-3.37; P = 0.049). Sepsis bundle compliance was 21.5% at 1 hour (26.0%, 22.1%, and 16.2% in LICs/LMICs, upper middle-income countries/regions, and HICs, respectively; P < 0.001) and 36.6% at 3 hours (39.3%, 32.8%, and 38.5%, respectively; P = 0.001). Delaying antibiotic administration beyond 3 hours was the only element independently associated with increased mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 2.53; 95% confidence interval, 2.07-3.08; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Sepsis is a common cause of admission to Asian ICUs. Mortality remains high and is higher in LICs/LMICs after controlling for confounders. Sepsis bundle compliance remains low. Delaying antibiotic administration beyond 3 hours from diagnosis is associated with increased mortality. Clinical trial registered with www.ctri.nic.in (CTRI/2019/01/016898).

Heterogeneity of treatment effect of interferon-β1b and lopinavir-ritonavir in patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome by cytokine levels

Animal and human data indicate variable effects of interferons in treating coronavirus infections according to inflammatory status and timing of therapy. In this sub-study of the MIRACLE trial (MERS-CoV Infection Treated with a Combination of Lopinavir-Ritonavir and Interferon β-1b), we evaluated the heterogeneity of treatment effect of interferon-β1b and lopinavir-ritonavir versus placebo among hospitalized patients with MERS on 90-day mortality, according to cytokine levels and timing of therapy. We measured plasma levels of 17 cytokines at enrollment and tested the treatment effect on 90-day mortality according to cytokine levels (higher versus lower levels using the upper tertile (67%) as a cutoff point) and time to treatment (≤ 7 days versus > 7 days of symptom onset) using interaction tests. Among 70 included patients, 32 received interferon-β1b and lopinavir-ritonavir and 38 received placebo. Interferon-β1b and lopinavir-ritonavir reduced mortality in patients with lower IL-2, IL-8 and IL-13 plasma concentrations but not in patients with higher levels (p-value for interaction = 0.09, 0.07, and 0.05, respectively) and with early but not late therapy (p = 0.002). There was no statistically significant heterogeneity of treatment effect according to other cytokine levels. Further work is needed to evaluate whether the assessment of inflammatory status can help in identifying patients with MERS who may benefit from interferon-β1b and lopinavir-ritonavir. Trial registration: This is a sub-study of the MIRACLE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02845843).

Dexmedetomidine and Propofol Sedation in Critically Ill Patients and Dose Associated 90-day Mortality: A Secondary Cohort Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial (SPICE-III)

RATIONALE

Sedation Practice in Intensive Care Evaluation (SPICE-III) trial reported significant heterogeneity in mortality with dexmedetomidine treatment. Supplemental propofol was commonly used to achieve desirable sedation.

OBJECTIVES

to quantify the association of different infusion rates of dexmedetomidine or propofol, given in combination, with mortality and if this is modified by age.

METHODS AND MEASUREMENTS

We included 1177 patients randomized in SPICE-III to receive dexmedetomidine and given supplemental propofol, stratified by age (>65 or ≤65 years). We used double stratification analysis to produce quartiles of steady infusion rates of dexmedetomidine, while escalating propofol dose and vice versa. We used Cox proportional hazard and multivariable regression, adjusted for relevant clinical variable to evaluate the association of sedative dose with 90-day mortality.

MAIN RESULTS

Younger patients 598/1177(50.8%) received a significantly higher dose of both sedatives compared with older patients, to achieve comparable sedation depth. On double stratification analysis, escalating infusion rates of propofol to 1.27 mg/kg/h at a steady dexmedetomidine infusion rate (0.54 mcg/kg/h) was associated with reduced adjusted mortality in younger, but not older patients. This was consistent with multivariable regression modelling [hazard ratio: 0.59(95% Confidence Interval 0.43-0.78),P<0.0001], adjusted for baseline risk and interaction with dexmedetomidine dose. In contrast, among younger patients using multivariable regression, escalating dexmedetomidine infusion rate was associated with increased adjusted mortality [HR:1.30(95%CI 1.03-1.65), P=0.029].

CONCLUSION

In patients ≤ 65 years sedated with dexmedetomidine and propofol combination, preferentially increasing the dose of propofol was associated with decreased adjusted 90-day mortality. Conversely, increasing dexmedetomidine may be associated with increased mortality. Clinical trial registration available at www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, ID: NCT01728558.

Effect of Helmet Noninvasive Ventilation vs Usual Respiratory Support on Mortality Among Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Due to COVID-19: The HELMET-COVID Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Helmet noninvasive ventilation has been used in patients with COVID-19 with the premise that helmet interface is more effective than mask interface in delivering prolonged treatments with high positive airway pressure, but data about its effectiveness are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether helmet noninvasive ventilation compared with usual respiratory support reduces mortality in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a multicenter, pragmatic, randomized clinical trial that was conducted in 8 sites in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait between February 8, 2021, and November 16, 2021. Adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (n = 320) due to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were included. The final follow-up date for the primary outcome was December 14, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive helmet noninvasive ventilation (n = 159) or usual respiratory support (n = 161), which included mask noninvasive ventilation, high-flow nasal oxygen, and standard oxygen.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality. There were 12 prespecified secondary outcomes, including endotracheal intubation, barotrauma, skin pressure injury, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 322 patients who were randomized, 320 were included in the primary analysis, all of whom completed the trial. Median age was 58 years, and 187 were men (58.4%). Within 28 days, 43 of 159 patients (27.0%) died in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group compared with 42 of 161 (26.1%) in the usual respiratory support group (risk difference, 1.0% [95% CI, -8.7% to 10.6%]; relative risk, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.72-1.49]; P = .85). Within 28 days, 75 of 159 patients (47.2%) required endotracheal intubation in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group compared with 81 of 161 (50.3%) in the usual respiratory support group (risk difference, -3.1% [95% CI, -14.1% to 7.8%]; relative risk, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.75-1.17]). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in any of the prespecified secondary end points. Barotrauma occurred in 30 of 159 patients (18.9%) in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group and 25 of 161 (15.5%) in the usual respiratory support group. Skin pressure injury occurred in 5 of 159 patients (3.1%) in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group and 10 of 161 (6.2%) in the usual respiratory support group. There were 2 serious adverse events in the helmet noninvasive ventilation group and 1 in the usual respiratory support group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this study suggest that helmet noninvasive ventilation did not significantly reduce 28-day mortality compared with usual respiratory support among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure due to COVID-19 pneumonia. However, interpretation of the findings is limited by imprecision in the effect estimate, which does not exclude potentially clinically important benefit or harm.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04477668.

Risk of COVID-19 in healthcare workers working in intensive care setting

BACKGROUND

The higher risk of COVID-19 in health care workers (HCWs) is well-known. However, the risk within HCWs is not fully understood. The objective was to compare the COVID-19 risk in intensive care unit (ICU) vs non-ICU locations.

METHODS

A prospective surveillance study was conducted among HCWs at a large tertiary care facility in Riyadh between March 1st to November 30th, 2020. HCWs included both clinical (provide direct patient care) and nonclinical positions (do not provide direct patient care).

RESULTS

A total 1,594 HCWs with COVID-19 were included; 103 (6.5%) working in ICU and 1,491 (93.5%) working in non-ICU locations. Compared with non-ICU locations, ICU had more nurses (54.4% vs 22.1%, P < .001) and less support staff (2.9% vs 53.1%, P < .001). COVID-19 infection was similar in ICU and non-ICU locations (9.0% vs 9.8%, P = .374). However, it was significantly higher in ICU nurses (12.3% vs 6.5%, P < .001). Support staff had higher risk than other HCWs, irrespective of ICU working status (15.1% vs 7.2%, P < 0.001). The crude relative risk of COVID-19 in ICU vs non-ICU locations was 0.92, 95% confidence interval ( was 0.76-1.11 (P = .374). However, relative risk adjusted for professional category was significantly increased to 1.23, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.50 (P = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

ICU had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 infection only after adjusting for the distribution and risk of different professional categories. The latter is probably determined by both exposure level and protection practices. The finding underscores the importance of strict implementation of preventive measures among all HCWs, including those performing nonclinical services.

Intravenous Vitamin C in Adults with Sepsis in the Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

Studies that have evaluated the use of intravenous vitamin C in adults with sepsis who were receiving vasopressor therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU) have shown mixed results with respect to the risk of death and organ dysfunction.

METHODS

In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned adults who had been in the ICU for no longer than 24 hours, who had proven or suspected infection as the main diagnosis, and who were receiving a vasopressor to receive an infusion of either vitamin C (at a dose of 50 mg per kilogram of body weight) or matched placebo administered every 6 hours for up to 96 hours. The primary outcome was a composite of death or persistent organ dysfunction (defined by the use of vasopressors, invasive mechanical ventilation, or new renal-replacement therapy) on day 28.

RESULTS

A total of 872 patients underwent randomization (435 to the vitamin C group and 437 to the control group). The primary outcome occurred in 191 of 429 patients (44.5%) in the vitamin C group and in 167 of 434 patients (38.5%) in the control group (risk ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.40; P = 0.01). At 28 days, death had occurred in 152 of 429 patients (35.4%) in the vitamin C group and in 137 of 434 patients (31.6%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.40) and persistent organ dysfunction in 39 of 429 patients (9.1%) and 30 of 434 patients (6.9%), respectively (risk ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.05). Findings were similar in the two groups regarding organ-dysfunction scores, biomarkers, 6-month survival, health-related quality of life, stage 3 acute kidney injury, and hypoglycemic episodes. In the vitamin C group, one patient had a severe hypoglycemic episode and another had a serious anaphylaxis event.

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with sepsis receiving vasopressor therapy in the ICU, those who received intravenous vitamin C had a higher risk of death or persistent organ dysfunction at 28 days than those who received placebo. (Funded by the Lotte and John Hecht Memorial Foundation; LOVIT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03680274.).

Machine learning decision tree algorithm role for predicting mortality in critically ill adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU

Background

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and is currently a major cause of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions globally. The role of machine learning in the ICU is evolving but currently limited to diagnostic and prognostic values. A decision tree (DT) algorithm is a simple and intuitive machine learning method that provides sequential nonlinear analysis of variables. It is simple and might be a valuable tool for bedside physicians during COVID-19 to predict ICU outcomes and help in critical decision-making like end-of-life decisions and bed allocation in the event of limited ICU bed capacities. Herein, we utilized a machine learning DT algorithm to describe the association of a predefined set of variables and 28-day ICU outcome in adult COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU. We highlight the value of utilizing a machine learning DT algorithm in the ICU at the time of a COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This was a prospective and multicenter cohort study involving 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia. We included critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between March 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020. The predictors of 28-day ICU mortality were identified using two predictive models: conventional logistic regression and DT analyses.

Results

There were 1468 critically ill COVID-19 patients included in the study. The 28-day ICU mortality was 540 (36.8 %), and the 90-day mortality was 600 (40.9 %). The DT algorithm identified five variables that were integrated into the algorithm to predict 28-day ICU outcomes: need for intubation, need for vasopressors, age, gender, and PaO2/FiO2 ratio.

Conclusion

DT is a simple tool that might be utilized in the ICU to identify critically ill COVID-19 patients who are at high risk of 28-day ICU mortality. However, further studies and external validation are still required.

Effect of Awake Prone Positioning on Endotracheal Intubation in Patients With COVID-19 and Acute Respiratory Failure: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

The efficacy and safety of prone positioning is unclear in nonintubated patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of prone positioning in nonintubated adult patients with acute hypoxemia and COVID-19.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Pragmatic, unblinded randomized clinical trial conducted at 21 hospitals in Canada, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the US. Eligible adult patients with COVID-19 were not intubated and required oxygen (≥40%) or noninvasive ventilation. A total of 400 patients were enrolled between May 19, 2020, and May 18, 2021, and final follow-up was completed in July 2021.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomized to awake prone positioning (n = 205) or usual care without prone positioning (control; n = 195).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation within 30 days of randomization. The secondary outcomes included mortality at 60 days, days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days, days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days, adverse events, and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

Among the 400 patients who were randomized (mean age, 57.6 years [SD, 12.83 years]; 117 [29.3%] were women), all (100%) completed the trial. In the first 4 days after randomization, the median duration of prone positioning was 4.8 h/d (IQR, 1.8 to 8.0 h/d) in the awake prone positioning group vs 0 h/d (IQR, 0 to 0 h/d) in the control group. By day 30, 70 of 205 patients (34.1%) in the prone positioning group were intubated vs 79 of 195 patients (40.5%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.12], P = .20; absolute difference, -6.37% [95% CI, -15.83% to 3.10%]). Prone positioning did not significantly reduce mortality at 60 days (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.40], P = .54; absolute difference, -1.15% [95% CI, -9.40% to 7.10%]) and had no significant effect on days free from invasive mechanical ventilation or noninvasive ventilation at 30 days or on days free from the intensive care unit or hospital at 60 days. There were no serious adverse events in either group. In the awake prone positioning group, 21 patients (10%) experienced adverse events and the most frequently reported were musculoskeletal pain or discomfort from prone positioning (13 of 205 patients [6.34%]) and desaturation (2 of 205 patients [0.98%]). There were no reported adverse events in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure from COVID-19, prone positioning, compared with usual care without prone positioning, did not significantly reduce endotracheal intubation at 30 days. However, the effect size for the primary study outcome was imprecise and does not exclude a clinically important benefit.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04350723.

Protocol and statistical analysis plan for the mega randomised registry trial research program comparing conservative versus liberal oxygenation targets in adults receiving unplanned invasive mechanical ventilation in the ICU (Mega-ROX)

Background: The effect of conservative versus liberal oxygen therapy on 90-day in-hospital mortality in patients who require unplanned invasive mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit (ICU) is uncertain and will be evaluated in the mega randomised registry trial research program (Mega-ROX). Objective: To summarise the protocol and statistical analysis plan for Mega-ROX. Design, setting and participants: Mega-ROX is a 40 000-patient parallel-group, registry-embedded clinical trial in which adults who require unplanned invasive mechanical ventilation in an ICU will be randomly assigned to conservative or liberal oxygen therapy. Within this overarching trial research program, three nested parallel randomised controlled trials will be conducted. These will include patients with suspected hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE) following resuscitation from a cardiac arrest, patients with sepsis, and patients with non-HIE acute brain injuries or conditions. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome is in-hospital allcause mortality up to 90 days from the date of randomisation. Secondary outcomes include duration of survival, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, and proportion of patients discharged home. Results and conclusions: Mega-ROX will compare the effect of conservative versus liberal oxygen therapy on 90-day in-hospital mortality in critically ill adults who receive unplanned invasive mechanical ventilation in an ICU. The protocol and a pre-specified approach to analyses are reported here to mitigate analysis bias. Trial registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTRN 12620000391976).

Predictors of survival from Acinetobacter in Saudi Arabian intensive care units: A prospective, one-year, six-city, ten-center cohort study

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii is a continuously-emerging worldwide health crisis, with mortality rates approaching 50% in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The objective of this study was to evaluate regional, patient-related, and organism-related predictors of survival among critically-ill patients with confirmed Acinetobacter infection.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study was conducted within ten ICUs across six geographically- and climatologically-distinct cities across Saudi Arabia over 13 months.

RESULTS

Of 169 patients with confirmed Acinetobacter infection enrolled in the study, 80 (47.6%) died. Survivors were statistically younger, predominantly male, more likely to be admitted for trauma, less likely to have hypertension, diabetes, or have undergone hemodialysis, and more likely to have been treated with antibiotics prior to having a positive culture for Acinetobacter, but less likely to have received an aminoglycoside. Survivors also had lower baseline APACHE II and SOFA scores and were infected with stains of Acinetobacter that had less meropenem- or colistin-resistance. Multivariate analysis identified the following independent predictors of survival: younger age, lower ICU-day#1 APACHE-II and ICU-day#3 SOFA scores, being admitted for trauma, and having no history of hemodialysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-related factors outweigh regional and hospital-related factors as predictors of survival among critically-ill patients with Acinetobacter infection.

Lessening Organ dysfunction with VITamin C (LOVIT): statistical analysis plan

BACKGROUND

Lessening Organ Dysfunction with VITamin C (LOVIT) is a blinded multicentre randomized clinical trial that compared high-dose intravenous vitamin C to placebo in patients admitted to the intensive care unit with proven or suspected infection as the main diagnosis and receiving a vasopressor.

OBJECTIVE

To describe a pre-specified statistical analysis plan (SAP) for LOVIT, written prior to unblinding and locking of the trial database.

METHODS

The SAP was designed by the LOVIT principal investigators and statisticians and approved by the steering committee and coinvestigators. The SAP defines the primary and secondary outcomes and describes the planned primary, secondary, and subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

The SAP includes a draft participant flow diagram, tables, and planned figures. The primary outcome is a composite of mortality and persistent organ dysfunction (receipt of mechanical ventilation, vasopressors or new renal replacement therapy) at 28 days, where day 1 is the day of randomization. All analyses will use a frequentist statistical framework. The analysis of the primary outcome will estimate the risk ratio and 95% confidence interval in a generalized linear mixed model with binomial distribution and log link and considering site as a random effect. We will perform a secondary analysis adjusting for pre-specified baseline clinical variables. Subgroup analyses will include age, sex, frailty, severity of illness, Sepsis-3 definition of septic shock, baseline ascorbic acid level, and COVID-19 status.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed a SAP for the LOVIT trial and will adhere to it in the analysis phase.

CLINICALTRIAL

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03680274 (21 September 2018).

Effect of Antiplatelet Therapy on Survival and Organ Support-Free Days in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19 is uncertain.

Objective

To determine whether antiplatelet therapy improves outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In an ongoing adaptive platform trial (REMAP-CAP) testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, 1557 critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 were enrolled between October 30, 2020, and June 23, 2021, from 105 sites in 8 countries and followed up for 90 days (final follow-up date: July 26, 2021).

Interventions

Patients were randomized to receive either open-label aspirin (n = 565), a P2Y12 inhibitor (n = 455), or no antiplatelet therapy (control; n = 529). Interventions were continued in the hospital for a maximum of 14 days and were in addition to anticoagulation thromboprophylaxis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based respiratory or cardiovascular organ support) within 21 days, ranging from -1 for any death in hospital (censored at 90 days) to 22 for survivors with no organ support. There were 13 secondary outcomes, including survival to discharge and major bleeding to 14 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. An odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. Efficacy was defined as greater than 99% posterior probability of an OR greater than 1. Futility was defined as greater than 95% posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 vs control. Intervention equivalence was defined as greater than 90% probability that the OR (compared with each other) was between 1/1.2 and 1.2 for 2 noncontrol interventions.

Results

The aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitor groups met the predefined criteria for equivalence at an adaptive analysis and were statistically pooled for further analysis. Enrollment was discontinued after the prespecified criterion for futility was met for the pooled antiplatelet group compared with control. Among the 1557 critically ill patients randomized, 8 patients withdrew consent and 1549 completed the trial (median age, 57 years; 521 [33.6%] female). The median for organ support-free days was 7 (IQR, -1 to 16) in both the antiplatelet and control groups (median-adjusted OR, 1.02 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.86-1.23]; 95.7% posterior probability of futility). The proportions of patients surviving to hospital discharge were 71.5% (723/1011) and 67.9% (354/521) in the antiplatelet and control groups, respectively (median-adjusted OR, 1.27 [95% CrI, 0.99-1.62]; adjusted absolute difference, 5% [95% CrI, -0.2% to 9.5%]; 97% posterior probability of efficacy). Among survivors, the median for organ support-free days was 14 in both groups. Major bleeding occurred in 2.1% and 0.4% of patients in the antiplatelet and control groups (adjusted OR, 2.97 [95% CrI, 1.23-8.28]; adjusted absolute risk increase, 0.8% [95% CrI, 0.1%-2.7%]; 99.4% probability of harm).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among critically ill patients with COVID-19, treatment with an antiplatelet agent, compared with no antiplatelet agent, had a low likelihood of providing improvement in the number of organ support-free days within 21 days.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707.

Electronic medical record implementation in a large healthcare system from a leadership perspective

Background

Information on the use of change management models to guide electronic medical records (EMR) implementation is limited. This case study describes the leadership aspects of a large-scale EMR implementation using Kotter’s change management model.

Methods

This case study presents the experience in implementing a new EMR system from the leadership perspective at King Abdulaziz Medical City, a large tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We described the process of implementation and outlined the challenges and opportunities, throughout the journey from the pre-implementation to the post-implementation phases.

Results

We described the corresponding actions to the eight domains of Kotter’s change management model: creating a sense of urgency, building the guiding team, developing a change vision and strategy, understanding and buy-in, removing obstacles, creating short-term wins, building on the change and anchoring the changes in corporate culture.

Conclusions

The case study highlights that EMR implementation is not a pure information technology project but rather is a technical-based complex social adaptive project that requires a specific set of leadership competencies that are central to its success. It demonstrates that change management models might be useful for large-scale EMR implementation.