The Effect of ICU Diaries on Psychological Outcomes and Quality of Life of Survivors of Critical Illness and Their Relatives: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This review by McIlroy and colleagues was published in the November 2018 issue of Critical Care Medicine.
Objectives:  To evaluate the effect of ICU diaries on post traumatic stress disorder symptoms in ICU survivors and their relatives.Secondary objectives were to determine the effect on anxiety, depression, and health-related quality of life in patients and their relatives.
Data Sources:  We searched online databases,trial registries, and references of relevant articles.
Study Selection:  Studies were included if there was an ICU diary intervention group which was compared with a group without a diary.
Data Extraction:  Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were reviewed independently by two authors. Data was abstracted using a structured template.
Data Synthesis:  Our search identified 1,790 articles and retained eight studies for inclusion in the analysis. Pooled results found no significant reduction in patients’ post traumatic stress disorder symptoms with ICU diaries (risk ratio, 0.75 [0.3-1.73]; p = 0.5; n = 3 studies); however, there was a significant improvement in patients’ anxiety(risk ratio, 0.32 [0.12, 0.86]; p = 0.02; n = 2 studies) and depression (risk ratio, 0.39 [0.17-0.87]; p = 0.02; n = 2 studies) symptoms. Two studies reported significant improvement in post traumatic stress disorder symptoms of relatives of ICU survivors; however, these results could not be pooled due to reporting differences. One study reported no significant improvement in either anxiety (risk ratio, 0.94; 95% [0.66-1.33]; p = 0.72) or depression (risk ratio, 0.98; 95% [0.5-1.9]; p = 0.95) in relatives. There was a significant improvement in health-related quality of life of patients with a mean increase in the Short Form-36 general health score by 11.46 (95% CI, 5.87-17.05; p ≤0.0001; n = 2 studies). No studies addressed health-related quality of life of relatives.  
Conclusions:  ICU diaries decrease anxiety and depression and improve health-related quality of life, but not post traumatic stress disorder among ICU survivors and may result in less post traumatic stress disorder among relatives of ICU patients. Multicenter trials with larger sample sizes are necessary to confirm these findings.
To access the full text of this article via the journal’s homepage you require a personal subscription to the journal.  Some articles may be available freely without a password. Library members can order individual articles via the Rotherham NHSFoundation Trust Library and Knowledge Service using the article requests on line via this link.

Advertisements

Dexmedetomidine in prevention and treatment of postoperative and intensive care unit delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This article by Flukiger et al was published in Annals of intensive care September 2018.
Background:  To determine the preventive and therapeutic effect of dexmedetomidine on intensive care unit (ICU) delirium.
Methods:  The literature search using PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed (August 1, 2018) to detect all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adult ICU patients receiving dexmedetomidine. Articles were included if they assessed the influence of dexmedetomidine compared to a sedative agent on incidence of ICU delirium or treatment of this syndrome. Accordingly, relevant articles were allocated to the following two groups: (1) articles that assessed the delirium incidence (incidence comparison) or articles that assessed the treatment of delirium (treatment comparison). Incidence of delirium and delirium resolution were the primary outcomes. We combined treatment effects comparing dexmedetomidine versus (1) placebo, (2) standard sedatives, and (3) opioids in random-effects meta-analyses. Risk of bias for each included RCT was assessed following Cochrane standards.
Results:  The literature search resulted in 28 articles (25 articles/4975 patients for the incidence comparison and three articles/166 patients for the treatment comparison). In the incidence comparison, heterogeneity was present in different subgroups. Administration of dexmedetomidine was associated with significantly lower overall incidence of delirium when compared to placebo (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.39-0.70; I2 = 37%), standard sedatives (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.46-0.86; I2 = 69%), as well as to opioids (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.44-0.83; I2 = 0%). Use of dexmedetomidine significantly increased the risks of bradycardia and hypotension. Limited data were available on circulatory insufficiency and mortality. In the treatment comparison, the comparison drugs in the three RCTs were placebo, midazolam, and haloperidol. The resolution of delirium was measured differently in each study. Two out of the three studies indicated clear favorable effects for dexmedetomidine (i.e., compared to placebo and midazolam). The study comparing dexmedetomidine with haloperidol was a pilot study (n = 20) with high variability in the results.
Conclusions:  Findings suggest that dexmedetomidine reduces incidence and duration of ICU delirium. Furthermore, our systematic searches show that there is limited evidence if a delirium shall be treated with dexmedetomidine.
The full text of the article is available via this link.

Effect of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment on clinical outcomes in intensive care unit patients with infection and sepsis patients: a patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials

The secondary research was published in the journal Critical Care in August 2018 by Wirz and others.
Background:  The clinical utility of serum procalcitonin levels in guiding antibiotic treatment decisions in patients with sepsis remains unclear. This patient-level meta-analysis based on 11 randomized trials investigates the impact of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy on mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with infection, both overall and stratified according to sepsis definition, severity, and type of infection.
Methods:  For this meta-analysis focusing on procalcitonin-guided antibiotic management in critically ill patients with sepsis of any type, in February 2018 we updated the database of a previous individual patient data meta-analysis which was limited to patients with respiratory infections only. We used individual patient data from 11 trials that randomly assigned patients to receive antibiotics based on procalcitonin levels (the “procalcitonin-guided” group) or the current standard of care (the “controls”). The primary endpoint was mortality within 30 days. Secondary endpoints were duration of antibiotic treatment and length of stay.
Results:  Mortality in the 2252 procalcitonin-guided patients was significantly lower compared with the 2230 control group patients (21.1% vs 23.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 0.99; p = 0.03). These effects on mortality persisted in a subgroup of patients meeting the sepsis 3 definition and based on the severity of sepsis (assessed on the basis of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, occurrence of septic shock or renal failure, and need for vasopressor or ventilatory support) and on the type of infection (respiratory, urinary tract, abdominal, skin, or central nervous system), with interaction for each analysis being > 0.05. Procalcitonin guidance also facilitated earlier discontinuation of antibiotics, with a reduction in treatment duration (9.3 vs 10.4 days; adjusted coefficient -1.19 days, 95% CI -1.73 to -0.66; p < 0.001).
Conclusion:  Procalcitonin-guided antibiotic treatment in ICU patients with infection and sepsis patients results in improved survival and lower antibiotic treatment duration.
The full text of this article is freely available via this link.

The Effect of ICU Out-of-Hours Admission on Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This article by Galloway and others was published in the November 2017 issue of “Critical Care Medicine”

Objectives:  Organizational factors are associated with outcome of critically ill patients and may vary by time of day and day of week. We aimed to identify the association between out-of-hours admission to critical care and mortality.
Data Sources:  MEDLINE (via Ovid) and EMBASE (via Ovid).
Study Selection:  We performed a systematic search of the literature for studies on out-of-hours adult general ICU admission on patient mortality.
Data Extraction:  Meta-analyses were performed and Forest plots drawn using RevMan software. Data are presented as odds ratios ([95% CIs], p values).
Data Synthesis:  A total of 16 studies with 902,551 patients were included in the analysis with a crude mortality of 18.2%. Fourteen studies with 717,331 patients reported mortality rates by time of admission and 11 studies with 835,032 patients by day of admission. Admission to ICU at night was not associated with an increased odds of mortality compared with admissions during the day (odds ratio, 1.04 [0.98-1.11]; p = 0.18). However, admissions during the weekend were associated with an increased odds of death compared with ICU admissions during weekdays (1.05 [1.01-1.09]; p = 0.006). Increased mortality associated with weekend ICU admissions compared with weekday ICU admissions was limited to North American countries (1.08 [1.03-1.12]; p = 0.0004). The absence of a routine overnight on-site intensivist was associated with increased mortality among weekend ICU admissions compared with weekday ICU admissions (1.11 [1.00-1.22]; p = 0.04) and night time admissions compared with daytime ICU admissions (1.11 [1.00-1.23]; p = 0.05).
Conclusions: Adjusted risk of death for ICU admission was greater over the weekends compared with weekdays. The absence of a dedicated intensivist on-site overnight may be associated with increased mortality for acute admissions. These results need to be interpreted in context of the organization of local healthcare resources before changes to healthcare policy are implemented.
The article is available on the internet to those who have a personal subscription via this link to the full text.  Library members can order individual articles via the Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust Library and Knowledge Service using the article requests online via this link.

Outcomes of Patient- and Family-Centered Care Interventions in the ICU: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This paper was published in Critical Care Medicine October 2017 by Goldfarb et al.
Objective:  To determine whether patient- and family-centered care interventions in the ICU improve outcomes.
Data Sources:  We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception until December 1, 2016.
Study Selection:  We included articles involving patient- and family-centered care interventions and quantitative, patient- and family-important outcomes in adult ICUs.
Data Extraction:  We extracted the author, year of publication, study design, population, setting, primary domain investigated, intervention, and outcomes.
Data Synthesis:  There were 46 studies (35 observational pre/post, 11 randomized) included in the analysis. Seventy-eight percent of studies (n = 36) reported one or more positive outcome measures, whereas 22% of studies (n = 10) reported no significant changes in outcome measures. Random-effects meta-analysis of the highest quality randomized studies showed no significant difference in mortality (n = 5 studies; odds ratio = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.95-1.21; p = 0.27; I = 0%), but there was a mean decrease in ICU length of stay by 1.21 days (n = 3 studies; 95% CI, -2.25 to -0.16; p = 0.02; I = 26%). Improvements in ICU costs, family satisfaction, patient experience, medical goal achievement, and patient and family mental health outcomes were also observed with intervention; however, reported outcomes were heterogeneous precluding formal meta-analysis.
Conclusions:  Patient- and family-centered care-focused interventions resulted in decreased ICU length of stay but not mortality. A wide range of interventions were also associated with improvements in many patient- and family-important outcomes. Additional high-quality interventional studies are needed to further evaluate the effectiveness of patient- and family-centered care in the intensive care setting.
The full text of this article will usually be only available via the internet to those who have a personal subscription though some articles may be available freely without a password.  Library members can order individual articles via the Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust Library and Knowledge Service using the article requests online via this link.

Early, Goal-Directed Therapy for Septic Shock – A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis.

This paper by the PRISM investigators led by Kathryn Rowan was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in June 2017 Volume 376 number 23.  The full text of the article is available to subscribers to this journal via this link.  The Library and Knowledge Service can obtain the full text of the article for registered members by requesting it via the library website document request form.

BACKGROUND:  After a single-center trial and observational studies suggesting that early, goal-directed therapy (EGDT) reduced mortality from septic shock, three multicenter trials (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe) showed no benefit. This meta-analysis of individual patient data from the three recent trials was designed prospectively to improve statistical power and explore heterogeneity of treatment effect of EGDT.

METHODS:  We harmonized entry criteria, intervention protocols, outcomes, resource-use measures, and data collection across the trials and specified all analyses before unblinding. After completion of the trials, we pooled data, excluding the protocol-based standard-therapy group from the ProCESS trial, and resolved residual differences. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included 1-year survival, organ support, and hospitalization costs. We tested for treatment-by-subgroup interactions for 16 patient characteristics and 6 care-delivery characteristics.

RESULTS:  We studied 3723 patients at 138 hospitals in seven countries. Mortality at 90 days was similar for EGDT (462 of 1852 patients [24.9%]) and usual care (475 of 1871 patients [25.4%]); the adjusted odds ratio was 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.14; P=0.68). EGDT was associated with greater mean (±SD) use of intensive care (5.3±7.1 vs. 4.9±7.0 days, P=0.04) and cardiovascular support (1.9±3.7 vs. 1.6±2.9 days, P=0.01) than was usual care; other outcomes did not differ significantly, although average costs were higher with EGDT. Subgroup analyses showed no benefit from EGDT for patients with worse shock (higher serum lactate level, combined hypotension and hyperlactatemia, or higher predicted risk of death) or for hospitals with a lower propensity to use vasopressors or fluids during usual resuscitation.

CONCLUSIONS:  In this meta-analysis of individual patient data, EGDT did not result in better outcomes than usual care and was associated with higher hospitalization costs across a broad range of patient and hospital characteristics.

High-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy vs conventional oxygen therapy in cardiac surgical patients: A meta-analysis

This article is to be published in the Journal of Critical Care.  The full text of the article can be accessed via this link.

Introduction:  The use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for the treatment of many diseases has gained increasing popularity. In the present meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of HFNCs compared with conventional oxygen therapy (COT) in adult postextubation cardiac surgical patients.

Method:  We reviewed the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Wanfang databases, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Two investigators independently collected the data and assessed the quality of each study. RevMan 5.3 was used for the present meta-analysis.

Results:  We included 495 adult postextubation cardiac surgical patients. There was no significant heterogeneity among the studies. Compared with COT, HFNCs were associated with a significant reduction in the escalation of respiratory support (risk ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.82; z = 3.32, P < .001). There were no significant differences in the reintubation rate (risk ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.04-24.84; z = 0.02, P = .98) or length of intensive care unit stay (weighted mean difference, 0.13; 95% CI, −0.88 to 7.92; z = 1.57, P = .12) between the 2 groups. No severe complications were reported in either group.

Conclusions:  The HFNC could reduce the need for escalation of respiratory support compared with COT, and it could be safely administered in adult postextubation cardiac surgical patients.