RESUMEN
Background:Recognition of postoperative infection after cardiac surgery is challenging. Biomarkers may be very useful to recognize infection at early stage, but the literature is controversial. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study at two large University Hospitals, including adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery (excluding those with preoperative infections, cirrhotic or immunocompromised). We evaluated the kinetics of C?Reactive Protein (CRP) and White Cell Count (WCC) during the first postoperative week. Primary outcomes were CRP and WCC changes according to the development of postoperative infection. In order to evaluate the influence of cardiopulmonary bypass on biomarker kinetics, we also studied CRP and WCC changes in patients without postoperative infection and undergoing on? vs off?pump coronary?artery bypass grafting. Results: Among 429 included, 45 patients (10.5%) had evidence of postoperative infection. Patients with postoperative infection had higher CRP and WCC values than those without infection, with between?groups difference becoming significant from postoperative day 2 for CRP (120.6 ± 3.6 vs. 134.6 ± 7.9, P < 0.01), and from postoperative day 3 for WCC (10.5 ± 0.5 vs. 9.9 ± 0.2, P = 0.02). Over the postoperative period, CRP and WCC showed significant within?group changes regardless of development of postoperative infection (P < 0.001 for both). We found no differences in CRP and WCC kinetics between patients undergoing on? vs off?pump procedure. Conclusions: During the first week after cardiac surgery, CRP increases one day earlier than WCC in patients developing postoperative infections, with such difference becoming significant on the second postoperative day. In not infected patients, use of cardiopulmonary bypass does not influence CRP and WCC kinetics
RESUMEN
RESUMO Objetivo: Realizar uma revisão sistemática para sumarizar o conhecimento relativo à prevalência de burnout entre médicos atuantes na unidade de terapia intensiva. Métodos: Conduzimos uma revisão sistemática nas bases de dados MEDLINE e PubMed® (última atualização em 4 de fevereiro de 2019), com o objetivo de resumir a evidência a respeito de burnout entre médicos atuantes em unidades de terapia intensiva. Incluímos todos os estudos que relatavam burnout em trabalhadores na unidade de terapia intensiva, segundo o Inventário de Burnout de Maslach e, a seguir, triamos os estudos quanto a dados relativos a burnout especificamente em médicos atuantes na unidade de terapia intensiva. Resultados: Encontramos 31 estudos que descreviam burnout em membros da equipe da unidade de terapia intensiva e incluíam diferentes perfis de profissionais de saúde. Dentre estes, cinco estudos se focalizavam apenas em médicos, e 12 outros investigavam burnout em uma mescla de profissionais atuantes na unidade de terapia intensiva, mas forneciam dados à parte relativos aos médicos. A prevalência de burnout teve grande variação entre os estudos (variando entre 18% e 49%), porém diversas discrepâncias metodológicas, dentre elas os critérios de corte para definição de burnout e variabilidade da escala de Likert, impediram uma análise agrupada significativa. Conclusão: A prevalência da síndrome de burnout entre médicos atuantes na unidade de terapia intensiva é relativamente alta, porém heterogeneidades metodológicas significantes exigem precauções na interpretação de nossos resultados. Os níveis mais baixos de burnout relatados parecem mais elevados do que os identificados em estudos que investigaram uma mescla de profissionais da unidade de terapia intensiva. Há uma necessidade urgente de consenso que recomende o uso consistente do Inventário de Burnout de Maslach para triar a presença de burnout a fim de fornecer dados precisos a respeito de burnout entre médicos atuantes na unidade de terapia intensiva.
Abstract Objective: We performed a systematic review to summarize the knowledge regarding the prevalence of burnout among intensive care unit physicians. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the MEDLINE and PubMed® databases (last update 04.02.2019) with the goal of summarizing the evidence on burnout among intensive care unit physicians. We included all studies reporting burnout in intensive care unit personnel according to the Maslach Burnout Inventory questionnaire and then screened studies for data on burnout among intensive care unit physician specifically. Results: We found 31 studies describing burnout in intensive care unit staff and including different healthcare profiles. Among these, 5 studies focused on physicians only, and 12 others investigated burnout in mixed intensive care unit personnel but provided separate data on physicians. The prevalence of burnout varied greatly across studies (range 18% - 49%), but several methodological discrepancies, among them cut-off criteria for defining burnout and variability in the Likert scale, precluded a meaningful pooled analysis. Conclusion: The prevalence of burnout syndrome among intensive care unit physicians is relatively high, but significant methodological heterogeneities warrant caution being used in interpreting our results. The lower reported levels of burnout seem higher than those found in studies investigating mixed intensive care unit personnel. There is an urgent need for consensus recommending a consistent use of the Maslach Burnout Inventory test to screen burnout, in order to provide precise figures on burnout in intensive care unit physicians.