Determinants of Professional Fulfillment and Burnout Among Intensivists: A National Survey by the Society of Critical Care Anesthesiologists in 2022.

BACKGROUND: Increased burnout and decreased professional fulfillment among intensive care physicians is partly due to intensive care unit (ICU) workload. Although the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic increased ICU workload, it also may have increased feelings of personal fulfillment due to positive public perceptions of physicians caring for COVID patients. We surveyed critical care anesthesiologists to identify the effect of provider demographics, ICU workload, and COVID-19-related workload, on professional fulfillment and burnout. METHODS: We performed an exploratory survey of 606 members of the Society of Critical Care Anesthesiologists (SOCCA) in January and February 2022. We used the Stanford Professional Fulfillment Index (PFI) to grade levels of professional fulfillment and markers of burnout (ie, work exhaustion and disengagement). Univariable and multivariable models were used to identify associations between provider demographics and practice characteristics and professional fulfillment and work exhaustion. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-five intensivists (29%) responded. A total of 65% were male and 49% were between 36 and 45 years old. The overall median PFI score-0 (none) to 24 (most professional fulfillment)-was 17 (IQR, 1-24), with a wide distribution of responses. In multivariable analysis, factors associated with higher professional fulfillment included age >45 years ( P =.004), ≤15 weeks full-time ICU coverage in 2020 ( P =.02), role as medical director ( P =.01), and nighttime home call with supervision of in-house ICU fellows ( P =.01). CONCLUSIONS: Professional fulfillment and work exhaustion in this cross-sectional survey were associated with several demographic and practice characteristics but not COVID-19-related workload, suggesting that COVID-19 workload may not have either positive or negative perceptions on professional fulfillment.

100 Years of Critical Care in the Pages of Anesthesia & Analgesia.

The founding of Anesthesia & Analgesia (A&A) in 1922 was roughly contemporaneous with the creation of the first intensive care unit (ICU) in the United States at Johns Hopkins in 1923. Throughout the next 100 years, the pages of A&A have mirrored the development of critical care as its own distinct specialty. Although primarily a journal focused on intraoperative anesthesia, A&A has maintained a small but steady presence in critical care research. This review highlights the history and development of critical care publications in the pages of A&A from early observations on the physiology of critical illness (1922-1949) to the groundbreaking work of Peter Safar and others on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (1950-1970), the growth of modern critical care (1970-2010), and the 2020 to 2022 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era.

Measuring SARS-CoV-2 aerosolization in rooms of hospitalized patients.

Objective: Airborne spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains a significant risk for healthcare workers. Understanding transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital could help minimize nosocomial infection. The objective of this pilot study was to measure aerosolization of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital rooms of COVID-19 patients. Methods: Two air samplers (Inspirotec) were placed 1 and 4 m away from adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection hospitalized at an urban, academic tertiary care center from June to October 2020. Airborne SARS-CoV-2 concentration was measured by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and analyzed by clinical parameters and patient demographics. Results: Thirteen patients with COVID-19 (eight females [61.5%], median age: 57 years old, range 25-82) presented with shortness of breath (100%), cough (38.5%) and fever (15.4%). Respiratory therapy during air sampling varied: mechanical ventilation via endotracheal tube (n = 3), high flow nasal cannula (n = 4), nasal cannula (n = 4), respiratory helmet (n = 1), and room air (n = 1). SARS-CoV-2 RNA was identified in rooms of three out of three intubated patients compared with one out of 10 of the non-intubated patients (p = .014). Airborne SARS-CoV-2 tended to decrease with distance (1 vs. 4 m) in rooms of intubated patients. Conclusions: Hospital rooms of intubated patients had higher levels of aerosolized SARS-CoV-2, consistent with increased aerosolization of virus in patients with severe disease or treatment with positive pressure ventilation through an endotracheal tube. While preliminary, these data have safety implications for health care workers and design of protective measures in the hospital. Level of Evidence: 2.

Design of Clinical Trials Evaluating Sedation in Critically Ill Adults Undergoing Mechanical Ventilation: Recommendations From Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research (SCEPTER) Recommendation III.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of sedative medication use in critically ill adults undergoing mechanical ventilation differ considerably in their methodological approach. This heterogeneity impedes the ability to compare results across studies. The Sedation Consortium on Endpoints and Procedures for Treatment, Education, and Research Recommendations convened a meeting of multidisciplinary experts to develop recommendations for key methodologic elements of sedation trials in the ICU to help guide academic and industry clinical investigators. DESIGN: A 2-day in-person meeting was held in Washington, DC, on March 28-29, 2019, followed by a three-round, online modified Delphi consensus process. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six participants from academia, industry, and the Food and Drug Administration with expertise in relevant content areas, including two former ICU patients attended the in-person meeting, and the majority completed an online follow-up survey and participated in the modified Delphi process. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The final recommendations were iteratively refined based on the survey results, participants' reactions to those results, summaries written by panel moderators, and a review of the meeting transcripts made from audio recordings. Fifteen recommendations were developed for study design and conduct, subject enrollment, outcomes, and measurement instruments. Consensus recommendations included obtaining input from ICU survivors and/or their families, ensuring adequate training for personnel using validated instruments for assessments of sedation, pain, and delirium in the ICU environment, and the need for methodological standardization. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations are intended to assist researchers in the design, conduct, selection of endpoints, and reporting of clinical trials involving sedative medications and/or sedation protocols for adult ICU patients who require mechanical ventilation. These recommendations should be viewed as a starting point to improve clinical trials and help reduce methodological heterogeneity in future clinical trials.

Initial Clinical Impressions of the Critical Care of COVID-19 Patients in Seattle, New York City, and Chicago.

Since the first recognition of a cluster of novel respiratory viral infections in China in late December 2019, intensivists in the United States have watched with growing concern as infections with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus-now named coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19)-have spread to hospitals in the United States. Because COVID-19 is extremely transmissible and can progress to a severe form of respiratory failure, the potential to overwhelm available critical care resources is high and critical care management of COVID-19 patients has been thrust into the spotlight. COVID-19 arrived in the United States in January and, as anticipated, has dramatically increased the usage of critical care resources. Three of the hardest-hit cities have been Seattle, New York City, and Chicago with a combined total of over 14,000 cases as of March 23, 2020.In this special article, we describe initial clinical impressions of critical care of COVID-19 in these areas, with attention to clinical presentation, laboratory values, organ system effects, treatment strategies, and resource management. We highlight clinical observations that align with or differ from already published reports. These impressions represent only the early empiric experience of the authors and are not intended to serve as recommendations or guidelines for practice, but rather as a starting point for intensivists preparing to address COVID-19 when it arrives in their community.