Hour-1 bundle adherence was associated with reduction of in-hospital mortality among patients with sepsis in Japan.

BACKGROUND: The updated Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommend a 1-hour window for completion of a sepsis care bundle; however, the effectiveness of the hour-1 bundle has not been fully evaluated. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of hour-1 bundle completion on clinical outcomes in sepsis patients. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study conducted in 17 intensive care units in tertiary hospitals in Japan. We included all adult patients who were diagnosed as having sepsis by Sepsis-3 and admitted to intensive care units from July 2019 to August 2020. Impacts of hour-1 bundle adherence and delay of adherence on risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality were estimated by multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The final study cohort included 178 patients with sepsis. Among them, 89 received bundle-adherent care. Completion rates of each component (measure lactate level, obtain blood cultures, administer broad-spectrum antibiotics, administer crystalloid, apply vasopressors) within 1 hour were 98.9%, 86.2%, 51.1%, 94.9%, and 69.1%, respectively. Completion rate of all components within 1 hour was 50%. In-hospital mortality was 18.0% in the patients with and 30.3% in the patients without bundle-adherent care (p = 0.054). The adjusted odds ratio of non-bundle-adherent versus bundle-adherent care for in-hospital mortality was 2.32 (95% CI 1.09-4.95) using propensity scoring. Non-adherence to obtaining blood cultures and administering broad-spectrum antibiotics within 1 hour was related to in-hospital mortality (2.65 [95% CI 1.25-5.62] and 4.81 [95% CI 1.38-16.72], respectively). The adjusted odds ratio for 1-hour delay in achieving hour-1 bundle components for in-hospital mortality was 1.28 (95% CI 1.04-1.57) by logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Completion of the hour-1 bundle was associated with lower in-hospital mortality. Obtaining blood cultures and administering antibiotics within 1 hour may have been the components most contributing to decreased in-hospital mortality.

Care bundles for improving outcomes in patients with COVID-19 or related conditions in intensive care - a rapid scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the strain of coronavirus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause serious illness in some people resulting in admission to intensive care units (ICU) and frequently, ventilatory support for acute respiratory failure. Evaluating ICU care, and what is effective in improving outcomes for these patients is critical. Care bundles, a small set of evidence-based interventions, delivered together consistently, may improve patient outcomes. To identify the extent of the available evidence on the use of care bundles in patients with COVID-19 in the ICU, the World Health Organization (WHO) commissioned a scoping review to inform WHO guideline discussions. This review does not assess the effectiveness of the findings, assess risk of bias, or assess the certainty of the evidence (GRADE). As this review was commissioned to inform guideline discussions, it was done rapidly over a three-week period from 26 October to 18 November 2020. OBJECTIVES: To identify and describe the available evidence on the use of care bundles in the ICU for patients with COVID-19 or related conditions (acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) viral pneumonia or pneumonitis), or both. In carrying out the review the focus was on characterising the evidence base and not evaluating the effectiveness or safety of the care bundles or their component parts. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 26 October 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies of all designs that reported on patients who are critically ill with COVID-19, ARDS, viral pneumonia or pneumonitis, in the ICU setting, where a care bundle was implemented in providing care, were eligible for inclusion. One review author (VS) screened all records on title and abstract. A second review author (DR) checked 20% of excluded and included records; agreement was 99.4% and 100% respectively on exclude/include decisions. Two review authors (VS and DR) independently screened all records at full-text level. VS and DR resolved any disagreements through discussion and consensus, or referral to a third review author (AN) as required. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One review author (VS) extracted the data and a second review author (DR) checked 20% of this for accuracy. As the review was not designed to synthesise effectiveness data, assess risk of bias, or characterise the certainty of the evidence (GRADE), we mapped the extracted data and presented them in tabular format based on the patient condition; that is patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19, patients with ARDS, patients with any influenza or viral pneumonia, patients with severe respiratory failure, and patients with mixed conditions. We have also provided a narrative summary of the findings from the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included 21 studies and identified three ongoing studies. The studies were of variable designs and included a systematic review of standardised approaches to caring for critically ill patients in ICU, including but not exclusive to care bundles (1 study), a randomised trial (1 study), prospective and retrospective cohort studies (4 studies), before and after studies (7 studies), observational quality improvement reports (4 studies), case series/case reports (3 studies) and audit (1 study). The studies were conducted in eight countries, most commonly China (5 studies) and the USA (4 studies), were published between 1999 and 2020, and involved over 2000 participants in total. Studies categorised participant conditions patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 (7 studies), patients with ARDS (7 studies), patients with another influenza or viral pneumonia (5 studies), patients with severe respiratory failure (1 study), and patients with mixed conditions (1 study). The care bundles described in the studies involved multiple diverse practices. Guidance on ventilator settings (10 studies), restrictive fluid management (8 studies), sedation (7 studies) and prone positioning (7 studies) were identified most frequently, while only one study mentioned chest X-ray. None of the included studies reported the prespecified outcomes ICU-acquired weakness (muscle wasting, weight loss) and users' experience adapting care bundles. Of the remaining prespecified outcomes, 14 studies reported death in ICU, nine reported days of ventilation (or ventilator-free days), nine reported length of stay in ICU in days, five reported death in hospital, three reported length of stay in hospital in days, and three reported adherence to the bundle. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review has identified 21 studies on care bundle use in critically ill patients in ICU with COVID-19, ARDS, viral influenza or pneumonia and severe respiratory failure. The data for patients with COVID-19 specifically are limited, derived mainly from observational quality improvement or clinical experiential accounts. Research is required, urgently, to further assess care bundle use and optimal components of these bundles in this patient cohort. The care bundles described were also varied, with guidance on ventilator settings described in 10 care bundles, while chest X-ray was part mentioned in one care bundle in one study only. None of the studies identified in this scoping review measured users' experience of adapting care bundles. Optimising care bundle implementation requires that the components of the care bundle are collectively and consistently applied. Data on challenges, barriers and facilitators to implementation are needed. A formal synthesis of the outcome data presented in this review and a critical appraisal of the evidence is required by a subsequent effectiveness review. This subsequent review should further explore effect estimates across the included studies.

MIST (Modified Intubating Sequence for Transmissibility) Bundle for Infectious Diseases with Aerosol Hazard.

The current global severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has magnified the risk to healthcare providers when inititiating airway management, and safe tracheal intubation has become of paramount importance. Mitigation of risk to frontline providers requires airway management to be an orchestrated exercise based on training and purposeful simulation. Role allocation and closed-loop communication form the foundation of this exercise. We describe a methodical, 10-step approach from decision-making and meticulous drug and equipment choices to donning of personal protective equipment, and procedural concerns. This bundled approach will help reduce unplanned actions, which in turn may reduce the risk of aerosol transmission during airway management in resource-limited settings.

Relevant Nutrition Therapy in COVID-19 and the Constraints on Its Delivery by a Unique Disease Process.

Worldwide, as of July 2020, >13.2 million people have been infected by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. The spectrum of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ranges from mild illness to critical illness in 5% of cases. The population infected with SARS-CoV-2 requiring an intensive care unit admission often requires nutrition therapy as part of supportive care. Although the various societal guidelines for critical care nutrition meet most needs for the patient with COVID-19, numerous factors, which impact the application of those guideline recommendations, need to be considered. Since the SARS-CoV-2 virus is highly contagious, several key principles should be considered when caring for all patients with COVID-19 to ensure the safety of all healthcare personnel involved. Management strategies should cluster care, making all attempts to bundle patient care to limit exposure. Healthcare providers should be protected, and the spread of SARS-CoV-2 should be limited by minimizing procedures and other interventions that lead to aerosolization, avoiding droplet exposure through hand hygiene and use of personal protective equipment (PPE). PPE should be preserved by decreasing the number of individuals providing direct patient care and by limiting the number of patient interactions. Enteral nutrition (EN) is tolerated by the majority of patients with COVID-19, but a relatively low threshold for conversion to parenteral nutrition should be maintained if increased exposure to the virus is required to continue EN. This article offers relevant and practical recommendations on how to optimize nutrition therapy in critically ill patients with COVID-19.