Stress level assessment among health care workers involved in the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care health care workers (HCWs) are frontlines of this crisis as they deal with critically ill COVID-19 patients which can potentially affect their mental well-being and causes different levels of stress. AIM: To determine the prevalence of stress among HCWs involved in the management of critically ill COVID-19 patient, identify the factors associated with stress, and highlight the availability of psychological support provided to HCWs. METHODS: A cross-sectional multicenter, international study using a web-based questionnaire of 27 questions including the Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10) for assessment of stress level. Questions to identify factors associated with stress, the psychological support provided, and the sociodemographic characteristics were included. RESULTS: We received a total 1649 responses from 59 countries: 550 (34%) were from Europe, 525 (32.36%) from Asia, 283 (17.44%) from Africa, 177 (11%) from America, and 88 (5.42%) from Australia. The average stress level was 22 points on the PSS denoting moderate stress in 1327 (81.8%) respondents, while 239 (14.73%) respondents had a severe level of stress. Female gender, working in high capacity units and remote areas in addition to lack of psychological support, was significantly associated with stress in our study. CONCLUSION: Stress level was moderate to severe among intensive care HCWs during this pandemic, and many factors were associated with stress emphasizing the importance of psychological support during that unprecedented pandemic.

Arabic intensive care delirium screening checklist's validity and reliability: A multicenter study.

PURPOSE: To develop an Arabic version of Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) and assess its validity and reliability among critically ill patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multicentered study of convenience sample of adult ICU patients. Arabic translation was performed with rigorous back-to-back translation methods. Concurrent validity was established by calculating the sensitivity and specificity of two examiner assessments compared to a psychiatric evaluation. Kappa coefficients describe interrater reliability, whereas Cronbach α and composite reliability depict internal consistency. RESULTS: Three hundred critically ill patients were enrolled. Of these, validity testing was assessed in 180 patients. ICDSC screening was positive for delirium in 11% of enrolled patients. The area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.9413, with predicted sensitivity 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 60-81%) and specificity 99% (95% CI: 98-100%). The Arabic ICDSC showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.63 and composite reliability = 0.64). Interrater agreement was excellent (Kappa coefficient [Ò¡] = 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: Arabic ICDSC is a valid and reliable delirium-screening tool among Arabic-speaking ICU population. Future studies could address whether these findings are generalizable to a higher proportion of mechanically ventilated patients, and address acceptability and reliability in other Arabic language critical care settings.

Serious Cardiovascular Adverse Events Reported with Intravenous Sedatives: A Retrospective Analysis of the MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting System.

BACKGROUND: Serious cardiovascular adverse events (SCAEs) associated with intravenous sedatives remain poorly characterized. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare SCAE incidence, types, and mortality between intravenous benzodiazepines (i.e., diazepam, lorazepam, and midazolam), dexmedetomidine, and propofol in the USA over 8 years regardless of the clinical setting where it was administered. METHODS: The Food and Drug Administration's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting System was searched between 2004 and 2011 using the Evidex® platform from Advera Health Analytics, Inc. to identify all reports that included one or more of ten different SCAEs (package insert incidence ≥ 1%) and where an intravenous benzodiazepine, dexmedetomidine, or propofol was the primary suspected drug. RESULTS: Among the 2326 Food and Drug Administration's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting System cases reported, 394 (16.9%) were related to a SCAE. The presence of a SCAE (vs. a non-SCAE) is associated with higher mortality (34 vs. 8%, p < 0.001). The percentage of cases with one or more SCAE, the case mortality rate (%), and the incidence of each SCAE (per 106 days of sedative exposure), respectively, were benzodiazepines (14, 26, 13) [diazepam (13, 23, 31); lorazepam (15, 43, 14); midazolam (14, 20, 11)]; dexmedetomidine (40, 15, 13); and propofol (17, 39, 7). Propofol (vs. either a benzodiazepine or dexmedetomidine) was associated with more total SCAEs (268 vs. 126, p < 0.001) but a lower incidence (per 106 days of sedative exposure) of SCAE (7 vs. 13, p = 0.0001) and cardiac arrest [6.3 (benzodiazepine) vs. 6.7 (dexmedetomidine) vs. 1.4 (propofol), p < 0.0001]. CONCLUSIONS: Serious cardiac adverse events account for nearly one-fifth of intravenous sedative Food and Drug Administration's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting System reports. These SCAEs appear to be associated with greater mortality than non-cardiac serious adverse events. Serious cardiac events may be more prevalent with either benzodiazepines or dexmedetomidine than propofol.

Evaluating the Published Critical Care Research from the World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Region.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of published research in a region provides insight into relevant aspects of clinical care and research priorities. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the type of critical care research published in the World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR) over a 10-year period. RESULTS: During the study period (2007-2016), the search strategy revealed 4303 publications, of which 1537 were included in the analysis; studies were excluded for the following reasons: not critical care, conducted in non-EMR countries, editorials, case reports, in-vitro or animal studies, as well as those conducted in multiple countries and those that evaluated foreign military personal. Countries varied in the number of publications produced, ranging from none in Somalia to 620 in Iran. The majority of the studies were observational (78%), evaluated adults (73%), and the most common areas of research were infectious (29%) and respiratory (10%) diseases. Median sample size was 120 and the mean (SD) impact factor of the journals in which the articles were published was 1.02 (0.7).

Preventing ICU Subsyndromal Delirium Conversion to Delirium With Low-Dose IV Haloperidol: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of scheduled low-dose haloperidol versus placebo for the prevention of delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ≥ 4) administered to critically ill adults with subsyndromal delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist = 1-3). DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Three 10-bed ICUs (two medical and one surgical) at an academic medical center in the United States. PATIENTS: Sixty-eight mechanically ventilated patients with subsyndromal delirium without complicating neurologic conditions, cardiac surgery, or requiring deep sedation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive IV haloperidol 1 mg or placebo every 6 hours until delirium occurred (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ≥ 4 with psychiatric confirmation), 10 days of therapy had elapsed, or ICU discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the haloperidol (n = 34) and placebo (n = 34) groups. A similar number of patients given haloperidol (12/34 [35%]) and placebo (8/34 [23%]) developed delirium (p = 0.29). Haloperidol use reduced the hours per study day spent agitated (Sedation Agitation Scale ≥ 5) (p = 0.008), but it did not influence the proportion of 12-hour ICU shifts patients spent alive without coma (Sedation Agitation Scale ≤ 2) or delirium (p = 0.36), the time to first delirium occurrence (p = 0.22), nor delirium duration (p = 0.26). Days of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.80), ICU mortality (p = 0.55), and ICU patient disposition (p = 0.22) were similar in the two groups. The proportion of patients who developed corrected QT-interval prolongation (p = 0.16), extrapyramidal symptoms (p = 0.31), excessive sedation (p = 0.31), or new-onset hypotension (p = 1.0) that resulted in study drug discontinuation was comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose scheduled haloperidol, initiated early in the ICU stay, does not prevent delirium and has little therapeutic advantage in mechanically ventilated, critically ill adults with subsyndromal delirium.

Efficacy and safety of early dexmedetomidine during noninvasive ventilation for patients with acute respiratory failure: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Successful application of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for acute respiratory failure (ARF) requires patient cooperation and comfort. The efficacy and safety of early IV dexmedetomidine when added to protocolized, as-needed IV midazolam and fentanyl remain unclear. METHODS: Adults with ARF and within 8 h of starting NIV were randomized to receive IV dexmedetomidine (0.2 µg/kg/h titrated every 30 min to 0.7 µg/kg/h to maintain a Sedation-Agitation Scale [SAS] score of 3 to 4) or placebo in a double-blind fashion up to 72 h, until NIV was stopped for ≥ 2 h, or until intubation. Patients with agitation (SAS ≥ 5) or pain (visual analog scale ≥ 5 of 10 cm) 15 min after each dexmedetomidine and placebo increase could receive IV midazolam 0.5 to 1.0 mg or IV fentanyl 25 to 50 µg, respectively, at a minimum interval of every 3 h. RESULTS: The dexmedetomidine (n = 16) and placebo (n = 17) groups were similar at baseline. Use of early dexmedetomidine did not improve NIV tolerance (score, 1 of 4; OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.44-4.70; P = .54) nor, vs. placebo, led to a greater median (interquartile range) percent time either tolerating NIV (99% [61%-100%] vs. 67% [40%-100%], P = .56) or remaining at the desired sedation level (SAS score = 3 or 4, 100% [86%-100%] vs. 100% [100%-100%], P = .28], or fewer intubations (P = .79). Although use of dexmedetomidine was associated with a greater duration of NIV vs placebo (37 [16-72] vs. 12 [4-22] h, P = .03), the total ventilation duration (NIV + invasive) was similar (3.3 [2-4] days vs. 3.8 [2-5] days, P = .52). More patients receiving dexmedetomidine had one or more episodes of deep sedation vs placebo (SAS ≤ 2, 25% vs. 0%, P = .04). Use of midazolam (P = .40) and episodes of either severe bradycardia (heart rate ≤ 50 beats/min, P = .18) or hypotension (systolic BP ≤ 90 mm Hg, P = .64) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Initiating dexmedetomidine soon after NIV initiation in patients with ARF neither improves NIV tolerance nor helps to maintain sedation at a desired goal. Randomized, multicenter trials targeting patients with initial intolerance are needed to further elucidate the role for dexmedetomidine in this population.

Randomized ICU trials do not demonstrate an association between interventions that reduce delirium duration and short-term mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We reviewed randomized trials of adult ICU patients of interventions hypothesized to reduce delirium burden to determine whether interventions that are more effective at reducing delirium duration are associated with a reduction in short-term mortality. DATA SOURCES: We searched CINHAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane databases from 2001 to 2012. STUDY SELECTION: Citations were screened for randomized trials that enrolled critically ill adults, evaluated delirium at least daily, compared a drug or nondrug intervention hypothesized to reduce delirium burden with standard care (or control), and reported delirium duration and/or short-term mortality (≤ 45 d). DATA EXTRACTION: In duplicate, we abstracted trial characteristics and results and evaluated quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We performed random effects model meta-analyses and meta-regressions. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 17 trials enrolling 2,849 patients which evaluated a pharmacologic intervention (n = 13) (dexmedetomidine [n = 6], an antipsychotic [n = 4], rivastigmine [n = 2], and clonidine [n = 1]), a multimodal intervention (n = 2) (spontaneous awakening [n = 2]), or a nonpharmacologic intervention (n = 2) (early mobilization [n = 1] and increased perfusion [n = 1]). Overall, average delirium duration was lower in the intervention groups (difference = -0.64 d; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.13; p = 0.01) being reduced by more than or equal to 3 days in three studies, 0.1 to less than 3 days in six studies, 0 day in seven studies, and less than 0 day in one study. Across interventions, for 13 studies where short-term mortality was reported, short-term mortality was not reduced (risk ratio = 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76-1.06; p = 0.19). Across 13 studies that reported mortality, meta-regression revealed that delirium duration was not associated with reduced short-term mortality (p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: A review of current evidence fails to support that ICU interventions that reduce delirium duration reduce short-term mortality. Larger controlled studies are needed to establish this relationship.

Agitation during prolonged mechanical ventilation at a long-term acute care hospital: risk factors, treatments, and outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence, risk factors, treatment practices, and outcomes of agitation in patients undergoing prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) in the long-term acute care hospital (LTACH) setting are not well understood. We compared agitation risk factors, management strategies, and outcomes between patients who developed agitation and those who did not, in LTACH patients undergoing PMV. METHODS: Patients admitted to an LTACH for PMV over a 1-year period were categorized into agitated and nonagitated groups. The presence of agitation risk factors, management strategies, and relevant outcomes were extracted and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients were included, 41% (33) with agitation and 59% (47) without. Compared to the nonagitated group, the agitated group had a lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (P < .0006), a greater transfer rate from an academic center (P = .05), a greater delirium frequency at both baseline (P = .04) and during admission (P < .001), and a greater rate of benzodiazepine discontinuation (P = .02). Although the use of scheduled antipsychotic (P = .0005) or restraint (P = .002) therapy was more common in the agitated group, use of benzodiazepines (P = .16), opioids (P = .11), or psychiatric evaluation (P = .90) was not. Weaning success, duration of LTACH stay, and daily costs were similar. CONCLUSION: Agitation among the LTACH patients undergoing PMV is associated with greater delirium and use of antipsychotics and restraints but does not influence weaning success or LTACH stay. Strategies focused on agitation prevention and treatment in this population need to be developed and formally evaluated.

Perceptions of nurses and physicians of their communication at night about intensive care patients' pain, agitation, and delirium.

BACKGROUND: Ineffective daytime nurse-physician communication in intensive care adversely affects patients' outcomes. Nurses' and physicians' communications and perceptions of this communication at night are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine perceptions of nurses and physicians of their communication with each other at night in the intensive care unit about patients' pain, agitation, and delirium and to develop a qualitative survey instrument to investigate this topic. Methods A validated survey was distributed to nighttime nurses and physicians in 2 medical intensive care units. RESULTS: Most nurses (30/45; 67%) and physicians (56/75; 75%) responded. Nurses (35%) and physicians (31%) thought that a similar proportion of communications was related to pain, agitation, and delirium. Most nurses (70%) and physicians (80%) agreed that nurses used good judgment when paging physicians at night because of patients' pain, agitation, and delirium, but physicians (72%) were more likely than nurses (48%) to think that these pages did not portray the situation accurately (P = .004). For many text pages, physicians attributed a heightened level of urgency more often than did the nurses who sent the texts. Nurses often thought that physicians did not appreciate the urgency (33%) or complexity (33%) of the situations the nurses communicated via pages. More physicians (41%) than nurses (14%) agreed that nurses exceeded medication orders for pain, agitation, and delirium before contacting a physician (P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Perceptual differences between physicians and nurses about nurse-physician communications at night regarding pain, agitation, and delirium were numerous and should be studied further.

Agreement between ICU clinicians and electrophysiology cardiologists on the decision to initiate a QTc-interval prolonging medication in critically ill patients with potential risk factors for torsade de pointes: a comparative, case-based evaluation.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To measure concordance between different intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians and a consensus group of electrophysiology (EP) cardiologists for use of a common rate-corrected QT interval (QTc)-prolonging medication in cases containing different potential risk factor(s) for torsade de pointes (TdP). DESIGN: Prospective case-based evaluation. SETTING: Academic medical center with 320 beds. SUBJECTS: Medical house staff (MDs) and ICU nurses (RNs) from one center and select critical care pharmacists (PHs). INTERVENTION: Completion of a survey containing 10 hypothetical ICU cases in which patients had agitated delirium for which a psychiatrist recommended intravenous haloperidol 5 mg every 6 hours. Each case contained different potential risk factor(s) for TdP in specific combinations. A group of five EP cardiologists agreed that haloperidol use was safe in five cases and not safe in five cases. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For each case, participants were asked to document whether they would administer haloperidol, to provide a rationale for their decision, and to state their level of confidence in that decision. Most clinicians (92 of 115 [80%]) invited to participate completed the cases. Among the five cases where EP cardiologists agreed that haloperidol was not safe, 29% of respondents felt that haloperidol was safe. Conversely, in the five cases where EP cardiologists felt haloperidol was safe, 21% of respondents believed that it was not safe. Overall respondent-EP cardiologist agreement for haloperidol use across the 10 cases was moderate (κ = 0.51). MDs and PHs were in agreement with the EP cardiologists more than RNs (p=0.03). Interprofessional variability existed for the TdP risk factors each best identified. Clinician confidence correlated with EP cardiologist concordance for MDs (p=0.002) and PHs (p=0.0002), but not for RNs (p=0.69). CONCLUSION: When evaluating use of a QTc interval-prolonging medication, ICU clinicians often fail to identify the TdP risk factors that EP cardiologists feel should prevent its use. Clinician-EP cardiologist concordance varies by the specific risk factor(s) for TdP and the ICU professional conducting the assessment.

Antipsychotic prescribing patterns, and the factors and outcomes associated with their use, among patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation in the long-term acute care hospital setting.

BACKGROUND: Administration of scheduled antipsychotic therapy to mechanically ventilated patients to prevent or treat delirium is common, despite the lack of evidence to support its use. Among long-term acute care hospital (LTACH) patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV), the frequency of scheduled antipsychotic therapy use, and the factors and outcomes associated with it, have not been described. OBJECTIVE: To identify scheduled antipsychotic therapy prescribing practices, and the factors and outcomes associated with the use of antipsychotics, among LTACH patients requiring PMV. METHODS: Consecutive patients without major psychiatric disorders or dementia who were admitted to an LTACH for PMV over 1 year were categorized as those receiving scheduled antipsychotic therapy (≥24 hours of use) and those not receiving scheduled antipsychotic therapy. Presence of delirium, use of psychiatric evaluation, nonscheduled antipsychotic therapy, and scheduled antipsychotic therapy-related adverse effects were extracted and compared between the 2 groups and when significant (p ≤ 0.05), were entered into a regression analysis using generalized estimating equation techniques. RESULTS: Among 80 patients included, 39% (31) received scheduled antipsychotic therapy and 61% (49) did not. Baseline characteristics, including age, sex, illness severity, and medical history, were similar between the 2 groups. Scheduled antipsychotic therapy was administered on 52% of LTACH days for a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 25 (6-38) days and, in the antipsychotic group, was initiated at an outside hospital (45%) or on day 2 (1-6; median [IQR]) of the LTACH stay (55%). Quetiapine was the most frequently administered scheduled antipsychotic (77%; median dose 50 [37-72] mg/day). Use of scheduled antipsychotic therapy was associated with a greater incidence of psychiatric evaluation (OR 5.7; p = 0.01), delirium (OR 2.4; p = 0.05), as-needed antipsychotic use (OR 4.1; p = 0.005) and 1:1 sitter use (OR 7.3; p = 0.001), but not benzodiazepine use (p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Among LTACH patients requiring PMV, scheduled antipsychotic therapy is used frequently and is associated with a greater incidence of psychiatric evaluation, delirium, as-needed psychotic use, and sitter use. Although scheduled antipsychotic therapy-related adverse effects are uncommon, these effects are infrequently monitored.

Optimising the recognition of delirium in the intensive care unit.

Delirium affects up to 80% of critically ill patients and negatively influences patient outcome. Consensus guidelines advocate that a validated screening tool like the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) or the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) be used to identify delirium rather than a subjective approach. The CAM-ICU and ICDSC have the most rigorous psychometric data to support their use. The differences between these two instruments are far less important to the outcome of patients than the regular and reliable use of either in routine ICU care. Implementation of a large-scale delirium screening effort is both feasible and sustainable and should be accompanied by both didactic and bedside education. An ICU clinical road map should be used on a daily basis that promotes delirium assessment, establishes a targeted sedation goal and defines the analgesic/sedative regimen that is best suited to maintain patient comfort, prevent delirium and promote wakefulness.

Impact of enteral methadone on the ability to wean off continuously infused opioids in critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Continuously infused opioids are frequently used to optimize patient comfort in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, concerns about rebound pain and opioid withdrawal may delay efforts to discontinue this therapy. OBJECTIVE: To measure the association between use of scheduled enteral methadone according to a protocol in mechanically ventilated, medical critically ill adults receiving prolonged continuously infused fentanyl and the time to discontinue continuously infused fentanyl therapy. METHODS: This case-control study included 20 consecutive mechanically ventilated adults in a medical ICU, without a history of chronic opioid use, who received 72 or more hours of continuously infused fentanyl and were prescribed scheduled enteral methadone as part of a protocol medical ICU strategy to wean off continuously infused fentanyl. Patients were matched in a 1:2 fashion, by duration of mechanical ventilation, to 40 consecutive preprotocol medical ICU patients meeting the same criteria but who were never given methadone. Duration of continuously infused fentanyl was compared between the 2 groups by constructing Kaplan-Meier plots and estimating the likelihood that methadone use was associated with a decrease in continuously infused fentanyl requirements over time, using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The groups were well matched except the methadone patients were older (p = 0.04). Time (median [interquartile range]) to continuously infused fentanyl discontinuation was shorter in the methadone group (4.5 [3.9-5.8] vs 7.0 [4.9-11.5] days; p = 0.002). Continuously infused fentanyl was more likely to be discontinued 2 days after methadone was first initiated (hazard ratio 9.1; p = 0.0004). The proportion of patients who experienced 1 or more episodes of either QTc interval prolongation (p = 0.79) or unarousability (p = 0.47) was similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Enterally administered methadone is associated with earlier cessation of continuously infused fentanyl in mechanically ventilated adults without a history of opioid dependence admitted to a medical ICU. Prospective, controlled studies are needed to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of methadone as a strategy to wean off continuously infused fentanyl in different ICU populations.

The first international residency program accredited by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.

The processes by which the pharmacy residency program at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre-Riyadh, Saudi Arabia became the first American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) accredited program outside the United States is described. This article provides key points for a successful program for other pharmacy residency programs around the world. Additionally, it points out the need for establishing international standards for pharmacy residency programs.

Pharmacoeconomic analysis in Saudi Arabia: an overdue agenda item for action.

Pharmacoeconomics is a branch of health economics related to the most economical and efficient use of pharmaceuticals. Pharmacoeconomic research identifies, measures and compares the costs and outcomes (clinical, economic and humanistic) of pharmaceutical products and services. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation can play a significant role in the efficient allocation of resources in healthcare systems with constrained budgets. Countries are trying to control the rising costs of health care in their aging population. They are all asking the same question: Is the new drug good value for money; and if so, what is the society willing to pay for it? This article reviews the importance of, and the need for, adaptation of pharmacoeconomic analysis to the conditions in Saudi Arabia. It will shed some light on the important steps for converting the concept into practice, including the need for identifying the willing-to-pay (WTP) or the threshold cutoff, the existence of a real cost for each utility, the nonexistence of an pharmacoeconomic advisory forum, pharmaceutical budget allocation, and the impact of pharmaceutical marketing. It will also provide recommendations for easing any challenges that might jeopardize the conduct of such analysis in Saudi Arabia.

Evolution of tigecycline resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae in a single patient.

Carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae infections carry serious clinical and infection-control implications. Isolates possessing such hydrolyzing enzymes have been described in the United States and around the world. Besides being resistant to carbapenems, they usually confer resistance to fluoroquinolones, piperacillin-tazobactam, and extended-spectrum cephalosporins. Tigecycline demonstrates in vitro activity against these organisms, but reported resistance raises concern about tigecycline use for these infections. We describe a carbapenemase-producing K pneumoniae evolving resistance to tigecycline in a 75-year-old male after a prolonged stay in a critical care unit.