Epidemiology of Hypophosphatemia in Critical Illness: A Multicentre, Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Hypophosphatemia is common in critically ill patients. We have described the epidemiology of hypophosphatemia in patients admitted to the Intensive Care Units. METHODS: A multicentre, retrospective cohort study of 12 ICUs in Queensland, Australia from January 1st, 2015, to December 31st, 2021. Exclusions included readmissions, renal replacement therapy, end-stage renal disease, and palliative intent admissions and transfers from other ICUs. Patients were classified into four groups based on the severity of the first episode of low serum phosphate (PO4): "None" (PO4: ≥ 0.81 mmol/L, ``Mild" (PO4: ≥ 0.50 & < 0.81 mmol/L) "Moderate" (PO4: ≥ 0.30 & < 0.50 mmol/L) and "Severe" (PO4: < 0.30 mmol/L). A mixed-effect logistic regression model, including hospital as a random effect, was developed to examine factors associated with 90-day case fatality. RESULTS: Of the 89,776 patients admitted, 68,699 patients were included in this study, with 23,485 (34.2%) having hypophosphatemia with onset mostly on Day 2 of ICU admission and correcting to normal 3 days after hypophosphatemia was identified. There was substantial variation among participating ICUs in phosphate replacement; the threshold, and the route by which it was replaced. Day-90 case fatality increased with severity of hypophosphatemia (None: 3,974 (8.8%), Mild: 2,306 (11%), Moderate: 377 (14%); Severe: 108 (21%) (p < 0.001)). Multivariable regression analysis showed that compared to those without hypophosphatemia, patients with moderate (odds ratio (OR) 1.24; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.07-1.44; p = 0.004) or severe (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.13-1.97; p = 0.005) hypophosphatemia had increased risk of 90-day case fatality. CONCLUSION: Hypophosphatemia was common, and mostly occurred on day 2 with early correction of serum phosphate. Phosphate replacement practices were variable among ICUs. Moderate and severe hypophosphatemia was associated with increased 90-day case fatality.

A survey of Australian public opinion on using comorbidity to triage intensive care patients in a pandemic.

Objectives This study aimed to determine which method to triage intensive care patients using chronic comorbidity in a pandemic was perceived to be the fairest by the general public. Secondary objectives were to determine whether the public perceived it fair to provide preferential intensive care triage to vulnerable or disadvantaged people, and frontline healthcare workers. Methods A postal survey of 2000 registered voters randomly selected from the Australian Electoral Commission electoral roll was performed. The main outcome measures were respondents' fairness rating of four hypothetical intensive care triage methods that assess comorbidity (chronic medical conditions, long-term survival, function and frailty); and respondents' fairness rating of providing preferential triage to vulnerable or disadvantaged people, and frontline healthcare workers. Results The proportion of respondents who considered it fair to triage based on chronic medical conditions, long-term survival, function and frailty, was 52.1, 56.1, 65.0 and 62.4%, respectively. The proportion of respondents who considered it unfair to triage based on these four comorbidities was 31.9, 30.9, 23.8 and 23.2%, respectively. More respondents considered it unfair to preferentially triage vulnerable or disadvantaged people, than fair (41.8% versus 21.2%). More respondents considered it fair to preferentially triage frontline healthcare workers, than unfair (44.2% versus 30.0%). Conclusion Respondents in this survey perceived all four hypothetical methods to triage intensive care patients based on comorbidity in a pandemic disaster to be fair. However, the sizable minority who consider this to be unfair indicates that these triage methods could encounter significant opposition if they were to be enacted in health policy.

Sepsis-associated acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit: incidence, patient characteristics, timing, trajectory, treatment, and associated outcomes. A multicenter, observational study.

PURPOSE: The Acute Disease Quality Initiative (ADQI) Workgroup recently released a consensus definition of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury (SA-AKI), combining Sepsis-3 and Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) AKI criteria. This study aims to describe the epidemiology of SA-AKI. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study carried out in 12 intensive care units (ICUs) from 2015 to 2021. We studied the incidence, patient characteristics, timing, trajectory, treatment, and associated outcomes of SA-AKI based on the ADQI definition. RESULTS: Out of 84,528 admissions, 13,451 met the SA-AKI criteria with its incidence peaking at 18% in 2021. SA-AKI patients were typically admitted from home via the emergency department (ED) with a median time to SA-AKI diagnosis of 1 day (interquartile range (IQR) 1-1) from ICU admission. At diagnosis, most SA-AKI patients (54%) had a stage 1 AKI, mostly due to the low urinary output (UO) criterion only (65%). Compared to diagnosis by creatinine alone, or by both UO and creatinine criteria, patients diagnosed by UO alone had lower renal replacement therapy (RRT) requirements (2.8% vs 18% vs 50%; p < 0.001), which was consistent across all stages of AKI. SA-AKI hospital mortality was 18% and SA-AKI was independently associated with increased mortality. In SA-AKI, diagnosis by low UO only, compared to creatinine alone or to both UO and creatinine criteria, carried an odds ratio of 0.34 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.36) for mortality. CONCLUSION: SA-AKI occurs in 1 in 6 ICU patients, is diagnosed on day 1 and carries significant morbidity and mortality risk with patients mostly admitted from home via the ED. However, most SA-AKI is stage 1 and mostly due to low UO, which carries much lower risk than diagnosis by other criteria.

Sodium chloride or plasmalyte-148 for patients presenting to emergency departments with diabetic ketoacidosis: A nested cohort study within a multicentre, cluster, crossover, randomised, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that fluid resuscitation in the ED with plasmalyte-148 (PL) compared with 0.9% sodium chloride (SC) would result in a lower proportion of patients with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. METHODS: We performed a prespecified nested cohort study at two hospitals within a cluster, crossover, open label, randomised, controlled trial comparing the effects of PL versus SC as fluid therapy for patients who presented to the ED with DKA. All patients presenting within a fixed recruitment period were included. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients admitted to ICU. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were enrolled (SC n = 38, PL n = 46). The SC group had a lower median pH on admission (SC: 7.09 [interquartile range (IQR) 7.01-7.21], PL: 7.17 [IQR 6.99-7.26]). The median volume of intravenous fluids administered in ED was 2150 mL (IQR 2000-3200 mL; SC) and 2200 mL (IQR 2000-3450; PL); respectively. A higher proportion of patients in the SC group, 19 (50%), was admitted to ICU compared with PL group, 18 (39.1%); however, after adjustment for pH at presentation and diabetes type in a multivariable logistic regression model, the PL group did not have a significantly different rate of ICU admission compared with the SC group (odds ratio for ICU admission 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.13-3.97, P = 0.71). CONCLUSION: Patients with DKA treated with PL compared with SC in the EDs had similar rates of requiring ICU admission.

Sodium chloride or Plasmalyte-148 evaluation in severe diabetic ketoacidosis (SCOPE-DKA): a cluster, crossover, randomized, controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To determine whether treatment with Plasmalyte-148 (PL) compared to sodium chloride 0.9% (SC) results in faster resolution of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and whether the acetate in PL potentiates ketosis. METHODS: We conducted a cluster, crossover, open-label, randomized, controlled Phase 2 trial at seven hospitals in adults admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) with severe DKA with hospital randomised to PL or SC as fluid therapy. The primary outcome, DKA resolution, was defined as a change in base excess to ≥ - 3 mEq/L at 48 h. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were enrolled with 90 patients included in the modified-intention-to-treat population (PL n = 48, SC n = 42). At 48 h, mean fluid administration was 6798 ± 4850 ml vs 6574 ± 3123 ml, median anion gap 6 mEq/L (IQR 5-7) vs 7 mEq/L (IQR 5-7) and median blood ketones 0.3 mmol/L (IQR 0.1-0.5) vs 0.3 (IQR 0.1-0.5) in the PL and SC groups. DKA resolution at 48 h occurred in 96% (PL) and 86% (SC) of patients; odds ratio 3.93 (95% CI 0.73-21.16, p = 0.111). At 24 h, DKA resolution occurred in 69% (PL) and 36% (SC) of patients; odds ratio 4.24 (95% CI 1.68-10.72, p = 0.002). The median ICU and hospital lengths of stay were 49 h (IQR 23-72) vs 55 h (IQR 41-80) and 81 h (IQR 58-137) vs 98 h (IQR 65-195) in the PL and SC groups. CONCLUSION: Plasmalyte-148, compared to sodium chloride 0.9%, may lead to faster resolution of metabolic acidosis in patients with DKA without an increase in ketosis. These findings need confirmation in a large, Phase 3 trial.