The impact of distance on post-ICU disability.

BACKGROUND: Nonurban residential living is associated with adverse outcomes for a number of chronic health conditions. However, it is unclear what effect it has amongst survivors of critical illness. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to determine whether patients living greater than 50 km from the treating intensive care unit (ICU) have disability outcomes at 6 months that differ from people living within 50 km. METHODS: This was a multicentre, prospective cohort study conducted in five metropolitan ICUs. Participants were adults admitted to the ICU, who received >24 h of mechanical ventilation and survived to hospital discharge. In a secondary analysis of these data, the cohort was dichotomised based on residential distance from the treating ICU: <50 km and ≥50 km. The primary outcome was patient-reported disability using the 12-item World Health Organization's Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). This was recorded at 6 months after ICU admission by telephone interview. Secondary outcomes included health status as measured by EQ-5D-5L return to work and psychological function as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between distance from the ICU and moderate to severe disability, adjusted for potential confounders. Variables included in the multivariable model were deemed to be clinically relevant and had baseline imbalance between groups (p < 0.10). These included marital status and hours of mechanical ventilation. Sensitivity analysis was also conducted using distance in kilometres as a continuous variable. RESULTS: A total of 262 patients were enrolled, and 169 (65%) lived within 50 km of the treating ICU and 93 (35%) lived ≥50 km from the treating ICU (interquartile range [IQR] 10-664 km). There was no difference in patient-reported disability at 6 months between patients living <50 km and those living ≥50 km (WHODAS total disability % [IQR] 10.4 [2.08-25] v 14.6 [2.08-20.8], P = 0.74). There was also no difference between groups for the six major life domains of the WHODAS. There was no difference in rates of anxiety or depression as measured by HADS score (HADS anxiety median [IQR] 4 [1-7] v 3 [1-7], P = 0.60) (HADS depression median [IQR] 3 [1-6] v 3 [1-6], P = 0.62); health status as measured by EQ-5D (mean [SD] 66.7 [20] v 69.8 [22.2], P = 0.24); or health-related unemployment (% (N) 39 [26] v 25 [29.1], P = 0.61). After adjusting for confounders, living ≥50 km from the treating ICU was not associated with increased disability (odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval: 0.33-1.16; P = 0.13) CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of intensive care in Victoria, Australia, who live at least 50 km from the treating ICU did not have greater disability than people living less than 50 km at 6 months after discharge. Living 50 km or more from the treating ICU was not associated with disability, nor was it associated with anxiety or depression, health status, or unemployment due to health.

The frequency and nature of clinician identified medication-related rapid response system calls.

AIM: The contribution of adverse medication events to clinical deterioration is unknown. This study aimed to determine the frequency and nature of rapid response system (RRS) calls that clinicians perceived were medication-related using RRS quality arm data. METHODS: Analysis of routine data prospectively collected by clinicians responding to RRS calls in an Australian acute tertiary academic hospital. RESULTS: Between January 2013 and June 2017, 12,221 adult patients triggered the RRS for 25,906 medical emergency team (MET) and 512 code blue calls. Clinicians identified 433 medication-related RRS calls (1.6%) involving 406 patients (3.3%). These included 418 MET calls (1.3 medication-related MET calls per 1000 admissions) and 15 code blue calls (0.045 medication-related code blue calls per 1000 admissions). Medication-related calls occurred earlier in the admission (p = 0.002) and were more common for patients triggering multiple calls during the same admission (p < 0.001), compared to non-medication-related calls. Medication-related calls most commonly were triggered by low blood pressure (38.3%) and involved cardiovascular (43.0%) and nervous system medications (36.0%). Dose-related toxicity (n = 178) was the most frequent adverse medication event contributing to medication-related calls. CONCLUSION: One in 30 patients triggering a RRS call experienced medication-related clinical deterioration, most often due to dose related toxicity of cardiovascular system medications. The perceived frequency and potential preventability of this medication-related harm suggest further research is required to increase recognition of medication-related RRS calls by responding clinicians and to reduce the incidence.

An Observational Analysis of Medication Use During 5,727 Medical Emergency Team Activations at a Tertiary Referral Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Medical emergency teams (METs) rescue deteriorating patients as the response arm of hospital rapid response systems. This study aimed to (1) investigate medication use during MET activations by describing the type, frequency and access sources of medications; and (2) assess associations between patient characteristics, MET activation criteria, and outcomes and MET medication use. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective study from a prospective database of MET activations in an Australian tertiary referral hospital was undertaken. Consecutive adult MET activations over a 12-month period were included. RESULTS: Across the study period, there were 5,727 MET activations with medications used at 33.5% (n = 1,920). Of 2,648 medications used, cardiac system agents (n = 944; 35.6%) were the most common category used, while intravenous electrolytes (n = 341; 12.9%) and opioid analgesics (n = 248; 9.4%).were the most frequently used medications. Most commonly, medications were sourced from ward stocks. High blood pressure, heart or respiratory rate, pain, and multiple activation criteria were associated with MET medication use (p < 0.001). Patients who required medications were less likely to remain on the ward, and immediate admission to the ICU was approximately doubled (odds ratio = 1.90; 95% confidence interval = 1.47-2.45). CONCLUSION: Medication use by the MET was common and associated with escalation to intensive care. A wide variety of medications, principally from ward stocks, were used with some predictability based on activation criteria. Local system improvements have demonstrated that by focusing on common MET syndromes and medications, further investigation can refine and improve medication use and management systems for deteriorating patients.

Understanding how medications contribute to clinical deterioration and are used in rapid response systems: A comprehensive scoping review.

BACKGROUND: In hospitals, rapid response systems (RRSs) identify patients who deteriorate and provide critical care at their bedsides to stabilise and escalate care. Medications, including oral and parenteral pharmaceutical preparations, are the most common intervention for hospitalised patients and the most common cause of harm. This connection between clinical deterioration and medication safety is poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To inform improvements in prevention and management of clinical deterioration, this review aimed to examine how medications contributed to clinical deterioration and how medications were used in RRSs. REVIEW METHODS: A scoping review was undertaken of medication data reported in studies of clinical deterioration or RRSs in diverse hospital settings between 2005 and 2017. Bibliographic database searches used permutations of "rapid response system," "medical emergency team," and keyword searching with medication-related terms. Independent selection, quality assessment, and data extraction informed mapping against four medication themes: causes of deterioration, predictors of deterioration, RRS use, and management. RESULTS: Thirty articles were reviewed. Quality was low: limited by small samples, observational, single-centre designs and few primary medication-related outcomes. Adverse drug reactions and potentially preventable medication errors, involving sedatives, analgesics, and cardiovascular agents, contributed to clinical deterioration. While sparsely reported, outcomes included death and escalation of care. In children, administration of antibiotics or nebulised medications appeared to predict subsequent deterioration. Cardiovascular medications, sedatives, and analgesics commonly were used to manage deterioration but further detail was lacking. Despite reported potential for patient harm, evaluation of medication management systems was limited. CONCLUSIONS: Medications contributed to potentially preventable clinical deterioration, with considerable harm, and were common interventions for its management. When assessing deteriorating patients or caring for patients who require escalation to critical care, clinicians should consider medication errors and adverse reactions. Studies with more specific medication-related, patient-centred end points could reduce medication-related deterioration and refine RRS medication use and management.