Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Glycemic Control for Critically Ill Children and Adults 2024.

RATIONALE: Maintaining glycemic control of critically ill patients may impact outcomes such as survival, infection, and neuromuscular recovery, but there is equipoise on the target blood levels, monitoring frequency, and methods. OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to update the 2012 Society of Critical Care Medicine and American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) guidelines with a new systematic review of the literature and provide actionable guidance for clinicians. PANEL DESIGN: The total multiprofessional task force of 22, consisting of clinicians and patient/family advocates, and a methodologist applied the processes described in the ACCM guidelines standard operating procedure manual to develop evidence-based recommendations in alignment with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Approach (GRADE) methodology. Conflict of interest policies were strictly followed in all phases of the guidelines, including panel selection and voting. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcomes question related to glycemic management in critically ill children (≥ 42 wk old adjusted gestational age to 18 yr old) and adults, including triggers for initiation of insulin therapy, route of administration, monitoring frequency, role of an explicit decision support tool for protocol maintenance, and methodology for glucose testing. We identified the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak or as a good practice statement. In addition, "In our practice" statements were included when the available evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation, but the panel felt that describing their practice patterns may be appropriate. Additional topics were identified for future research. RESULTS: This guideline is an update of the guidelines for the use of an insulin infusion for the management of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. It is intended for adult and pediatric practitioners to reassess current practices and direct research into areas with inadequate literature. The panel issued seven statements related to glycemic control in unselected adults (two good practice statements, four conditional recommendations, one research statement) and seven statements for pediatric patients (two good practice statements, one strong recommendation, one conditional recommendation, two "In our practice" statements, and one research statement), with additional detail on specific subset populations where available. CONCLUSIONS: The guidelines panel achieved consensus for adults and children regarding a preference for an insulin infusion for the acute management of hyperglycemia with titration guided by an explicit clinical decision support tool and frequent (≤ 1 hr) monitoring intervals during glycemic instability to minimize hypoglycemia and against targeting intensive glucose levels. These recommendations are intended for consideration within the framework of the patient's existing clinical status. Further research is required to evaluate the role of individualized glycemic targets, continuous glucose monitoring systems, explicit decision support tools, and standardized glycemic control metrics.

Recommendations for meeting the pediatric patient's need for a clinical pharmacist: a joint opinion of the Pediatrics Practice and Research Network of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy and the Pediatric Pharmacy Advocacy Group.

Children warrant access to care from clinical pharmacists trained in pediatrics. The American College of Clinical Pharmacy Pediatrics Practice and Research Network (ACCP Pediatrics PRN) released an opinion paper in 2005 with recommendations for improving the quality and quantity of pediatric pharmacy education in colleges of pharmacy, residency programs, and fellowships. Although progress has been made in increasing the availability of pediatric residencies, there is still much to be done to meet the direct care needs of pediatric patients. The purpose of this joint opinion paper is to outline strategies and recommendations for expanding the quality and capacity of pediatric clinical pharmacy practitioners by elevating the minimum expectations for pharmacists entering pediatric practice, standardizing pediatric pharmacy education, expanding the current number of pediatric clinical pharmacists, and creating an infrastructure for development of pediatric clinical pharmacists and clinical scientists. These recommendations may be used to provide both a conceptual framework and action items for schools of pharmacy, health care systems, and policymakers to work together to increase the quality and quantity of pediatric training, practice, and research initiatives.

Idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury: an overview.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) encompasses a spectrum of clinical disease ranging from mild biochemical abnormalities to acute liver failure. The majority of adverse liver reactions are idiosyncratic, occurring in most instances 5-90 days after the causative medication was last taken. The diagnosis of DILI is clinical, based on history, probability of the suspect medication as a cause of liver injury and exclusion of other hepatic disease. DILI can be hepatocellular (predominant rise in alanine transaminase), cholestatic (predominant rise in alkaline phosphatase) or mixed liver injury. An elevated bilirubin level more than twice the upper limit of normal in patients with hepatocellular liver injury implies severe DILI, with a mortality of approximately 10% and with an incidence rate of 0.7-1.3 per 100,000. Although acute liver failure is rare, 13-17% of all acute liver failure cases are attributed to idiosyncratic drug reactions. Response to drug withdrawal may be delayed up to 1 year with cholestatic liver injury with occasional subsequent progressive cholestasis known as the vanishing bile duct syndrome. Overall, chronic disease may occur in up to 6% even if the offending drug is withdrawn. Antibiotics and NSAIDs are the most common cause of DILI. Statins rarely cause significant liver injury whereas antiretroviral therapy is associated with hepatotoxicity in 10% of treated patients. Multiple mechanisms of DILI have been implicated, including TNF-alpha-activated apoptosis, inhibition of mitochondrial function and neoantigen formation. Risk factors for DILI include age, sex and genetic polymorphisms of drug-metabolising enzymes such as cytochrome P450. In patients with human immunodeficiency virus, the presence of chronic viral hepatitis increases the risk of antiretroviral therapy hepatotoxicity. Over the next decade, the combination of accurate case ascertainment of DILI via clinical networks and the application of genomics and proteomics will hopefully lead to accurate prediction of risk of DILI, so that pharmacotherapy can be optimised with avoidance of adverse hepatic events.