Perioperative Considerations in Older Kidney and Liver Transplant Recipients: A Review.

With the growth of the older adult population, the number of older adults waitlisted for and undergoing kidney and liver transplantation has increased. Transplantation is an important and definitive treatment for this population. We present a contemporary review of the unique preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative issues that patients older than 65 y face when they undergo kidney or liver transplantation. We focus on geriatric syndromes that are common in older patients listed for kidney or liver transplantation including frailty, sarcopenia, and cognitive dysfunction; discuss important considerations for older transplant recipients, which may impact preoperative risk stratification; and describe unique challenges in intraoperative and postoperative management for older patients. Intraoperative challenges in the older adult include using evidence-based best anesthetic practices, maintaining adequate perfusion pressure, and using minimally invasive surgical techniques. Postoperative concerns include controlling acute postoperative pain; preventing cardiovascular complications and delirium; optimizing immunosuppression; preventing perioperative kidney injury; and avoiding nephrotoxicity and rehabilitation. Future studies are needed throughout the perioperative period to identify interventions that will improve patients' preoperative physiologic status, prevent postoperative medical complications, and improve medical and patient-centered outcomes in this vulnerable patient population.

A Review and Discussion of Full-Time Equivalency and Appropriate Compensation Models for an Adult Intensivist in the United States Across Various Base Specialties.

OBJECTIVES: Physicians with training in anesthesiology, emergency medicine, internal medicine, neurology, and surgery may gain board certification in critical care medicine upon completion of fellowship training. These clinicians often only spend a portion of their work effort in the ICU. Other work efforts that benefit an ICU infrastructure, but do not provide billing opportunities, include education, research, and administrative duties. For employed or contracted physicians, there is no singular definition of what constitutes an intensive care full-time equivalent (FTE). Nevertheless, hospitals often consider FTEs in assessing hiring needs, salary, and eligibility for benefits. DATA SOURCES: Review of existing literature, expert opinion. STUDY SELECTION: Not applicable. DATA EXTRACTION: Not applicable. DATA SYNTHESIS: Not applicable. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding how an FTE is calculated, and the fraction of an FTE to be assigned to a particular cost center, is therefore important for intensivists of different specialties, as many employment models assign salary and benefits to a base specialty department and not necessarily the ICU.

Simulation of New York City's Ventilator Allocation Guideline During the Spring 2020 COVID-19 Surge.

Importance: The spring 2020 surge of COVID-19 unprecedentedly strained ventilator supply in New York City, with many hospitals nearly exhausting available ventilators and subsequently seriously considering enacting crisis standards of care and implementing New York State Ventilator Allocation Guidelines (NYVAG). However, there is little evidence as to how NYVAG would perform if implemented. Objectives: To evaluate the performance and potential improvement of NYVAG during a surge of patients with respect to the length of rationing, overall mortality, and worsening health disparities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included intubated patients in a single health system in New York City from March through July 2020. A total of 20 000 simulations were conducted of ventilator triage (10 000 following NYVAG and 10 000 following a proposed improved NYVAG) during a crisis period, defined as the point at which the prepandemic ventilator supply was 95% utilized. Exposures: The NYVAG protocol for triage ventilators. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comparison of observed survival rates with simulations of scenarios requiring NYVAG ventilator rationing. Results: The total cohort included 1671 patients; of these, 674 intubated patients (mean [SD] age, 63.7 [13.8] years; 465 male [69.9%]) were included in the crisis period, with 571 (84.7%) testing positive for COVID-19. Simulated ventilator rationing occurred for 163.9 patients over 15.0 days, 44.4% (95% CI, 38.3%-50.0%) of whom would have survived if provided a ventilator while only 34.8% (95% CI, 28.5%-40.0%) of those newly intubated patients receiving a reallocated ventilator survived. While triage categorization at the time of intubation exhibited partial prognostic differentiation, 94.8% of all ventilator rationing occurred after a time trial. Within this subset, 43.1% were intubated for 7 or more days with a favorable SOFA score that had not improved. An estimated 60.6% of these patients would have survived if sustained on a ventilator. Revising triage subcategorization, proposed improved NYVAG, would have improved this alarming ventilator allocation inefficiency (25.3% [95% CI, 22.1%-28.4%] of those selected for ventilator rationing would have survived if provided a ventilator). NYVAG ventilator rationing did not exacerbate existing health disparities. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of intubated patients experiencing simulated ventilator rationing during the apex of the New York City COVID-19 2020 surge, NYVAG diverted ventilators from patients with a higher chance of survival to those with a lower chance of survival. Future efforts should be focused on triage subcategorization, which improved this triage inefficiency, and ventilator rationing after a time trial, when most ventilator rationing occurred.

Cardiac arrest in the perioperative period: a consensus guideline for identification, treatment, and prevention from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and the European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiac arrest in the operating room is a rare but potentially life-threatening event with mortality rates of more than 50%. Contributing factors are often known, and the event is recognised rapidly as patients are usually under full monitoring. This guideline covers the perioperative period and is complementary to the European Resuscitation Council guidelines. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and the European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery jointly nominated a panel of experts to develop guidelines for the recognition, treatment, and prevention of cardiac arrest in the perioperative period. A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. All searches were restricted to publications from 1980 to 2019 inclusive and to the English, French, Italian and Spanish languages. The authors also contributed individual, independent literature searches. RESULTS: This guideline contains background information and recommendation for the treatment of cardiac arrest in the operating room environment, and addresses controversial topics such as open chest cardiac massage, resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion and resuscitative thoracotomy, pericardiocentesis, needle decompression, and thoracostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Successful prevention and management of cardiac arrest during anaesthesia and surgery requires anticipation, early recognition, and a clear treatment plan. The ready availability of expert staff and equipment must also be taken into consideration. Success not only depends on medical knowledge, technical skills and a well-organised team using crew resource management, but also on an institutional safety culture embedded in everyday practice through continuous education, training, and multidisciplinary co-operation.

Cardiac arrest in the perioperative period: a consensus guideline for identification, treatment, and prevention from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and the European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiac arrest in the operating room is a rare but potentially life-threatening event with mortality rates of more than 50%. Contributing factors are often known, and the event is recognised rapidly as patients are usually under full monitoring. This guideline covers the perioperative period and is complementary to the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) guidelines. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and the European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery jointly nominated a panel of experts to develop guidelines for the recognition, treatment and prevention of cardiac arrest in the perioperative period. A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. All searches were restricted to publications from 1980 to 2019 inclusive and to the English, French, Italian and Spanish languages. The authors also contributed individual, independent literature searches. RESULTS: This guideline contains background information and recommendation for the treatment of cardiac arrest in the operating room environment, and addresses controversial topics such as open chest cardiac massage (OCCM), resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion (REBOA) and resuscitative thoracotomy, pericardiocentesis, needle decompression and thoracostomy. CONCLUSION: Successful prevention and management of cardiac arrest during anaesthesia and surgery requires anticipation, early recognition and a clear treatment plan. The ready availability of expert staff and equipment must also be taken into consideration. Success not only depends on medical knowledge, technical skills and a well organised team using crew resource management but also on an institutional safety culture embedded in everyday practice through continuous education, training and multidisciplinary co-operation.

Guidelines and principles for the care of the cardiothoracic transplant patient in the intensive care unit.

Heart and lung transplant recipients require care provided by clinicians from multiple different specialties, each contributing unique expertise and perspective. The period the patient spends in the intensive care unit is one of the most critical times in the perioperative trajectory. Various organizational models of intensive care exist, including those led by intensivists, surgeons, transplant cardiologists, and pulmonologists. Coordinating timely efficient intensive care is an essential and logistically difficult goal. The present work product of the American Society of Transplantation's Thoracic and Critical Care Community of Practice, Critical Care Task Force outlines operational guidelines and principles that may be applied in different organizational models to optimize the delivery of intensive care for the cardiothoracic organ recipient.

Nationwide Clinical Practice Patterns of Anesthesiology Critical Care Physicians: A Survey to Members of the Society of Critical Care Anesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing contributions of critical care anesthesiologists to clinical practice, research, and administrative leadership of intensive care units (ICUs), relatively little is known about the subspecialty-specific clinical practice environment. An understanding of contemporary clinical practice is essential to recognize the opportunities and challenges facing critical care anesthesia, optimize staffing patterns, assess sustainability and satisfaction, and strategically plan for future activity, scope, and training. This study surveyed intensivists who are members of the Society of Critical Care Anesthesiologists (SOCCA) to evaluate practice patterns of critical care anesthesiologists, including compensation, types of ICUs covered, models of overnight ICU coverage, and relationships between these factors. We hypothesized that variability in compensation and practice patterns would be observed between individuals. METHODS: Board-certified critical care anesthesiologists practicing in the United States were identified using the SOCCA membership distribution list and invited to take a voluntary online survey between May and June 2021. Multiple-choice questions with both single- and multiple-select options were used for answers with categorical data, and adaptive questioning was used to clarify stem-based responses. Respondents were asked to describe practice patterns at their respective institutions and provide information about their demographics, salaries, effort in ICUs, as well as other activities. RESULTS: A total of 490 participants were invited to take this survey, and 157 (response rate 32%) surveys were completed and analyzed. The majority of respondents were White (73%), male (69%), and younger than 50 years of age (82%). The cardiothoracic/cardiovascular ICU was the most common practice setting, with 69.5% of respondents reporting time working in this unit. Significant variability was observed in ICU practice patterns. Respondents reported spending an equal proportion of their time in clinical practice in the operating rooms and ICUs (median, 40%; interquartile range [IQR], 20%-50%), whereas a smaller proportion-primarily those who completed their training before 2009-reported administrative or research activities. Female respondents reported salaries that were $36,739 less than male respondents; however, this difference was not statistically different, and after adjusting for age and practice type, these differences were less pronounced (-$27,479.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], -$57,232.61 to $2273.03; P = .07). CONCLUSIONS: These survey data provide a current snapshot of anesthesiology critical care clinical practice patterns in the United States. Our findings may inform decision-making around the initiation and expansion of critical care services and optimal staffing patterns, as well as provide a basis for further work that focuses on intensivist satisfaction and burnout.

Shape Matters: A Neglected Feature of Medication Safety : Why Regulating the Shape of Medication Containers Can Improve Medication Safety.

This paper aims to highlight how to reduce medication errors through the implementation of human factors science to the design features of medication containers. Despite efforts to employ automation for increased safety and decreased workload, medication administration in hospital wards is still heavily dependent on human operators (pharmacists, nurses, physicians, etc.). Improving this multi-step process requires its being studied and designed as an interface in a complex socio-technical system. Human factors engineering, also known as ergonomics, involves designing socio-technical systems to improve overall system performance, and reduces the risk of system, and in particular, operator, failures. The incorporation of human factors principles into the design of the work environment and tools that are in use during medication administration could improve this process. During periods of high workload, the cognitive effort necessary to work through a very demanding process may overwhelm even expert operators. In such conditions, the entire system should facilitate the human operator's high level of performance. Regarding medications, clinicians should be provided with as many perceptual cues as possible to facilitate medication identification. Neglecting the shape of the container as one of the features that differentiates between classes of medications is a lost opportunity to use a helpful characteristic, and medication administration failures that happen in the absence of such intentional design arise from "designer error" rather than "user error". Guidelines that define a container's shape for each class of medication would compel pharmaceutical manufacturers to be compatible and would eliminate the confusion that arises when a hospital changes the supplier of a given medication.

Intensivists' perceptions of what is missing in their compassionate care during interactions in the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: We proposed that the behaviors that demonstrate compassionate care in the intensive care unit (ICU) can be self-assessed and improved among ICU clinicians. Literature showing views of intensivists about their own compassionate care attitudes is missing. METHODS: This was an observational, prospective, cross-sectional study. We surveyed clinicians who are members of professional societies of intensive care using the modified Schwartz Center Compassionate Care Scale® (SCCCS) about their self-reported compassionate care. A modified SCCCS instrument was disseminated via an email sent to the members of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine between March and June 2021. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-three clinicians completed the survey from a cohort of 1000 members who responded (32.3% response rate). The majority (54%) of respondents were male physicians of 49 (+ - 10 SD) years of age and 19 (12 + - SD) years in practice. The mean SCCCS was 88.5 (out of 100) with an average score of 8 for each question (out of 10), showing a high self-assessed physician rating of their compassionate care in the ICU. There was a positive association with age and years in practice with a higher score, especially for women ages 30-50 years (P = 0.03). Years in practice was also independently associated with greater compassion scores (p < 0.001). Lower scores were given to behaviors that reflect understanding perspectives of families and patients and showing caring and sensitivity. In contrast, the top scores were given to behaviors that included conducting family discussions and showing respect. CONCLUSION: Physicians in the ICU self-score high in compassionate care, especially if they are more experienced, female, and older. Self-identified areas that need improvement are the humanistic qualities requiring sensitivity, such as cognitive empathy, which involves perspective-taking, reflective listening, asking open-ended questions, and understanding the patient's context and worldview. These can be addressed in further clinical and ICU quality improvement initiatives.

How Common SOFA and Ventilator Time Trial Criteria Would Have Performed During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Observational Simulated Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate how key aspects of New York State Ventilator Allocation Guidelines (NYSVAG)-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score criteria and ventilator time trials -might perform with respect to the frequency of ventilator reallocation and survival to hospital discharge in a simulated cohort of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: Single center retrospective observational and simulation cohort study of 884 critically ill COVID-19 patients undergoing ventilator allocation per NYSVAG. RESULTS: In total, 742 patients (83.9%) would have had their ventilator reallocated during the 11-day observation period, 280 (37.7%) of whom would have otherwise survived to hospital discharge if provided with a ventilator. Only 65 (18.1%) of the observed surviving patients would have survived by NYSVAG. Extending ventilator time trials from 2 to 5 days resulted in a 49.2% increase in simulated survival to discharge. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of a protracted respiratory pandemic, implementation of NYSVAG or similar protocols could lead to a high degree of ventilator reallocation, including withdrawal from patients who might otherwise survive. Longer ventilator time trials might lead to improved survival for COVID-19 patients given their protracted respiratory failure. Further studies are needed to understand the survival of patients receiving reallocated ventilators to determine whether implementation of NYSVAG would improve overall survival.

Automated interpretable discovery of heterogeneous treatment effectiveness: A COVID-19 case study.

Testing multiple treatments for heterogeneous (varying) effectiveness with respect to many underlying risk factors requires many pairwise tests; we would like to instead automatically discover and visualize patient archetypes and predictors of treatment effectiveness using multitask machine learning. In this paper, we present a method to estimate these heterogeneous treatment effects with an interpretable hierarchical framework that uses additive models to visualize expected treatment benefits as a function of patient factors (identifying personalized treatment benefits) and concurrent treatments (identifying combinatorial treatment benefits). This method achieves state-of-the-art predictive power for COVID-19 in-hospital mortality and interpretable identification of heterogeneous treatment benefits. We first validate this method on the large public MIMIC-IV dataset of ICU patients to test recovery of heterogeneous treatment effects. Next we apply this method to a proprietary dataset of over 3000 patients hospitalized for COVID-19, and find evidence of heterogeneous treatment effectiveness predicted largely by indicators of inflammation and thrombosis risk: patients with few indicators of thrombosis risk benefit most from treatments against inflammation, while patients with few indicators of inflammation risk benefit most from treatments against thrombosis. This approach provides an automated methodology to discover heterogeneous and individualized effectiveness of treatments.

Time-Varying Mortality Risk Suggests Increased Impact of Thrombosis in Hospitalized Covid-19 Patients.

Treatment protocols, treatment availability, disease understanding, and viral characteristics have changed over the course of the Covid-19 pandemic; as a result, the risks associated with patient comorbidities and biomarkers have also changed. We add to the ongoing conversation regarding inflammation, hemostasis and vascular function in Covid-19 by performing a time-varying observational analysis of over 4000 patients hospitalized for Covid-19 in a New York City hospital system from March 2020 to August 2021 to elucidate the changing impact of thrombosis, inflammation, and other risk factors on in-hospital mortality. We find that the predictive power of biomarkers of thrombosis risk have increased over time, suggesting an opportunity for improved care by identifying and targeting therapies for patients with elevated thrombophilic propensity.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Research Opportunities for Infection and Blood Purification Therapies.

Patients with infection can develop sepsis, and their mortality can be high. An important aspect in the treatment of sepsis is adequate management of the infection. DATA SOURCES: Using a modified Delphi approach, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign research committee recently published a series of 26 priorities for sepsis and septic shock. STUDY SELECTION: Task force members with specific expertise were tasked with generating expanded reviews for all infection questions and a subset of adjunctive therapy questions from the larger list of sepsis priorities. Each question was addressed by one of the six task force members. DATA EXTRACTION: In-depth reviews were then edited by the group as a whole, with added input from the committee cochairs. DATA SYNTHESIS: Six questions were addressed: 1) should empiric antibiotic combination therapy be used in sepsis or septic shock? 2) does optimization of antimicrobial pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics impact patient outcomes in sepsis? 3) should viral reactivation resulting from sepsis-induced immunosuppression be treated with antiviral therapy in critically ill septic patients? 4) should rapid diagnostic tests be implemented in clinical practice? 5) what is the role of lung-protective ventilation in sepsis patients without acute respiratory distress syndrome? and 6) how do we determine the efficacy of "blood purification" therapies such as endotoxin absorbers, cytokine absorbers, and plasmapheresis. CONCLUSIONS: The research committee members for the Surviving Sepsis Campaign aimed to explore research questions in order to provide existing evidence and highlight areas of uncertainty and future directions.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: research priorities for the administration, epidemiology, scoring and identification of sepsis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify priorities for administrative, epidemiologic and diagnostic research in sepsis. DESIGN: As a follow-up to a previous consensus statement about sepsis research, members of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Committee, representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine addressed six questions regarding care delivery, epidemiology, organ dysfunction, screening, identification of septic shock, and information that can predict outcomes in sepsis. METHODS: Six questions from the Scoring/Identification and Administration sections of the original Research Priorities publication were explored in greater detail to better examine the knowledge gaps and rationales for questions that were previously identified through a consensus process. RESULTS: The document provides a framework for priorities in research to address the following questions: (1) What is the optimal model of delivering sepsis care?; (2) What is the epidemiology of sepsis susceptibility and response to treatment?; (3) What information identifies organ dysfunction?; (4) How can we screen for sepsis in various settings?; (5) How do we identify septic shock?; and (6) What in-hospital clinical information is associated with important outcomes in patients with sepsis? CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial knowledge of sepsis epidemiology and ways to identify and treat sepsis patients, but many gaps remain. Areas of uncertainty identified in this manuscript can help prioritize initiatives to improve an understanding of individual patient and demographic heterogeneity with sepsis and septic shock, biomarkers and accurate patient identification, organ dysfunction, and ways to improve sepsis care.