National Survey: How Do We Approach the Patient at Risk of Clinical Deterioration outside the ICU in the Spanish Context?

BACKGROUND: Anticipating and avoiding preventable intrahospital cardiac arrest and clinical deterioration are important priorities for international healthcare systems and institutions. One of the internationally followed strategies to improve this matter is the introduction of the Rapid Response Systems (RRS). Although there is vast evidence from the international community, the evidence reported in a Spanish context is scarce. METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional research consisting of a voluntary 31-question online survey was performed. The Spanish Society of Intensive, Critical and Coronary Care Medicine (SEMICYUC) supported the research. RESULTS: We received 62 fully completed surveys distributed within 13 of the 17 regions and two autonomous cities of Spain. Thirty-two of the participants had an established Rapid Response Team (RRT). Common frequency on measuring vital signs was at least once per shift but other frequencies were contemplated (48.4%), usually based on professional criteria (69.4%), as only 12 (19.4%) centers used Early Warning Scores (EWS) or automated alarms on abnormal parameters. In the sample, doctors, nurses (55%), and other healthcare professionals (39%) could activate the RRT via telephone, but only 11.3% of the sample enacted this at early signs of deterioration. The responders on the RRT are the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), doctors, and nurses, who are available 24/7 most of the time. Concerning the education and training of general ward staff and RRT members, this varies from basic to advanced and specific-specialized level, simulating a growing educational methodology among participants. A great number of participants have emergency resuscitation equipment (drugs, airway adjuncts, and defibrillators) in their general wards. In terms of quality improvement, only half of the sample registered RRT activity indicators. In terms of the use of communication and teamwork techniques, the most used is clinical debriefing in 29 centers. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of the concept of RRS, we found in our context that we are in the early stages of the establishment process, as it is not yet a generalized concept in most of our hospitals. The centers that have it are in still in the process of maturing the system and adapting themselves to our context.

Aerosol therapy in intensive and intermediate care units: prospective observation of 2808 critically ill patients.

PURPOSE: Unlike in the outpatient setting, delivery of aerosols to critically ill patients may be considered complex, particularly in ventilated patients, and benefits remain to be proven. Many factors influence aerosol delivery and recommendations exist, but little is known about knowledge translation into clinical practice. METHODS: Two-week cross-sectional study to assess the prevalence of aerosol therapy in 81 intensive and intermediate care units in 22 countries. All aerosols delivered to patients breathing spontaneously, ventilated invasively or noninvasively (NIV) were recorded, and drugs, devices, ventilator settings, circuit set-up, humidification and side effects were noted. RESULTS: A total of 9714 aerosols were administered to 678 of the 2808 admitted patients (24 %, CI95 22-26 %), whereas only 271 patients (10 %) were taking inhaled medication before admission. There were large variations among centers, from 0 to 57 %. Among intubated patients 22 % (n = 262) received aerosols, and 50 % (n = 149) of patients undergoing NIV, predominantly (75 %) inbetween NIV sessions. Bronchodilators (n = 7960) and corticosteroids (n = 1233) were the most frequently delivered drugs (88 % overall), predominantly but not exclusively (49 %) administered to patients with chronic airway disease. An anti-infectious drug was aerosolized 509 times (5 % of all aerosols) for nosocomial infections. Jet-nebulizers were the most frequently used device (56 %), followed by metered dose inhalers (23 %). Only 106 (<1 %) mild side effects were observed, despite frequent suboptimal set-ups such as an external gas supply of jet nebulizers for intubated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Aerosol therapy concerns every fourth critically ill patient and one-fifth of ventilated patients.