Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rapid Sequence Intubation in the Critically Ill Adult Patient.

RATIONALE: Controversies and practice variations exist related to the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic management of the airway during rapid sequence intubation (RSI). OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations on pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic topics related to RSI. DESIGN: A guideline panel of 20 Society of Critical Care Medicine members with experience with RSI and emergency airway management met virtually at least monthly from the panel's inception in 2018 through 2020 and face-to-face at the 2020 Critical Care Congress. The guideline panel included pharmacists, physicians, a nurse practitioner, and a respiratory therapist with experience in emergency medicine, critical care medicine, anesthesiology, and prehospital medicine; consultation with a methodologist and librarian was available. A formal conflict of interest policy was followed and enforced throughout the guidelines-development process. METHODS: Panelists created Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) questions and voted to select the most clinically relevant questions for inclusion in the guideline. Each question was assigned to a pair of panelists, who refined the PICO wording and reviewed the best available evidence using predetermined search terms. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework was used throughout and recommendations of "strong" or "conditional" were made for each PICO question based on quality of evidence and panel consensus. Recommendations were provided when evidence was actionable; suggestions, when evidence was equivocal; and best practice statements, when the benefits of the intervention outweighed the risks, but direct evidence to support the intervention did not exist. RESULTS: From the original 35 proposed PICO questions, 10 were selected. The RSI guideline panel issued one recommendation (strong, low-quality evidence), seven suggestions (all conditional recommendations with moderate-, low-, or very low-quality evidence), and two best practice statements. The panel made two suggestions for a single PICO question and did not make any suggestions for one PICO question due to lack of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Using GRADE principles, the interdisciplinary panel found substantial agreement with respect to the evidence supporting recommendations for RSI. The panel also identified literature gaps that might be addressed by future research.

Was COVID-19 Associated With Worsening Inequities in Stroke Treatment and Outcomes?

Background COVID-19 stressed hospitals and may have disproportionately affected the stroke outcomes and treatment of Black and Hispanic individuals. Methods and Results This retrospective study used 100% Medicare Provider Analysis and Review file data from between 2016 and 2020. We used interrupted time series analyses to examine whether the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated disparities in stroke outcomes and reperfusion therapy. Among 1 142 560 hospitalizations for acute ischemic strokes, 90 912 (8.0%) were Hispanic individuals; 162 752 (14.2%) were non-Hispanic Black individuals; and 888 896 (77.8%) were non-Hispanic White individuals. The adjusted odds of mortality increased by 51% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.34-1.69]; P<0.001), whereas the rates of nonhome discharges decreased by 11% (aOR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.82-0.96]; P=0.003) for patients hospitalized during weeks when the hospital's proportion of patients with COVID-19 was >30%. The overall rates of motor deficits (P=0.25) did not increase, and the rates of reperfusion therapy did not decrease as the weekly COVID-19 burden increased. Black patients had lower 30-day mortality (aOR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.69-0.72]; P<0.001) but higher rates of motor deficits (aOR, 1.14 [95% CI, 1.12-1.16]; P<0.001) than White individuals. Hispanic patients had lower 30-day mortality and similar rates of motor deficits compared with White individuals. There was no differential increase in adverse outcomes or reduction in reperfusion therapy among Black and Hispanic individuals compared with White individuals as the weekly COVID-19 burden increased. Conclusions This national study of Medicare patients found no evidence that the hospital COVID-19 burden exacerbated disparities in treatment and outcomes for Black and Hispanic individuals admitted with an acute ischemic stroke.

Prehospital Airway Management Training and Education: An NAEMSP Position Statement and Resource Document.

AbstractAirway management competency extends beyond technical skills to encompass a comprehensive approach to optimize patient outcomes. Initial and continuing education for airway management must therefore extend beyond a narrow focus on psychomotor skills and task completion to include appreciation of underlying pathophysiology, clinical judgment, and higher-order decision making. NAEMSP recommends:Active engagement in deliberate practice should be the guiding approach for developing and maintaining competence in airway management.EMS learners and clinicians must be educated in an escalating approach to airway management, where basic airway maneuvers form the central focus.Educational activities should extend beyond fundamental knowledge to focus on the development of clinical judgment.Optimization of patient outcomes should be valued over performance of individual airway management skills.Credentialing and continuing education activities in airway management are essential to advance clinicians beyond entry-level competency.Initial and continuing education programs should be responsive to advances in the evidence base and maintain adaptability to re-assess content and expected outcomes on a continual basis.

Open-label randomized trial of the safety and efficacy of a single dose conivaptan to raise serum sodium in patients with traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Conivaptan is an arginine-vasopressin-receptor antagonist approved for the treatment of hyponatremia. We hypothesized that administration of conivaptan to normonatremic patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) is safe and could reduce intracranial pressure (ICP). METHODS: Open-label, randomized, controlled trial enrolling 10 subjects within 24 h of severe TBI to receive a single 20 mg dose of conivaptan (n = 5) or usual care (n = 5). The primary endpoint was the evaluation of the safety profile defined by serum sodium increases averaging >1 mEq/h when measured every 4 h and any adverse events. Secondary endpoints were 48-h serum sodium, sodium load, change in ICP, and urine output. RESULTS: Ten patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Three patients (2 conivaptan, 1 usual care group) experienced brief sodium increases averaging >1 mEq/h, with no patients achieving Na >160 mEq/l. There were no drug-related serious adverse events. At 48 h, the mean sodium was 142 ± 6 mEq/l (conivaptan) and 144 ± 10 mEq/l (usual care, P = 0.71). 48-h sodium load was 819 ± 724 mEq in the conivaptan and 1,137 ± 1,165 mEq in the usual care group (P = 0.62). At 4 h, serum sodium was higher (P = 0.02) and ICP was lower (P = 0.046) in the conivaptan compared with usual care group. 24-h but not 48-h urine output was different between the two groups (P < 0.01 and P = 0.20, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that a single dose conivaptan is safe in non-hyponatremic patients with severe TBI and may reduce ICP. Further studies are needed to establish the effect of conivaptan on clinically relevant endpoints, and its role in the management of intracranial hypertension.