Incidence of propofol-related infusion syndrome in critically ill adults: a prospective, multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: While propofol is associated with an infusion syndrome (PRIS) that may cause death, the incidence of PRIS is unknown. Determining the incidence of PRIS and the frequency of PRIS-related clinical manifestations are key steps prior to the completion of any controlled studies investigating PRIS. This prospective, multicenter study sought to determine the incidence of PRIS and PRIS-related clinical manifestations in a large cohort of critically ill adults prescribed propofol. METHODS: Critically ill adults from 11 academic medical centers administered an infusion of propofol for [>or=] 24 hours were monitored at baseline and then on a daily basis until propofol was discontinued for the presence of 11 different PRIS-associated clinical manifestations and risk factors derived from 83 published case reports of PRIS. RESULTS: Among 1017 patients [medical (35%), neurosurgical (25%)], PRIS (defined as metabolic acidosis plus cardiac dysfunction and [>or=] 1 of: rhabdomyolysis, hypertriglyceridemia or renal failure occurring after the start of propofol therapy) developed in 11 (1.1%) patients an average of 3 (1-6) [median (range)] days after the start of propofol. While most (91%) of the patients who developed PRIS were receiving a vasopressor (80% initiated after the start of propofol therapy), few received a propofol dose >83 mcg/kg/min (18%) or died (18%). Compared to the 1006 patients who did not develop PRIS, the APACHE II score (25 +/- 6 vs 20 +/- 7, P = 0.01) was greater in patients with PRIS but both the duration of propofol use (P = 0.43) and ICU length of stay (P = 0.82) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Despite using a conservative definition for PRIS, and only considering new-onset PRIS clinical manifestations, the incidence of PRIS slightly exceeds 1%. Future controlled studies focusing on evaluating whether propofol manifests the derangements of critical illness more frequently than other sedatives will need to be large. These studies should also investigate the mechanism(s) and risk factors for PRIS.

John M. Eisenberg Patient Safety Awards. System innovation: Concord Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The Cardiac Surgery Program at Concord Hospital (Concord, NH) restructured clinical teamwork for improved safety and effectiveness on the basis of theory and practice from human factors science, aviation safety, and high-reliability organization theory. A team-based, collaborative rounds process--the Concord Collaborative Care Model--that involved use of a structured communications protocol was conducted daily at each patient's bedside. METHODS: The entire care team agreed to meet at the same time each day (8:45 AM to 9:30 AM) to share information and develop a plan of care for each patient, with patient and family members as active participants. The cardiac surgery team developed a structured communications protocol adapted from human factors science. To provide a forum for discussion of team goals and progress and to address system-level concerns, a biweekly system rounds process was established. RESULTS: Following implementation of collaborative rounds, mortality of Concord Hospital's cardiac surgery patients declined significantly from expected rates. Satisfaction rates of open heart patients scores were consistently in the 97th-99th percentile nationally. A quality of work life survey indicated that in every category, providers expressed greater satisfaction with the collaborative care process than with the traditional rounds process. Practice patterns in the Cardiac Surgery Program at Concord Hospital have changed to a much more collaborative and participatory process, with improved outcomes, happier patients, and more satisfied practitioners. A culture of continuous program improvement has been implemented that continues to evolve and produce benefits.