HAL is a multidisciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.

SummaryWhile previous studies have investigated the country of origin of anaesthetic publications, they have generally used a MEDLINE computer search to identify original articles and have often excluded non-English language articles. We undertook a hand-search of journals in the Journal Citation Reports Ò using the subject category of Anesthesiology. We quantified the number of original articles, editorials, review articles, case reports and correspondence attributed to each country. We also calculated the proportion of articles of each type from countries of each national income category. We analysed 9684 articles published in 2007 and

BackgroundAcute pancreatitis (AP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality in its most severe forms. Most patients with severe AP require intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation, frequently for more than 7 days, which is associated with the worst outcome. Recent increasing evidence from preclinical and clinical studies support the beneficial effects of epidural analgesia (EA) in AP, such as increased gut barrier function and splanchnic, pancreatic and renal perfusion, decreased liver damage and inflammatory response, and reduced mortality. Because recent studies suggest that EA might be a safe procedure in the critically ill, we sought to determine whether EA reduced AP-associated respiratory failure and other major clinical outcomes in patients with AP.Methods and analysisThe Epidural Analgesia for Pancreatitis (EPIPAN) trial is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled two-arm trial with assessor-blinded outcome assessment. The EPIPAN trial will randomise 148 patients with AP requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) to receive EA (with patient-controlled epidural administration of ropivacaine and sufentanil) combined with standard care based on current recommendations on the treatment of AP (interventional group), or standard care alone (reference group). The primary outcome is the number of ventilator-free days at day 30. Secondary outcomes include main complications of AP (eg, organ failure and mortality, among others), levels of biological markers of systemic inflammation, epithelial lung injury, renal failure, and healthcare-associated costs.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the appropriate ethics committee (CPP Sud-Est VI). Informed consent is required. If the combined application of EA and standard care proves superior to standard care alone in patients with AP in the ICU, the use of EA may become standard practice in experienced centres, thereby decreasing potential complications related to AP and its burden in critically ill patients. The results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT02126332.

No abstract

No abstract

Background and aimsWe reported the validation of the 18-item version of the ‘Inconforts des Patients de REAnimation (IPREA)’ questionnaire that includes 2 new items exploring feeling depressed and shortness of breath during an intensive care unit (ICU) stay.MethodsThe validation process was integrated in a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled, two-parallel group study built to assess the effectiveness of a tailored multicomponent program for reducing self-perceived discomfort in the ICU. All patients aged 18 years or older who survived an ICU stay of 3 calendar days or more were eligible for inclusion. Data collection included demographics (sex, age), type of admission (medical and surgical), health status scores at admission (Knaus score and McCabe index, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II), specific ICU therapeutics such as mechanical ventilation (MV), noninvasive ventilation (NIV), use of vasopressors, or renal replacement therapy (RRT), and ICU stay duration.ResultsA total of 994 patients were included. The initial structure of IPREA was confirmed using confirmatory factor analysis showing satisfactory fit (RMSEA at 0.042, CFI at 0.912). No multidimensional structure was identified, allowing the calculation of an overall discomfort score. The three highest discomforts were sleep deprivation, thirst, and perfusion lines and other devices, and the 3 lowest discomforts were limited visiting hours, hunger, and isolation. The overall discomfort score of the 18-item version of IPREA did not differ between men and women. Higher age was significantly correlated with a lower overall discomfort score. While MV was not linked to self-reported discomfort, patients treated by NIV reported higher overall discomfort scores than patients not treated by NIV.ConclusionThe 18-item version of IPREA is easy to use and possesses satisfactory psychometric properties. The availability of a reliable and valid French questionnaire asking about patients’ self-perceived ICU discomforts enables feedback from the health care team to be incorporated in a continuous quality health care improvement strategy.Trial registrationclinicaltrial.gov NCT02442934 (registration date: May 18, 2015, retrospectively registered).

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT02442934.

Background We determined whether an audit on the adherence to guidelines for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) for can improve the outcomes of patients in intensive care units (ICUs). Methods This study was conducted at 35 ICUs in 30 hospitals. We included consecutive adult patients hospitalized in ICUs for three days or more. After a three-month baseline period followed by the dissemination of recommendations, an audit on the compliance to recommendations (audit period) was followed by a three-month cluster-randomized trial. We randomly assigned ICUs to either audit and feedback (intervention group) or participation to a national registry (control group). The primary outcome was the duration of ICU stay. Results Among 1,856 patients enrolled, 602, 669, and 585 were recruited in the baseline, audit, and intervention periods, respectively. The composite measure of compliance was 47(38-56)% in the intervention group and 42(25-53)% in the control group (p=0.001). As compared to the baseline period, the ICU length of stay was reduced by 3.2 days in the intervention group (p=0.07) and by 2.8 days in the control group (p=0.02). The duration of ICU stay was 7 (5–14) in the control group and 9 (5–20) days in the intervention group (p=0.10). After adjustment for unbalanced baseline characteristics, the hazard ratio for being discharged alive from ICU in the control group was 1.17 (95% CI, 0.69 to 2.01; p=0.10). Conclusions The publication of French guidelines for HAP was associated with a reduction of the ICU length of stay. However, the realization of an audit to improve their application did not further improve outcomes.