ObjectiveTo evaluate the implementation of a multidisciplinary rapid response team led by an intensive care physician at a university hospital.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed assessment forms that were completed during the assessments made by the rapid response team of a university hospital between March 2009 and February 2014.ResultsData were collected from 1,628 assessments performed by the rapid response team for 1,024 patients and included 1,423 code yellow events and 205 code blue events. The number of assessments was higher in the first year of operation of the rapid response team. The multivariate analysis indicated that age (OR 1.02; 95%CI 1.02 - 1.03; p < 0.001), being male (OR 1.48; 95%CI 1.09 - 2.01; p = 0.01), having more than one assessment (OR 3.31; 95%CI, 2.32 - 4.71; p < 0.001), hospitalization for clinical care (OR 1.77; 95%CI 1.29 - 2.42; p < 0.001), the request of admission to the intensive care unit after the code event (OR 4.75; 95%CI 3.43 - 6.59; p < 0.001), and admission to the intensive care unit before the code event (OR 2.13; 95%CI 1.41 - 3.21; p = 0.001) were risk factors for hospital mortality in patients who were seen for code yellow events.ConclusionThe hospital mortality rates were higher than those found in previous studies. The number of assessments was higher in the first year of operation of the rapid response team. Moreover, hospital mortality was higher among patients admitted for clinical care.

for the BaSICS investigators and the BRICNet members IMPORTANCE Slower intravenous fluid infusion rates could reduce the formation of tissue edema and organ dysfunction in critically ill patients; however, there are no data to support different infusion rates during fluid challenges for important outcomes such as mortality.OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of a slower infusion rate vs control infusion rate on 90-day survival in patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Unblinded randomized factorial clinical trial in 75 ICUs in Brazil, involving 11 052 patients requiring at least 1 fluid challenge and with 1 risk factor for worse outcomes were randomized from May 29, 2017, to March 2, 2020. Follow-up was concluded on October 29, 2020. Patients were randomized to 2 different infusion rates (reported in this article) and 2 different fluid types (balanced fluids or saline, reported separately).INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive fluid challenges at 2 different infusion rates; 5538 to the slower rate (333 mL/h) and 5514 to the control group (999 mL/h). Patients were also randomized to receive balanced solution or 0.9% saline using a factorial design. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was 90-day survival.RESULTS Of all randomized patients, 10 520 (95.2%) were analyzed (mean age, 61.1 years [SD, 17.0 years]; 44.2% were women) after excluding duplicates and consent withdrawals. Patients assigned to the slower rate received a mean of 1162 mL on the first day vs 1252 mL for the control group. By day 90, 1406 of 5276 patients (26.6%) in the slower rate group had died vs 1414 of 5244 (27.0%) in the control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96-1.11; P = .46). There was no significant interaction between fluid type and infusion rate (P = .98).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients in the intensive care unit requiring fluid challenges, infusing at a slower rate compared with a faster rate did not reduce 90-day mortality. These findings do not support the use of a slower infusion rate.

Purpose To analyze whether a viscoelastic mattress support surface can reduce the incidence of stage 2 pressure injuries compared to a standard hospital mattress with pyramidal overlay in critically ill patients. Method A randomized clinical trial with intention-to-treat analysis was carried out recruiting patients with Braden scale ≤14 on intensive care unit admission from April 2016 to April 2017. Patients were allocated into two groups: intervention group (viscoelastic mattress) and control group (standard mattress with pyramidal overlay). The level of significance adopted was 5%. Results A total of 62 patients were included in the study. There was a predominance of males (53%) and the mean age was 67.9 (SD 18.8) years. There were no differences in clinical or severity characteristics between the patients in the control group and the intervention group. Pressure injuries occurred in 35 patients, with a median time of 7 days (ITQ 4–10) from admission. The frequency of pressure injuries was higher in the control group (80.6%) compared to the intervention group (32.2%; p < 0.001). Conclusions Viscoelastic support surfaces reduced the incidence of pressure injuries in moderate or higher risk critically ill patients when compared to pyramidal support surfaces.

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate seasonal variations of clinical characteristics, therapeutic resource use, and outcomes of critically ill patients admitted to an intensive care unit. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study conducted from January 2011 to December 2016 in adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a University Hospital. Data were collected on the type of admission, APACHE II, SOFA, and TISS 28 scores at ICU admission. Length of hospital stay and vital status at hospital discharge were recorded. A significance level of 5% was adopted. RESULTS: During the study period, 3.711 patients were analyzed. Patients had a median age of 60.0 years (interquartile range = 45.0 − 73.0), and 59% were men. The independent risk factors associated with increased hospital mortality rate were age, chronic disease, seasonality, diagnostic category, need for mechanical ventilation and vasoactive drugs, presence of acute kidney injury, and sepsis at admission. CONCLUSION: It was possible to observe variations of the clinical characteristics and prognosis of patients; summer months presented a higher proportion of clinical and emergency surgery patients, with higher mortality rates. Sepsis at ICU admission did not show seasonal behavior. A seasonal pattern was found for mortality rate.

No abstract

Objective To obtain data on bed refusal in intensive care units in Brazil and to evaluate the use of triage systems by professionals. Methods A cross-sectional survey. Using the Delphi methodology, a questionnaire was created contemplating the objectives of the study. Physicians and nurses enrolled in the research network of the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira (AMIBnet) were invited to participate. A web platform (SurveyMonkey ® ) was used to distribute the questionnaire. The variables in this study were measured in categories and expressed as proportions. The chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test was used to verify associations. The significance level was set at 5%. Results In total, 231 professionals answered the questionnaire, representing all regions of the country. The national intensive care units had an occupancy rate of more than 90% always or frequently for 90.8% of the participants. Among the participants, 84.4% had already refused admitting patients to the intensive care unit due to the capacity of the unit. Half of the Brazilian institutions (49.7%) did not have triage protocols for admission to intensive beds. Conclusions Bed refusal due to high occupancy rates is common in Brazilian intensive care units. Even so, half of the services in Brazil do not adopt protocols for triage of beds.