We present these guidelines to help physicians provide high-quality end of life (EOL) care in the ICU. Future studies should address their effectiveness from both critical care team and family perspectives.

BackgroundPatients with 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1pdm09)-related critical illness were frequently treated with systemic corticosteroids. While observational studies have reported significant corticosteroid-associated mortality after adjusting for baseline differences in patients treated with corticosteroids or not, corticosteroids have remained a common treatment in subsequent influenza outbreaks, including avian influenza A(H7N9). Our objective was to describe the use of corticosteroids in these patients and investigate predictors of steroid prescription and clinical outcomes, adjusting for both baseline and time-dependent factors.MethodsIn an observational cohort study of adults with H1N1pdm09-related critical illness from 51 Canadian ICUs, we investigated predictors of steroid administration and outcomes of patients who received and those who did not receive corticosteroids. We adjusted for potential baseline confounding using multivariate logistic regression and propensity score analysis and adjusted for potential time-dependent confounding using marginal structural models.ResultsAmong 607 patients, corticosteroids were administered to 280 patients (46.1 %) at a median daily dose of 227 (interquartile range, 154–443) mg of hydrocortisone equivalents for a median of 7.0 (4.0–13.0) days. Compared with patients who did not receive corticosteroids, patients who received corticosteroids had higher hospital crude mortality (25.5 % vs 16.4 %, p = 0.007) and fewer ventilator-free days at 28 days (12.5 ± 10.7 vs 15.7 ± 10.1, p < 0.001). The odds ratio association between corticosteroid use and hospital mortality decreased from 1.85 (95 % confidence interval 1.12–3.04, p = 0.02) with multivariate logistic regression, to 1.71 (1.05–2.78, p = 0.03) after adjustment for propensity score to receive corticosteroids, to 1.52 (0.90–2.58, p = 0.12) after case-matching on propensity score, and to 0.96 (0.28–3.28, p = 0.95) using marginal structural modeling to adjust for time-dependent between-group differences.ConclusionsCorticosteroids were commonly prescribed for H1N1pdm09-related critical illness. Adjusting for only baseline between-group differences suggested a significant increased risk of death associated with corticosteroids. However, after adjusting for time-dependent differences, we found no significant association between corticosteroids and mortality. These findings highlight the challenges and importance in adjusting for baseline and time-dependent confounders when estimating clinical effects of treatments using observational studies.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-016-1230-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: During the terminal withdrawal of life-sustaining measures for intensive care patients, the removal of respiratory support remains an ambiguous practice. Globally, perceptions and experiences of best practice vary due to the limited evidence in this area. Aim: To identify, appraise and synthesise the latest evidence around terminal withdrawal of mechanical ventilation in adult intensive care units specific to perceptions, experiences and practices. Design: Mixed methods systematic review and narrative synthesis. A review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018086495). Data sources: Four electronic databases were systematically searched (Medline, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL). Obtained articles published between January 2008 and January 2020 were screened for eligibility. All included papers were appraised using relevant appraisal tools. Results: Twenty-five papers were included in the review. Findings from the included papers were synthesised into four themes: ‘clinicians’ perceptions and practices’; ‘time to death and predictors’; ‘analgesia and sedation practices’; ‘physiological and psychological impact’. Conclusions: Perceptions, experiences and practices of terminal withdrawal of mechanical ventilation vary significantly across the globe. Current knowledge highlights that the time to death after withdrawal of mechanical ventilation is very short. Predictors for shorter duration could be considered by clinicians and guide the choice of pharmacological interventions to address distressing symptoms that patients may experience. Clinicians ought to prepare patients, families and relatives for the withdrawal process and the expected progression and provide them with immediate and long-term support following withdrawal. Further research is needed to improve current evidence and better inform practice guidelines.

No abstract

Background Donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) is responsible for the largest increase in deceased donation over the past decade. When the Canadian DCD guideline was published in 2006, it included recommendations to create standard policies and procedures for withdrawal of life-sustaining measures (WLSM) as well as quality assurance frameworks for this practice. In 2016, the Canadian Critical Care Society produced a guideline for WLSM that requires modifications to facilitate implementation when DCD is part of the endof-life care plan.

No abstract

No abstract