No abstract

No abstract

SummaryBackgroundInfluenza causes significant morbidity and mortality despite currently available treatments. Anecdotal reports suggest plasma with high antibody titers towards influenza may be of benefit in the treatment of severe influenza.MethodsWe conducted a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase 2 trial at 29 academic medical centers in the United States to assess the safety and efficacy of anti-influenza plasma with hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) antibody titers of ≥ 1:80 to the infecting strain. Hospitalized children and adults (including pregnant women) with severe influenza A or B (defined as hypoxia or tachypnea) were randomly assigned to receive either 2 units (or pediatric equivalent) of anti-influenza plasma plus standard care (P+S), versus standard care alone (S), and were followed for 28 days. The primary endpoint was time to normalization of patients’ respiratory status (respiratory rate of ≤ 20 for adults or age defined thresholds of 20–38 for children), and a room air saturation of oxygen ≥ 93%. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01052480FindingsBetween January 13, 2011 and March 2, 2015, 113 participants were screened, and 98 were randomized. Of the participants with confirmed influenza, 28 of 42 (67%) of P+S participants normalized their respiratory status by Day 28, as compared to 24 of 45 (53%) of S participants (p=0·069). The estimated hazard ratio comparing P+S to S was 1·71 (95% CI: 0·96 to 3·06). Six participants died, 1 (2%) and 5 (10%) from the P+S and S arms respectively (p=0·093). P+S participants had non-significant reductions in days in hospital (median 6 vs. 11 days, p=0·13) and days on mechanical ventilation (median 0 vs. 3 days, p=0·14), and significantly improved clinical status at Day 7 (p=0·020). Fewer P+S participants experienced SAEs compared to S recipients (20% vs. 38%, p= 0·041), the most frequent of which were acute respiratory distress syndrome (1 [2%] vs 2 [4%]) and stroke (1 [2%] vs 2 [4%]).InterpretationResults from this Phase II randomized trial of immune plasma for the treatment of severe influenza provides support for a possible benefit of immunotherapy across the primary and secondary endpoints. A Phase III randomized trial is now underway to further evaluate this intervention.

Objectives: To assess—by literature review and expert consensus—workforce, workload, and burnout considerations among intensivists and advanced practice providers. Design: Data were synthesized from monthly expert consensus and literature review. Setting: Workforce and Workload section workgroup of the Academic Leaders in Critical Care Medicine Task Force. Measurements and Main Results: Multidisciplinary care teams led by intensivists are an essential component of critical care delivery. Advanced practice providers (nurse practitioners and physician assistants) are progressively being integrated into ICU practice models. The ever-increasing number of patients with complex, life-threatening diseases, concentration of ICU beds in few centralized hospitals, expansion of specialty ICU services, and desire for 24/7 availability have contributed to growing intensivist staffing concerns. Such staffing challenges may negatively impact practitioner wellness, team perception of care quality, time available for teaching, and length of stay when the patient to intensivist ratio is greater than or equal to 15. Enhanced team communication and reduction of practice variation are important factors for improved patient outcomes. A diverse workforce adds value and enrichment to the overall work environment. Formal succession planning for ICU leaders is crucial to the success of critical care organizations. Implementation of a continuous 24/7 ICU coverage care model in high-acuity, high-volume centers should be based on patient-centered outcomes. High levels of burnout syndrome are common among intensivists. Prospective analyses of interventions to decrease burnout within the ICU setting are limited. However, organizational interventions are felt to be more effective than those directed at individuals. Conclusions: Critical care workforce and staffing models are myriad and based on several factors including local culture and resources, ICU organization, and strategies to reduce burden on the ICU provider workforce. Prospective studies to assess and avoid the burnout syndrome among intensivists and advanced practice providers are needed.

No abstract

No abstract

Intensivists are increasingly needed to care for the critically ill and manage ICUs as ICU beds, utilization, acuity of illness, complexity of care and costs continue to rise. However, there is a nationwide shortage of intensivists that has occurred despite years of well publicized warnings of an impending workforce crisis from specialty societies and the federal government. The magnitude of the intensivist shortfall, however, is difficult to determine because there are many perspectives of optimal ICU administration, patient coverage and intensivist availability and a lack of national data on intensivist practices. Nevertheless, the intensivist shortfall is quite real as evidenced by the alternative solutions that hospitals are deploying to provide care for their critically ill patients. In the midst of these manpower struggles, the critical care environment is dynamically changing and becoming more stressful. Severe hospital bed availability and fiscal constraints are forcing ICUs to alter their approaches to triage, throughput and unit staffing. National and local organizations are mandating that hospitals comply with resource intensive and arguably unproven initiatives to monitor and improve patient safety and quality, and informatics systems. Lastly, there is an ongoing sense of professional dissatisfaction among intensivists and a lack of public awareness that critical care medicine is even a distinct specialty. This article offers proposals to increase the adult intensivist workforce through expansion and enhancements of internal medicine based critical care training programs, incentives for recent graduates to enter the critical care medicine field, suggestions for improvements in the critical care profession and workplace to encourage senior intensivists to remain in the field, proactive marketing of critical care, and expanded engagement by the critical care societies in the challenges facing intensivists.

Staphylococcus lugdunensis is a virulent coagulase-negative staphylococcus (CoNS) that behaves like Staphylococcus aureus. Toxic shock syndrome, osteomyelitis, septic arthritis and postoperative endopthalmitis have been observed. Endocarditis complicated by heart failure, periannular abscess formation and embolic phenomenon have brought particular attention to this CoNS. Mortality rates for endocarditis appear higher when compared with other CoNS. Owing to the laboratory methods used, identification may be misleading. β-lactam antimicrobials are recommended pending sensitivities. Evaluation for endocarditis should be pursued in bacteremic patients due to its pathogenic potential.