Effective antimicrobial administration within the first hour of documented hypotension was associated with increased survival to hospital discharge in adult patients with septic shock. Despite a progressive increase in mortality rate with increasing delays, only 50% of septic shock patients received effective antimicrobial therapy within 6 hrs of documented hypotension.

No abstract

IntroductionData are sparse as to whether obesity influences the risk of death in critically ill patients with septic shock. We sought to examine the possible impact of obesity, as assessed by body mass index (BMI), on hospital mortality in septic shock patients.MethodsWe performed a nested cohort study within a retrospective database of patients with septic shock conducted in 28 medical centers in Canada, United States and Saudi Arabia between 1996 and 2008. Patients were classified according to the World Health Organization criteria for BMI. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between obesity and hospital mortality.ResultsOf the 8,670 patients with septic shock, 2,882 (33.2%) had height and weight data recorded at ICU admission and constituted the study group. Obese patients were more likely to have skin and soft tissue infections and less likely to have pneumonia with predominantly Gram-positive microorganisms. Crystalloid and colloid resuscitation fluids in the first six hours were given at significantly lower volumes per kg in the obese and very obese patients compared to underweight and normal weight patients (for crystalloids: 55.0 ± 40.1 ml/kg for underweight, 43.2 ± 33.4 for normal BMI, 37.1 ± 30.8 for obese and 27.7 ± 22.0 for very obese). Antimicrobial doses per kg were also different among BMI groups. Crude analysis showed that obese and very obese patients had lower hospital mortality compared to normal weight patients (odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.97 for obese and OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.85 for very obese patients). After adjusting for baseline characteristics and sepsis interventions, the association became non-significant (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.02 for obese and OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.04 for very obese).ConclusionsThe obesity paradox (lower mortality in the obese) documented in other populations is also observed in septic shock. This may be related in part to differences in patient characteristics. However, the true paradox may lie in the variations in the sepsis interventions, such as the administration of resuscitation fluids and antimicrobial therapy. Considering the obesity epidemic and its impact on critical care, further studies are warranted to examine whether a weight-based approach to common therapeutic interventions in septic shock influences outcome.

This document was developed through the collaborative efforts of the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the American College of Chest Physicians, and the Association of Organ Procurement Organizations. Under the auspices of these societies, a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional task force was convened, incorporating expertise in critical care medicine, organ donor management, and transplantation. Members of the task force were divided into 13 subcommittees, each focused on one of the following general or organ-specific areas: death determination using neurologic criteria, donation after circulatory death determination, authorization process, general contraindications to donation, hemodynamic management, endocrine dysfunction and hormone replacement therapy, pediatric donor management, cardiac donation, lung donation, liver donation, kidney donation, small bowel donation, and pancreas donation. Subcommittees were charged with generating a series of management-related questions related to their topic. For each question, subcommittees provided a summary of relevant literature and specific recommendations. The specific recommendations were approved by all members of the task force and then assembled into a complete document. Because the available literature was overwhelmingly comprised of observational studies and case series, representing low-quality evidence, a decision was made that the document would assume the form of a consensus statement rather than a formally graded guideline. The goal of this document is to provide critical care practitioners with essential information and practical recommendations related to management of the potential organ donor, based on the available literature and expert consensus.

rhIGF-I does not accelerate the recovery of renal function in ARF patients with substantial comorbidity.

No abstract

Patients transferred to a tertiary care ICU are generally more severely ill and consume more resources. However, they have similar adjusted mortality outcomes when compared with directly admitted patients. The difference in resource consumption is mainly attributable to the group of patients in the lowest predicted risk bracket.

Objective To assess the impact of EHR technology on the work and workflow of ICU physicians and compare time spent by ICU resident and attending physicians on various tasks before and after EHR implementation. Design EHR technology with electronic order management (CPOE, medication administration and pharmacy system) and physician documentation was implemented in October 2007. Measurement We collected a total of 289 h of observation pre- and post-EHR implementation. We directly observed the work of residents in three ICUs (adult medical/surgical ICU, pediatric ICU and neonatal ICU) and attending physicians in one ICU (adult medical/surgical ICU). Results EHR implementation had an impact on the time distribution of tasks as well as the temporal patterns of tasks. After EHR implementation, both residents and attending physicians spent more of their time on clinical review and documentation (40% and 55% increases, respectively). EHR implementation also affected the frequency of switching between tasks, which increased for residents (from 117 to 154 tasks per hour) but decreased for attendings (from 138 to 106 tasks per hour), and the temporal flow of tasks, in particular around what tasks occurred before and after clinical review and documentation. No changes in the time spent in conversational tasks or the physical care of the patient were observed. Conclusions The use of EHR technology has a major impact on ICU physician work (e.g., increased time spent on clinical review and documentation) and workflow (e.g., clinical review and documentation becoming the focal point of many other tasks). Further studies should evaluate the impact of changes in physician work on the quality of care provided.