Rapid responses may improve some meaningful outcomes, although these findings remain controversial. These systems may also improve care for patients at the end of life. Rapid response systems are expected to continue evolving with novel developments in monitoring technologies, risk prediction informatics, and work in human factors.

The presence of sepsis-associated coagulopathy identifies a group of patients with sepsis at higher risk for mortality. Furthermore, there is an incremental risk of mortality as the severity of sepsis-associated coagulopathy increases.

Introduction Patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have been postulated to present with distinct respiratory subphenotypes. However, most phenotyping schema have been limited by sample size, disregard for temporal dynamics, and insufficient validation. We aimed to identify respiratory subphenotypes of COVID-19-related ARDS using unbiased data-driven approaches. Methods PRoVENT–COVID was an investigator-initiated, national, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study at 22 intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands. Consecutive patients who had received invasive mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 (aged 18 years or older) served as the derivation cohort, and similar patients from two ICUs in the USA served as the replication cohorts. COVID-19 was confirmed by positive RT-PCR. We used latent class analysis to identify subphenotypes using clinically available respiratory data cross-sectionally at baseline, and longitudinally using 8-hourly data from the first 4 days of invasive ventilation. We used group-based trajectory modelling to evaluate trajectories of individual variables and to facilitate potential clinical translation. The PRoVENT-COVID study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04346342 . Findings Between March 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020, 1007 patients were admitted to participating ICUs in the Netherlands, and included in the derivation cohort. Data for 288 patients were included in replication cohort 1 and 326 in replication cohort 2. Cross-sectional latent class analysis did not identify any underlying subphenotypes. Longitudinal latent class analysis identified two distinct subphenotypes. Subphenotype 2 was characterised by higher mechanical power, minute ventilation, and ventilatory ratio over the first 4 days of invasive mechanical ventilation than subphenotype 1, but PaO 2 /FiO 2 , pH, and compliance of the respiratory system did not differ between the two subphenotypes. 185 (28%) of 671 patients with subphenotype 1 and 109 (32%) of 336 patients with subphenotype 2 had died at day 28 (p=0·10). However, patients with subphenotype 2 had fewer ventilator-free days at day 28 (median 0, IQR 0–15 vs 5, 0–17; p=0·016) and more frequent venous thrombotic events (109 [32%] of 336 patients vs 176 [26%] of 671 patients; p=0·048) compared with subphenotype 1. Group-based trajectory modelling revealed trajectories of ventilatory ratio and mechanical power with similar dynamics to those observed in latent class analysis-derived trajectory subphenotypes. The two trajectories were: a stable value for ventilatory ratio or mechanical power over the first 4 days of invasive mechanical ventilation (trajectory A) or an upward trajectory (trajectory B). However, upward trajectories were better independent prognosticators for 28-day m...

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Objectives: To characterize the rapid response team activations, and the patients receiving them, in the American Heart Association-sponsored Get With The Guidelines Resuscitation-Medical Emergency Team cohort between 2005 and 2015. Design: Retrospective multicenter cohort study. Setting: Three hundred sixty U.S. hospitals. Patients: Consecutive adult patients experiencing rapid response team activation. Interventions: Rapid response team activation. Measurements and Main Results: The cohort included 402,023 rapid response team activations from 347,401 unique healthcare encounters. Respiratory triggers (38.0%) and cardiac triggers (37.4%) were most common. The most frequent interventions—pulse oximetry (66.5%), other monitoring (59.6%), and supplemental oxygen (62.0%)—were noninvasive. Fluids were the most common medication ordered (19.3%), but new antibiotic orders were rare (1.2%). More than 10% of rapid response teams resulted in code status changes. Hospital mortality was over 14% and increased with subsequent rapid response activations. Conclusions: Although patients requiring rapid response team activation have high inpatient mortality, most rapid response team activations involve relatively few interventions, which may limit these teams’ ability to improve patient outcomes.

Qualitative research methods are important and have become increasingly prominent in medical education and research. The reason is simple: many pressing questions in these fields require qualitative approaches to elicit nuanced insights and additional meaning beyond standard quantitative measurements in surveys or observatons. Among the most common qualitative data collection methods are structured or semistructured in-person interviews and focus groups, in which participants describe their experiences relevant to the research question at hand. In the era of physical and social distancing because of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, little guidance exists for strategies for conducting focus groups or semistructured interviews. Here we describe our experience with, and recommendations for, conducting remote focus groups and/or interviews in the era of social distancing. Specifically, we discuss best practice recommendations for researchers using video teleconferencing programs to continue qualitative research during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Most potential HAP prevention strategies remain unproven.

No abstract