The results show that total maximum SOFA score and delta SOFA can be used to quantify the degree of dysfunction/failure already present on ICU admission, the degree of dysfunction/failure that appears during the ICU stay and the cumulative insult suffered by the patient. These properties make it a good instrument to be used in the evaluation of organ dysfunction/failure.

Early use of corticosteroids in patients affected by pandemic (H1N1)v influenza A infection did not result in better outcomes and was associated with increased risk of superinfections.

Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine.

IntroductionA significant number of critical ill patients die in the hospital after discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU). Data on this so-called occult mortality, well known since the 1980s, vary significantly between series. Examples include the GiViTI study with 26 % of deaths occurring after ICU discharge [1], the Portuguese study (23 %) [2], the EURICUS-I study (31 %) [3], and the North Thames study (27 %) Results: Those who died in the hospital after ICU discharge had a higher SAPS II score, were more frequently nonoperative, admitted from the ward, and had stayed longer in the ICU. Their degree of organ dysfunction/failure was higher (admission, maximum, and delta SOFA scores). They required more nursing workload resources while in the ICU. Both the amount of organ dysfunction/failure (especially cardiovascular, neurological, renal, and respiratory) and the amount of nursing workload that they required on the day before discharge were higher. The presence of residual CNS and renal dysfunction/failure were especially prognostic factors at ICU discharge. Multivariate analysis showed only predischarge organ dysfunction/failure to be important; thus the increased use of nursing workload resources before discharge probably reflects only the underlying organ dysfunction/failure. Conclusions: It is better to delay the discharge of a patient with organ dysfunction/failure from the ICU, unless adequate monitoring and therapeutic resources are available in the ward.

The European Surgical Outcomes Study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01203605.

The aim of this study was to determine if severity assessment tools (general severity of illness and community-acquired pneumonia specific scores) can be used to guide decisions for patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) due to pandemic influenza A pneumonia. A prospective, observational, multicentre study included 265 patients with a mean age of 42 (±16.1) years and an ICU mortality of 31.7%. On admission to the ICU, the mean pneumonia severity index (PSI) score was 103.2 ± 43.2 points, the CURB-65 score was 1.7 ± 1.1 points and the PIRO-CAP score was 3.2 ± 1.5 points. None of the scores had a good predictive ability: area under the ROC for PSI, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.65-0.78); CURB-65, 0.67 (95% CI, 0.59-0.74); and PIRO-CAP, 0.64 (95% CI, 0.56-0.71). The PSI score (OR, 1.022 (1.009-1.034), p 0.001) was independently associated with ICU mortality; however, none of the three scores, when used at ICU admission, were able to reliably detect a low-risk group of patients. Low risk for mortality was identified in 27.5% of patients using PIRO-CAP, but above 40% when using PSI (I-III) or CURB65 (<2). Observed mortality was 13.7%, 13.5% and 19.4%, respectively. Pneumonia-specific scores undervalued severity and should not be used as instruments to guide decisions in the ICU.

No abstract

Since the development of the first general outcome prediction models, these instruments have been widely used in the intensive care unit (ICU), both for patient evaluation and for ICU evaluation. Since some of these uses have been serious questioned, we assisted in the last years to the exploration of alternative paths for increasing the predictive power of the models and to enhance their applicability and utility in the real world. Part of these efforts focused on the exploration of more meaningful outcomes (clinical and non-clinical) with a strong tonic into the relation between outcomes and resources use. Also, since it is now widely recognized that the ICU is not an island, but it is integrated in a continuum of care, more and more efforts are being made to optimize and evaluate the interface between the ICU and the hospital, both at ICU admission and at ICU discharge. The objective of this review is to present and discuss, to the clinician working in the ICU, these emerging issues.