Faculty Bibliography

RATIONALE: Accurate, early identification of patients at risk for developing acute lung injury (ALI) provides the opportunity to test and implement secondary prevention strategies. OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency and outcome of ALI development in patients at risk and validate a lung injury prediction score (LIPS). METHODS: In this prospective multicenter observational cohort study, predisposing conditions and risk modifiers predictive of ALI development were identified from routine clinical data available during initial evaluation. The discrimination of the model was assessed with area under receiver operating curve (AUC). The risk of death from ALI was determined after adjustment for severity of illness and predisposing conditions. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two hospitals enrolled 5,584 patients at risk. ALI developed a median of 2 (interquartile range 1-4) days after initial evaluation in 377 (6.8%; 148 ALI-only, 229 adult respiratory distress syndrome) patients. The frequency of ALI varied according to predisposing conditions (from 3% in pancreatitis to 26% after smoke inhalation). LIPS discriminated patients who developed ALI from those who did not with an AUC of 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.82). When adjusted for severity of illness and predisposing conditions, development of ALI increased the risk of in-hospital death (odds ratio, 4.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.9-5.7). CONCLUSIONS: ALI occurrence varies according to predisposing conditions and carries an independently poor prognosis. Using routinely available clinical data, LIPS identifies patients at high risk for ALI early in the course of their illness. This model will alert clinicians about the risk of ALI and facilitate testing and implementation of ALI prevention strategies. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00889772).

HYPOTHESIS: Selected elements of a simple physical examination algorithm accurately predict categories of shock. SETTING: A 350-bed community teaching hospital. METHODS: Resident trainees who manage all critically ill and medically unstable patients were instructed to document capillary refill, (palpated) pulse volume, skin temperature, jugular venous pressure (JVP) and lung examination in all patients with prolonged (>30 minutes hypotension <90 mmHg). Treatment was determined by house officers guided by attending physicians of record. All cases were retrospectively reviewed by a senior clinician who applied consensus criteria/definitions to categorize shock as septic, cardiogenic or hypovolemic. Operating characteristics of examination findings for predicting categories of shock were computed. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients, averaging 71 +/- 16 years, were studied. A total of 37 patients were diagnosed with septic shock, 18 with cardiogenic shock of and 13 with hypovolemic shock. Capillary refill and skin temperature predicted septic shock with sensitivity of 89%, specificity of 68%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 77%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 84%, and overall accuracy of 79%. Presence of JVP >7 cmH(2)O was more accurate than bilateral pulmonary crackles (>1/3 from bases) in predicting cardiogenic shock for low-output patients with sensitivity of 82%, specificity of 79%, PPV of 75%, NPV of 85%, and overall accuracy of 80%. Using just skin temperature and JVP, the bedside approach correctly diagnosed 52/68 cases (overall accuracy = 76%). CONCLUSIONS: Simple bedside clinical examination findings correctly predict categories of shock in a majority of cases.

RATIONALE: Studies examining survival outcomes after in-hospital cardiopulmonary arrest (CPA) among intensive care unit (ICU) patients requiring medications for hemodynamic support are limited. OBJECTIVES: To examine outcomes of ICU patients who received cardiopulmonary resusitation. METHODS: We identified 49,656 adult patients with a first CPA occurring in an ICU between January 1, 2000 and August 26, 2008 within the National Registry of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation. Survival outcomes of patients requiring hemodynamic support immediately before CPA were compared with those of patients who did not receive hemodynamic support (pressors), using multivariable logistic regression analyses to adjust for differences in demographics and clinical characteristics. Pressor medications included epinephrine, norepinephrine, phenylephrine, dopamine, dobutamine, and vasopressin. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The overall rate of survival to hospital discharge was 15.9%. Patients taking pressors before CPA were less likely to survive to discharge (9.3 vs. 21.2%; P < 0.0001). After multivariable adjustment, patients taking pressors before pulseless CPA were 55% less likely to survive to discharge (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.48). Age equal to or greater than 65 years (adjusted OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.73-0.82), nonwhite race (adjusted OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.54-0.62), and mechanical ventilation (adjusted OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.56-0.63) were also variables that could be identified before CPA that were independently associated with lower survival. More than half of survivors were discharged to rehabilitation or extended care facilities. Only 3.9% of patients who had CPA despite pressors were discharged home from the hospital, as compared with 8.5% of patients with a CPA and not taking pressors (adjusted OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.49-0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Although overall survival of ICU patients was 15.9%, patients requiring pressors and who experienced a CPA in an ICU were half as likely to survive to discharge and to be discharged home than patients not taking pressors. This study provides robust estimates of CPR outcomes of critically ill patients, and may assist clinicians to inform consent for this procedure.

BACKGROUND: Age and duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) are strongly associated with mortality and hospital discharge disposition. METHODS: Electronic administrative records from a 425-bed community teaching hospital were obtained for 9,912 patients who were admitted to hospital ICUs between 2003 and 2008. Risk estimates of age and duration of MV for in-hospital mortality and discharge to home vs extended-care facilities (ECFs) also were obtained. RESULTS: Of 9,912 patients, 37 were discharged to hospice care, and 668 were < 18 years of age. Of the remaining 9,207 patients, 4,238 received invasive MV. Mortality or hospital discharge to ECFs increased consistently for each decade of age > 65 years and as the duration of MV increased. Although only 11.7% of patients < 65 years age who received MV for 1 or 2 days died during hospitalization, the mortality rate increased to 72.1% for patients > 85 years of age who had received MV for > 7 days. For patients requiring MV for >or= 7 days, < 10% of the >or= 65 years of age and < 5% of patients >or= 85 years of age survived to be discharged home from the hospital. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that age > 65 years and duration of MV remained significantly associated with outcomes, even after adjustment for hospital discharge diagnoses (Charlson scores). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that age and duration of MV are strongly associated with mortality and posthospital disposition. If confirmed, the simple combination of age and duration of MV provides prognostic information that could be used with trajectory of illness and in the context of patients' values to inform end-of-life discussions with patients or their surrogates during a trial of critical care.