Karen Burns

Quality of care in for-profit and not-for-profit nursing homes: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective To compare quality of care in for-profit and not-for-profit nursing homes. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomised controlled trials investigating quality of care in for-profit versus not-for-profit nursing homes. Results A comprehensive search yielded 8827 citations, of which 956 were judged appropriate for full text review. Study characteristics and results of 82 articles that met inclusion criteria were summarised, and results for the four most frequently reported quality measures were pooled. Included studies reported results dating from 1965 to 2003. In 40 studies, all statistically significant comparisons (P<0.05) favoured not-for-profit facilities; in three studies, all statistically significant comparisons favoured for-profit facilities, and the remaining studies had less consistent findings. Meta-analyses suggested that not-for-profit facilities delivered higher quality care than did for-profit facilities for two of the four most frequently reported quality measures: more or higher quality staffing (ratio of effect 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 1.14, P<0.001) and lower pressure ulcer prevalence (odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.98, P=0.02). Non-significant results favouring not-for-profit homes were found for the two other most frequently used measures: physical restraint use (odds ratio 0.93, 0.82 to 1.05, P=0.25) and fewer deficiencies in governmental regulatory assessments (ratio of effect 0.90, 0.78 to 1.04, P=0.17). Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence suggests that, on average, not-for-profit nursing homes deliver higher quality care than do for-profit nursing homes. Many factors may, however, influence this relation in the case of individual institutions.

Use of weaning protocols for reducing duration of mechanical ventilation in critically ill adult patients: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective To investigate the effects of weaning protocols on the total duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality, adverse events, quality of life, weaning duration, and length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital. Design Systematic review. Data sources Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, ISI Web of Science, ISI Conference Proceedings, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, and reference lists of articles. We did not apply language restrictions. Review methods We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of weaning from mechanical ventilation with and without protocols in critically ill adults. Data selection Three authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. A priori subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. We contacted study authors for additional information. Results Eleven trials that included 1971 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with usual care, the geometric mean duration of mechanical ventilation in the weaning protocol group was reduced by 25% (95% confidence interval 9% to 39%, P=0.006; 10 trials); the duration of weaning was reduced by 78% (31% to 93%, P=0.009; six trials); and stay in the intensive care unit length by 10% (2% to 19%, P=0.02; eight trials). There was significant heterogeneity among studies for total duration of mechanical ventilation (I2=76%, P<0.01) and duration of weaning (I2=97%, P<0.01), which could not be explained by subgroup analyses based on type of unit or type of approach. Conclusion There is evidence of a reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning, and stay in the intensive care unit when standardised weaning protocols are used, but there is significant heterogeneity among studies and an insufficient number of studies to investigate the source of this heterogeneity. Some studies suggest that organisational context could influence outcomes, but this could not be evaluated as it was outside the scope of this review.

Use of non-invasive ventilation to wean critically ill adults off invasive ventilation: meta-analysis and systematic review

Objective To summarise the evidence for early extubation with immediate application of non-invasive ventilation compared with continued invasive weaning on important outcomes in intubated adults with respiratory failure. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials. Setting Intensive care units. Participants Critically ill adults receiving invasive ventilation. Study selection criteria We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL, proceedings from four conferences, and reference lists of relevant studies to identify relevant trials. Two reviewers independently selected trials, assessed trial quality, and abstracted data. Results We identified 12 trials enrolling 530 participants, mostly with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Compared with invasive weaning, non-invasive weaning was significantly associated with reduced mortality (relative risk 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.38 to 0.79), ventilator associated pneumonia (0.29, 95% 0.19 to 0.45), length of stay in intensive care unit (weighted mean difference −6.27 days, −8.77 to −3.78) and hospital (−7.19 days, −10.80 to −3.58), total duration of ventilation, and duration of invasive ventilation. Non-invasive weaning had no effect on weaning failures or weaning time. Benefits on mortality and weaning failures were non-significantly greater in trials that exclusively enrolled patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease versus mixed populations. Conclusions Current trials in critically ill adults show a consistent positive effect of non-invasive weaning on mortality and ventilator associated pneumonia, though the net clinical benefits remain to be fully elucidated. Non-invasive ventilation should preferentially be used in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a highly monitored environment.

Comparison of standard and accelerated initiation of renal replacement therapy in acute kidney injury.

In patients with severe acute kidney injury (AKI) but no urgent indication for renal replacement therapy (RRT), the optimal time to initiate RRT remains controversial. While starting RRT preemptively may have benefits, this may expose patients to unnecessary RRT. To study this, we conducted a 12-center open-label pilot trial of critically ill adults with volume replete severe AKI. Patients were randomized to accelerated (12 h or less from eligibility) or standard RRT initiation. Outcomes were adherence to protocol-defined time windows for RRT initiation (primary), proportion of eligible patients enrolled, follow-up to 90 days, and safety in 101 fully eligible patients (57 with sepsis) with a mean age of 63 years. Median serum creatinine and urine output at enrollment were 268 micromoles/l and 356 ml per 24 h, respectively. In the accelerated arm, all patients commenced RRT and 45/48 did so within 12 h from eligibility (median 7.4 h). In the standard arm, 33 patients started RRT at a median of 31.6 h from eligibility, of which 19 did not receive RRT (6 died and 13 recovered kidney function). Clinical outcomes were available for all patients at 90 days following enrollment, with mortality 38% in the accelerated and 37% in the standard arm. Two surviving patients, both randomized to standard RRT initiation, were still RRT dependent at day 90. No safety signal was evident in either arm. Our findings can inform the design of a large-scale effectiveness randomized control trial.

Risk of Chronic Dialysis and Death Following Acute Kidney Injury

BACKGROUND Acute kidney injury frequently arises within an acute care hospitalization. Outcomes among acute kidney injury survivors following hospital discharge are poorly documented. METHODS We conducted a population-based cohort study between 1996 and 2006 of all adult patients in Ontario with acute kidney injury who did not require in-hospital dialysis, and who survived free of dialysis ≥30 days after discharge. Those with acute kidney injury (n=41,327) were matched 1:1 to patients without acute kidney injury during their index hospitalization. Matching was by age (±1 year), sex, history of chronic kidney disease, receipt of mechanical ventilation during the index hospitalization, and a propensity score for developing acute kidney injury. The primary outcome was subsequent need for chronic dialysis. The secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and rehospitalization. RESULTS Mean age was 70 years, and median follow-up was 2 years (maximum 10 years). The incidence of chronic dialysis was 1.78 per 100 person-years among those with acute kidney injury and 0.74 per 100 person-years among unaffected controls (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]; 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.42-3.00). Rates also were higher for all-cause mortality (15.34 vs 14.51 per-100 person-years; adjusted HR 1.10; 95% CI, 1.07-1.13) and rehospitalization (44.93 vs 37.18 per 100 person-years; adjusted HR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.18-1.24). CONCLUSION Even when acute dialysis is not required, survivors of acute kidney injury remain at higher risk of receipt of chronic dialysis thereafter. The absolute risk of death was more than 8 times the rate of chronic dialysis.

Noninvasive ventilation as a weaning strategy for mechanical ventilation in adults with respiratory failure: a Cochrane systematic review

Background: Noninvasive ventilation has been studied as a means of reducing complications among patients being weaned from invasive mechanical ventilation. We sought to summarize evidence comparing noninvasive and invasive weaning and their effects on mortality. Methods: We identified relevant randomized and quasirandomized trials through searches of databases, conference proceedings and grey literature. We included trials comparing extubation and immediate application of noninvasive ventilation with continued invasive weaning in adults on mechanical ventilation. Two reviewers each independently screened citations, assessed trial quality and abstracted data. Our primary outcome was mortality. Results: We identified 16 trials involving 994 participants, most of whom had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Compared with invasive weaning, noninvasive weaning significantly reduced mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36 to 0.80), weaning failures (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.96), ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.43), length of stay in the intensive care unit (mean difference [MD] −5.59 d, 95% CI −7.90 to −3.28) and in hospital (MD −6.04 d, 95% CI −9.22 to −2.87), and total duration of mechanical ventilation (MD −5.64 d, 95% CI −9.50 to −1.77). Noninvasive weaning had no significant effect on the duration of ventilation related to weaning, but significantly reduced rates of tracheostomy (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.47) and reintubation (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.97). Mortality benefits were significantly greater in trials enrolling patients with COPD than in trials enrolling mixed patient populations (RR 0.36 [95% CI 0.24 to 0.56] v. RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.47 to 1.40]). Interpretation: Noninvasive weaning reduces rates of death and pneumonia without increasing the risk of weaning failure or reintubation. In subgroup analyses, mortality benefits were significantly greater in patients with COPD.

Clinical factors associated with initiation of renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury—A prospective multicenter observational study

PURPOSE Our objective was to describe the current practice for initiation of RRT in this population. There is uncertainty regarding the optimal time to initiate renal replacement therapy (RRT) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). METHODS Prospective study of patients receiving RRT in 6 intensive care units (ICUs) at 3 hospitals from July 2007 to August 2008. We characterized factors associated with start of RRT and evaluated their relationship with mortality. RESULTS We included 234 patients. RRT was initiated 1 day (0-4) after ICU admission (median [interquartile range]). Median creatinine was 331 μmol/L (225-446 μmol/L), urea 22.9 mmol/L (13.9-32.9 mmol/L), and RIFLE-Failure in 76.9%. Of traditional indications, Pao(2)/Fio(2) < 200 (54.5%) and oliguria (32.9%) were most common. ICU and hospital mortality were 45.3% and 51.9%, respectively. In adjusted analysis, mortality at RRT initiation was associated with creatinine <332 μmol/L (odds ratio [OR] 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-5.4), change in urea from admission >8.9 mmol/L (OR 1.8; 95% CI, 1.0-3.4), urine output <82 mL/24 hours (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.5), fluid balance >3.0 L/24 hours (OR 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.5), percentage of fluid overload >5% (OR 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.7), 3 or more failing organs (OR 4.5; 95% CI, 1.2-4.2), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score >14 (OR 2.3; 95% CI, 1.3-4.3), and start 4 days or more after admission (OR 4.3; 95% CI, 1.9-9.5). Mortality was higher as factors accumulated. CONCLUSION In ICU patients requiring RRT, there was marked variation in factors that influence start of RRT. RRT initiation with fewer clinical triggers was associated with lower mortality. Timing of RRT may modify survival but requires appraisal in a randomized trial.

Protocolized versus non-protocolized weaning for reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation in critically ill adult patients. (Protocol)

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the effectiveness of anti-adhesion therapy versus placebo, no therapy or an alternative anti-adhesion therapy following operative hysteroscopy for the treatment of female subfertility.To determine the efficacy and safety of metformin in treating women with endometrial hyperplasia

Clinical research ethics for critically ill patients: A pandemic proposal

Pandemic H1N1 influenza is projected to be unprecedented in its scope, causing acute critical illness among thousands of young otherwise healthy adults, who will need advanced life support. Rigorous, relevant, timely, and ethical clinical and health services research is crucial to improve their care and outcomes. Studies designed and conducted during a pandemic should be held to the same high methodologic and implementation standards as during other times. However, unique challenges arise with the need to conduct investigations as efficiently as possible, focused on the optimal outcome for the individual patient, while balancing the need for maximal societal benefit. We believe that clinical critical care research during a pandemic must be approached differently from research undertaken under nonemergent circumstances. We propose recommendations to clinical investigators and research ethics committees regarding clinical and health services research on pandemic-related critical illness. We also propose strategies such as expedited and centralized research ethics committee reviews and alternate consent models.

Admission of the very elderly to the intensive care unit: family members' perspectives on clinical decision-making from a multicenter cohort study.

Background: Little is known about the perspectives and experiences of family members of very elderly patients who are admitted to the intensive care unit. Aim: To describe family members’ perspectives about care provided to very elderly critically ill patients. Design: Multicenter, prospective, cohort study. Participants and setting: In total, 535 family members of patients aged 80 years or older admitted to 22 intensive care units for more than 24 h. Results: Family members reported that the “patient be comfortable and suffer as little as possible” was their most important value and “the belief that life should be preserved at all costs” was their least important value considered in making treatment decisions. Most family members (57.9%) preferred that life support be used for their family member, whereas 24.1% preferred comfort measures only, and 14.4% were unsure of their treatment preferences. Only 57.3% reported that a doctor had talked to them about treatment options for the patient. Overall, 29.7% of patients received life-sustaining treatments for more than 7 days and 50.3% of these died in hospital. Families were most satisfied with the skill and competency of nurses and least satisfied with being included and supported in the decision-making process and with their sense of control over the patient’s care. Conclusion: There is incongruity between family values and preferences for end-of-life care and actual care received for very elderly patients who are admitted to the intensive care unit. Deficiencies in communication and decision-making may be associated with prolonged use of life-sustaining treatments in very elderly critically ill patients, many of whom ultimately die.