Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) initiatives within critical care research are limited by a lack of resources and inconsistent and rapidly changing language. The Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG) is committed to modelling EDI for the critical care community through its programming, communications, protocols, and policies. The objective of developing the EDI glossary of sociodemographic determinants of health described here was to provide a resource for critical care professionals to support broader equity initiatives and to promote education and awareness about inclusive language. METHODS: Through literature review, we identified EDI-related sociodemographic determinants of health, defined as sociodemographic factors that are associated with disparities in health care and health outcomes, with a focus on critical care medicine. For each sociodemographic determinant of health, we identified umbrella terms (defined as domains) and subterms/constructs that are related to these domains. We designed the glossary collaboratively with the CCCTG EDI working group, patient and family partnerships committee, and executive committee, which included diverse knowledge users such as researchers, clinicians, and patient and family partners. RESULTS: We report on 12 sociodemographic determinants of health domains including age, sex, gender, sexuality, race and ethnicity, income, education, employment status, marital status, language, disability, and migration status. Each domain (e.g., sex) contains relevant subterms such as male, female, intersex. For each domain, we provide examples of disparities in health care and health outcomes with a focus on critical care medicine. CONCLUSIONS: This EDI glossary of sociodemographic determinants of health serves as a nonexhaustive resource that may be referenced by critical care researchers, research coordinators, clinicians, and patient and family partners. The glossary is an essential step to raising awareness about inclusive terminology and to fostering and advancing equity in critical care medicine.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les initiatives en matière d'équité, de diversité et d'inclusion (EDI) dans le cadre de la recherche en soins intensifs sont limitées à la fois par un manque de ressources et par un langage incohérent et évoluant rapidement. Le Groupe canadien de recherche en soins intensifs (CCCTG) s'est engagé à devenir un modèle en matière d'EDI pour la communauté des soins intensifs par le biais de ses programmes, de ses communications, de ses protocoles et de ses politiques. L'objectif de l'élaboration du glossaire pour les déterminants sociodémographiques de la santé respectant l'EDI décrit ici était de fournir une ressource aux professionnel·les des soins intensifs pour soutenir des initiatives d'équité plus larges et de promouvoir l'éducation et la sensibilisation au langage inclusif. MéTHODE: En procédant à l'examen de la littérature, nous avons identifié des déterminants sociodémographiques de la santé liés à l'EDI, définis comme des facteurs sociodémographiques associés à des disparités dans les soins de santé et les devenirs en santé, en mettant l'accent sur la médecine des soins intensifs. Pour chaque déterminant sociodémographique de la santé, nous avons identifié des termes génériques (définis comme des domaines) et des sous-termes/construits liés à ces domaines. Nous avons conçu le glossaire en collaboration avec le groupe de travail sur l'EDI du CCCTG, le comité des partenariats avec les patient·es et les familles et le comité exécutif, qui comprenait divers utilisateurs et utilisatrices des connaissances tels que des personnes impliquées dans la recherche ou en clinique ainsi que des partenaires issu·es de la patientèle et de leurs familles. RéSULTATS: Nous rendons compte de 12 domaines sociodémographiques pour les déterminants de la santé, notamment l'âge, le sexe, le genre, la sexualité, la race et l'origine ethnique, le revenu, l'éducation, la situation d'emploi, l'état matrimonial, la langue, le handicap et le statut migratoire. Chaque domaine (par exemple, le sexe) contient des sous-termes pertinents tels que masculin, féminin, intersexe. Pour chaque domaine, nous fournissons des exemples de disparités dans les soins de santé et les issues en matière de santé, en mettant l'accent sur la médecine des soins intensifs. CONCLUSION: Ce glossaire EDI des déterminants sociodémographiques de la santé sert de ressource non exhaustive qui peut être consultée par les équipes de recherche en soins intensifs, les coordonnateurs et coordonnatrices de recherche, les clinicien·nes et les patient·es ainsi que les familles. Ce glossaire est une étape essentielle pour sensibiliser à la terminologie inclusive et pour favoriser et faire progresser l'équité en médecine des soins intensifs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased job vacancies in Canadian intensive care units (ICUs). We aimed to identify, explore, and describe factors contributing to the decisions of health care workers to leave, or strongly consider leaving their ICU positions during the peri-COVID-19 pandemic era. METHODS: We undertook a qualitative descriptive study between June and August 2022. We conducted semistructured interviews with 19 registered nurses and one respiratory therapist from a single ICU in Alberta, Canada who had left, or had strongly considered leaving their ICU position since the beginning of the pandemic. We used Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis to generate themes from these interviews. RESULTS: We identified five themes to describe the factors that contributed to participants' decisions to leave, or strongly consider leaving, their ICU positions. These were: 1) toxic workplace, 2) inadequate staffing, 3) distress from providing nonbeneficial care, 4) caring for patients with COVID-19 and their families, and 5) paradoxical responses to COVID-19 outside of the ICU. Some of these factors existed before the pandemic and were exacerbated by it, while others were novel to COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Participants described as key factors in their decision or desire to leave their ICU positions the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on workplace culture, staffing, and patient interactions, as well as the discourse surrounding COVID-19 outside of work. Strategies that target workplace culture and ensure adequate staffing should be prioritized to promote staff retention following the pandemic.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La pandémie de COVID-19 a entraîné une augmentation du nombre de postes vacants dans les unités de soins intensifs (USI) canadiennes. Notre objectif était d'identifier, d'explorer et de décrire les facteurs qui ont contribué à la décision des travailleuses et travailleurs de la santé de quitter ou d'envisager fortement de quitter leur poste aux soins intensifs pendant la période péri-pandémie de COVID-19. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude descriptive qualitative entre juin et août 2022. Nous avons mené des entrevues semi-structurées auprès de 19 membres du personnel infirmier autorisé et d'un·e inhalothérapeute d'une seule unité de soins intensifs en Alberta, au Canada, qui avaient quitté ou fortement envisagé de quitter leur poste aux soins intensifs depuis le début de la pandémie. Nous avons utilisé l'analyse thématique de Braun et Clarke pour générer des thèmes à partir de ces entretiens. RéSULTATS: Nous avons cerné cinq thèmes pour décrire les facteurs qui ont contribué à la décision des participant·es de quitter ou d'envisager fortement de quitter leur poste aux soins intensifs : 1) un lieu de travail toxique, 2) un personnel inadéquat, 3) la détresse liée à la fourniture de soins non bénéfiques, 4) la prise en charge des personnes atteintes de COVID-19 et de leurs familles, et 5) les réponses paradoxales à la COVID-19 en dehors de l'unité de soins intensifs. Certains de ces facteurs existaient avant la pandémie et ont été exacerbés par celle-ci, tandis que d'autres étaient nouveaux et liés à la COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Les participant·es ont décrit comme des facteurs clés dans leur décision ou leur désir de quitter leur poste aux soins intensifs les répercussions de la pandémie de COVID-19 sur la culture du lieu de travail, la dotation et les interactions avec la patientèle, ainsi que le discours entourant la COVID-19 en dehors du travail. Les stratégies qui ciblent la culture du milieu de travail et assurent une dotation adéquate devraient être priorisées afin de favoriser le maintien en poste du personnel après la pandémie.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: We aimed to synthesize the qualitative evidence on the impacts of COVID-19-related restricted family presence policies from the perspective of patients, families, and healthcare professionals from neonatal (NICU), pediatric (PICU), or adult ICUs. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Databases of Reviews and Clinical Trials, CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Two researchers independently reviewed titles/abstracts and full-text articles for inclusion. Thematic analysis was completed following appraising article quality and assessing confidence in the individual review findings using standardized tools. RESULTS: We synthesized 54 findings from 184 studies, revealing the impacts of these policies in children and adults on: (1) Family integrated care and patient and family-centered care (e.g., disruption to breastfeeding/kangaroo care, dehumanizing of patients); (2) Patients, families, and healthcare professionals (e.g., negative mental health consequences, moral distress); (3) Support systems (e.g., loss of support from friends/families); and (4) Relationships (e.g., loss of essential bonding with infant, struggle to develop trust). Strategies to mitigate these impacts are reported. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the multifaceted impacts of restricted visitation policies across distinct care settings and strategies to mitigate the harmful effects of these policies and guide the creation of compassionate family presence policies in future health crises. REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=290263 .

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: High-quality clinical trials are needed to establish the efficacy and safety of novel therapies for acute kidney injury (AKI) prevention. In this consensus workshop, we identified patient and caregiver priorities for recruitment, intervention delivery, and outcomes of a clinical trial of cilastatin to prevent nephrotoxic AKI. METHODS: We included adults with lived experience of AKI, chronic kidney disease, or risk factors for AKI (e.g., critical care hospitalization), and their caregivers. Using a modified nominal group technique approach, we conducted a series of hybrid in-person/virtual discussions covering 3 clinical trial topic areas: (1) consent and recruitment; (2) intervention delivery; and (3) trial outcomes. Participants voted on their top preferences in each topic area, and discussion transcripts were analyzed inductively using conventional content analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen individuals (11 patients, 2 caregivers) participated in the workshop. For consent and recruitment, participants prioritized technology enabled pre-screening and involvement of family members in the consent process. For intervention delivery, participants prioritized measures to facilitate ease of intervention administration and return visits. For trial outcomes, participants identified kidney-related and other clinical outcomes (e.g., AKI, chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular events) as top priorities. Analysis of transcripts provided insight into care team and family involvement in trial-related decisions, implications of allocation to a placebo arm, and impact of participants' experiences of AKI and critical illness. CONCLUSION: Findings from our workshop will directly inform development of a clinical trial protocol of cilastatin for nephrotoxic AKI prevention and can assist others in patient-centered approaches to AKI trial design.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Opioids remain the mainstay of analgesia for critically ill patients, but its exposure is associated with negative effects including persistent use after discharge. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be an effective alternative to opioids with fewer adverse effects. We aimed to describe beliefs and attitudes towards the use of NSAIDs in adult intensive care units (ICUs). METHODS: Our survey of Canadian ICU physicians was conducted using a web-based platform and distributed through the Canadian Critical Care Society (CCCS) email distribution list. We used previously described survey development methodology including question generation and reduction, pretesting, and clinical sensibility and pilot testing. RESULTS: We received 115 completed surveys from 321 CCCS members (36%). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs use was most described as "rarely" (59 respondents, 51%) with the primary concern being adverse events (acute kidney injury [108 respondents, 94%] and gastrointestinal bleeding [92 respondents, 80%]). The primary preferred analgesic was acetaminophen (75 respondents, 65%) followed by opioids (40 respondents, 35%). Most respondents (91 respondents, 80%) would be willing to participate in a randomized controlled trial examining NSAID use in critical care. CONCLUSIONS: In our survey, Canadian critical care physicians did not mention commonly using NSAIDs primarily because of concerns about adverse events. Nevertheless, respondents were interested in further studying ketorolac, a commonly used NSAID outside of the ICU, in critically ill patients.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les opioïdes restent le pilier de l'analgésie pour les patient·es gravement malades, mais l'exposition à ces agents est associée à des effets négatifs, notamment à leur utilisation persistante après le congé de l'hôpital. Les anti-inflammatoires non stéroïdiens (AINS) pourraient constituer une alternative efficace aux opioïdes avec moins d'effets indésirables. Nous avons cherché à décrire les croyances et les attitudes à l'égard de l'utilisation des AINS dans les unités de soins intensifs (USI) pour adultes. MéTHODE: Notre sondage auprès des médecins intensivistes au Canada a été mené à l'aide d'une plateforme Web et distribué aux personnes sur la liste de distribution électronique de la Société canadienne de soins intensifs (SCSI). Nous avons utilisé une méthodologie d'élaboration d'enquêtes décrite précédemment, y compris la génération et la réduction de questions, les tests préalables, la sensibilité clinique et les tests pilotes. RéSULTATS: Nous avons reçu 115 sondages remplis par 321 membres de la SCSI (36 %). L'utilisation d'anti-inflammatoires non stéroïdiens a été décrite comme « rare ¼ (59 répondant·es, 51 %), la principale préoccupation étant les événements indésirables (insuffisance rénale aiguë [108 répondant·es, 94 %] et saignements gastro-intestinaux [92 répondant·es, 80 %]). Le principal analgésique préféré était l'acétaminophène (75 répondant·es, 65 %), suivi des opioïdes (40 répondant·es, 35 %). La plupart des répondant·es (91 répondant·es, 80 %) seraient prêt·es à participer à une étude randomisée contrôlée examinant l'utilisation des AINS en soins intensifs. CONCLUSION: Dans notre sondage, les médecins intensivistes au Canada n'ont pas mentionné l'utilisation courante d'AINS, principalement en raison de préoccupations concernant leurs effets indésirables. Néanmoins, les répondant·es étaient intéressé·es à étudier plus avant le kétorolac, un AINS couramment utilisé en dehors des soins intensifs, chez les patient·es gravement malades.

RESUMEN

Recovery from sepsis is a key global health issue, impacting 38 million sepsis survivors worldwide per year. Sepsis survivors face a wide range of physical, cognitive, and psychosocial sequelae. Readmissions to hospital following sepsis are an important driver of global healthcare utilization and cost. Family members of sepsis survivors also experience significant stressors related to their role as informal caregivers. Increasing recognition of the burdens of sepsis survivorship has led to the development of postsepsis recovery programs to better support survivors and their families, although optimal models of care remain uncertain. The goal of this article is to perform a narrative review of recovery from sepsis from the perspective of patients, families, and health systems.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Sociodemographic variables influence health outcomes, either directly (ie, gender identity) or indirectly (eg, structural/systemic racism based on ethnoracial group). Identification of how sociodemographic variables can impact the health of critically ill adults is important to guide care and research design for this population. However, despite the growing recognition of the importance of collecting sociodemographic measures that influence health outcomes, insufficient and inconsistent data collection of sociodemographic variables persists in critical care studies. We aim to develop a set of core data variables (CoDaV) for social determinants of health specific to studies involving critically ill adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review to generate a list of possible sociodemographic measures to be used for round 1 of the modified Delphi processes. We will engage relevant knowledge users (previous intensive care unit patients and family members, critical care researchers, critical care clinicians and research co-ordinators) to participate in the modified Delphi consensus survey to identify the CoDaV. A final consensus meeting will be held with knowledge user representatives to discuss the final CoDaV, how each sociodemographic variable will be collected (eg, level of granularity) and how to disseminate the CoDaV for use in critical care studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Calgary conjoint health research ethics board has approved this study protocol (REB22-1648).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for clinical trials worldwide, threatening premature closure and trial integrity. Every phase of research operations was affected, often requiring modifications to protocol design and implementation. Objectives: To identify the barriers, solutions, and opportunities associated with continuing critical care trials that were interrupted during the pandemic, and to generate suggestions for future trials. Design, Setting, and Participants: This mixed-methods study performed an explanatory sequential analysis involving a self-administered electronic survey and focus groups of principal investigators (PIs) and project coordinators (PCs) conducting adult and pediatric individual-patient randomized trials of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group during the COVID-19 pandemic. Eligible trials were actively enrolling patients on March 11, 2020. Data were analyzed between September 2023 and January 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Importance ratings of barriers to trial conduct and completion, solutions employed, opportunities arising, and suggested strategies for future trials. Quantitative data examining barriers were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Data addressing solutions, opportunities, and suggestions were analyzed by qualitative content analysis. Integration involved triangulation of data sources and perspectives about 13 trials, synthesized by an interprofessional team incorporating reflexivity and member-checking. Results: A total of 13 trials run by 29 PIs and PCs (100% participation rate) were included. The highest-rated barriers (on a 5-point scale) to ongoing conduct during the pandemic were decisions to pause all clinical research (mean [SD] score, 4.7 [0.8]), focus on COVID-19 studies (mean [SD] score, 4.6 [0.8]), and restricted family presence in hospitals (mean [SD] score, 4.1 [0.8]). Suggestions to enable trial progress and completion included providing scientific leadership, implementing technology for communication and data management, facilitating the informed consent process, adapting the protocol as necessary, fostering site engagement, initiating new sites, streamlining ethics and contract review, and designing nested studies. The pandemic necessitated new funding opportunities to sustain trial enrollment. It increased public awareness of critical illness and the importance of randomized trial evidence. Conclusions and Relevance: While underscoring the vital role of research in society and drawing the scientific community together with a common purpose, the pandemic signaled the need for innovation to ensure the rigor and completion of ongoing trials. Lessons learned to optimize research procedures will help to ensure a vibrant clinical trials enterprise in the future.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Rationale: Women, older individuals, and racial and ethnic minority groups are often underrepresented in research studies. Objectives: We evaluated the demographics and diversity of participants enrolled in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published by investigators in association with the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Methods: We performed quantitative content analysis of peer-reviewed RCTs and observational studies from December 1994 to December 2022. For each publication, we extracted participant demographic variables, including sex, gender, age, race or ethnicity, sexual orientation, pregnancy status, language proficiency, income/financial status, housing, education, disability, and geography. Results: A total of 120 publications (28 RCTs, 92 observational studies) included 211,144 enrolled participants. Most (107 of 120; 89.2%) were multicenter studies, and 70% (84 of 120) were conducted exclusively in Canadian centers; 77.5% (93 of 120) studies enrolled adult participants, and 19.2% (23 of 120) enrolled pediatric participants. All studies reported participant mean or median age, 118 (98.3%) reported binary sex or gender, and 9 (7.5%) reported race or ethnicity. No justification was provided in 35 studies that listed pregnancy as an exclusion. There was infrequent reporting of housing (n = 4), employment (n = 2), income (n = 2), and education (n = 1). No studies reported the language proficiency, sexual orientation, disability, or geography of participants. Of the studies reporting gender, women and/or girls comprised 42.3% participants (range, 8.9-67.7%). Within nine studies reporting race or ethnicity of 2,950 participants, 59.7% were White, 8% South Asian, 7% Indigenous, 3% Asian, 1% Black, 14% unknown, and 6% "other." Conclusions: Research publications from the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group infrequently report important participant demographics, and diversity of research participants is disproportionate compared with Canadian societal demographics.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Our previous work synthesized published studies on well-being interventions during COVID-19. As we move into a post-COVID-19 pandemic period there is a need to comprehensively review published strategies, approaches, and interventions to improve child and youth well-being beyond deleterious impacts experienced during COVID-19. METHODS: Seven databases were searched from inception to January 2023. Studies were included if they: (1) presented original data on an approach (i.e., approach applied) or (2) provided recommendations to inform development of a future approach (i.e., approach suggested), (3) targeted to mitigate negative impacts of COVID-19 on child and youth (≤18 year) well-being, and (4) published on or after December 2019. RESULTS: 39 studies (n = 4/39, 10.3% randomized controlled trials) from 2021 to 2023 were included. Twenty-two studies applied an approach (n = 22/39, 56.4%) whereas seventeen studies (n = 17/39, 43.6%) suggested an approach; youth aged 13-18 year (n = 27/39, 69.2%) were most frequently studied. Approach applied records most frequently adopted an experimental design (n = 11/22, 50.0%), whereas approach suggested records most frequently adopted a cross-sectional design (n = 13/22, 59.1%). The most frequently reported outcomes related to good health and optimum nutrition (n = 28/39, 71.8%), followed by connectedness (n = 22/39, 56.4%), learning, competence, education, skills, and employability (n = 18/39, 46.1%), and agency and resilience (n = 16/39, 41.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The rapid onset and unpredictability of COVID-19 precluded meaningful engagement of children and youth in strategy development despite widespread recognition that early engagement can enhance usefulness and acceptability of interventions. Published or recommended strategies were most frequently targeted to improve connectedness, belonging, and socialization among children and youth.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Hypoxaemic respiratory failure (HRF) affects nearly 15% of critically ill adults admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). An evidence-based, stakeholder-informed multidisciplinary care pathway (Venting Wisely) was created to standardise the diagnosis and management of patients with HRF and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Successful adherence to the pathway requires a coordinated team-based approach by the clinician team. The overall aim of this study is to describe the acceptability of the Venting Wisely pathway among critical care clinicians. Specifically, this will allow us to (1) better understand the user's experience with the intervention and (2) determine if the intervention was delivered as intended. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This qualitative study will conduct focus groups with nurse practitioners, physicians, registered nurses and registered respiratory therapists from 17 Alberta ICUs. We will use template analysis to describe the acceptability of a multicomponent care pathway according to seven constructs of acceptability: (1) affective attitude;,(2) burden, (3) ethicality, (4) intervention coherence, (5) opportunity costs, (6) perceived effectiveness and (7) self-efficacy. This study will contribute to a better understanding of the acceptability of the Venting Wisely pathway. Identification of areas of poor acceptability will be used to refine the pathway and implementation strategies as ways to improve adherence to the pathway and promote its sustainability. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board. The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a scientific conference. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04744298.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Adequate recruitment is essential for successful clinical research. ICU nurses play a crucial role in identifying eligible patients, introducing research teams, facilitating informed consent, and caring for enrolled patients. However, a larger group of multidisciplinary healthcare professionals (the ICU care team) is equally important in promoting clinical research participation.To describe the ICU care team's experiences in ongoing clinical research, identifying perceived barriers and enablers to their participation, and apply a behavior framework to enhance research engagement. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey study. SETTING: Four adult ICUs and one PICU between June 2021 and March 2023. SUBJECTS: We recruited nurses, physicians, nurse practitioners, allied health professionals, and unit clerks. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: We developed and validated a cross-sectional survey based on the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behavior model. This survey included: 1) demographic questions (n = 7); 2) research experience questions (n = 6), 3) capability questions (n = 8); 4) opportunity questions (n = 11); 5) and motivation questions (n = 13).A total of 172 ICU care team members completed the survey. Results showed differences in capabilities, opportunities, and motivations among ICU care team members. For example, fellow/attending physicians and nurse practitioners reported higher confidence in discussing research with patients/families, while registered nurses and allied health professionals expressed less confidence. CONCLUSIONS: ICU care team members face multiple barriers that impact their involvement with the conduct of ICU research. To effectively engage healthcare professionals in this process, it is essential to address their capabilities (research knowledge and skills to communicate research with patients/families), create opportunities (collaboration/communication with research team, discuss research during multidisciplinary rounds), and motivate them (recognize their help and share the results of the research being conducted at their site) to improve ICU care team engagement in the conduct of ICU research.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to create a definition of patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding during critical illness as an outcome for a randomized trial. DESIGN: This was a sequential mixed-methods qualitative-dominant multi-center study with an instrument-building aim. In semi-structured individual interviews or focus groups we elicited views from survivors of critical illness and family members of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding which features indicate important gastrointestinal bleeding. Quantitative demographic characteristics were collected. We analyzed qualitative data using inductive content analysis to develop a definition for patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding. SETTING: Canada and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 51 ICU survivors and family members of ICU patients. RESULTS: Participants considered gastrointestinal bleeding to be important if it resulted in death, disability, or prolonged hospitalization. The following also signaled patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding: blood transfusion, vasopressors, endoscopy, CT-angiography, or surgery. Whether an intervention evinced concern depended on its effectiveness, side-effects, invasiveness and accessibility; contextual influences included participant familiarity and knowledge of interventions and trust in the clinical team. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of critical illness and family members described patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding differently than current definitions of clinically-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patient engagement in research is the meaningful and collaborative interaction between patients and researchers throughout the research process. Patient engagement can help to ensure patient-oriented values and perspectives are incorporated into the development, conduct, and dissemination of research. While patient engagement is increasingly prevalent in clinical research, it remains relatively unrealized in preclinical laboratory research. This may reflect the nature of preclinical research, in which routine interactions or engagement with patients may be less common. Our team of patient partners and researchers has previously identified few published examples of patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research, as well as a paucity of guidance on this topic. Here we propose the development of a process framework to facilitate patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research. METHODS: Our team, inclusive of researchers and patient partners, will develop a comprehensive, empirically-derived, and stakeholder-informed process framework for 'patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research.' First, our team will create a 'deliberative knowledge space' to conduct semi-structured discussions that will inform a draft framework for preclinical patient engagement. Over the course of several sessions, we will identify actions, activities, barriers, and enablers (e.g. considerations and motivations for patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research, define roles of key players). The resulting draft process framework will be further populated with examples and refined through an international consensus-building Delphi survey with patients, researchers, and other collaborator organizations. We will then conduct pilot field tests to evaluate the framework with preclinical laboratory research groups paired with patient partners. These results will be used to create a refined framework enriched with real-world examples and considerations. All resources developed will be made available through an online repository. DISCUSSION: Our proposed process framework will provide guidance, best practices, and standardized procedures to promote patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research. Supporting and facilitating patient engagement in this setting presents an exciting new opportunity to help realize the important impact that patients can make.

Engaging patients as partners or collaborators in clinical research is becoming more common, but it is still new in preclinical research. Preclinical researchers work in laboratories on cell and animal experiments. They traditionally don't have frequent interactions with patients compared to their clinical research colleagues. Integrating patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research may help ensure that patient perspectives and values are considered. To help preclinical laboratory research align with patient-centred priorities we propose the development of a practical framework. This framework will facilitate patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research. To achieve this, we will first hold in-depth discussions with patient partners, researchers, and other collaborators to understand views on patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research. Together, we will identify key considerations to draft a framework, including motivations for patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research, and defining the roles of those who need to be involved. We will refine the framework through an international survey where we will collect feedback from researchers, patient partners, and other collaborators to make further improvements. The framework will then be tested and refined by preclinical laboratory teams inclusive of patient partners. The finalized framework and other resources to facilitate patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research will be hosted in a 'one-stop-shop' of online resources. Ultimately, this framework will enable partnerships between patients and researchers and provide a roadmap for patient engagement in preclinical laboratory research. This presents an exciting new opportunity for patients and researchers to collaborate and potentially improve translation of laboratory-based research.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Children and youth experienced marked impacts on day-to-day life in the COVID-19 pandemic that were associated with poorer familial and friend relationships, and greater mental health challenges. Few studies provide self-report data on mental health symptoms from children and youth themselves. We sought to examine the associations between social factors and child and youth self-reported symptoms of worsened mood, anxiety, and irritability during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A nationally representative cross-sectional survey was administered online to collect self-report data across 10 Canadian provinces among children (11-14 years) and youth (15-18 years), April-May 2022. Age-appropriate questions were based on The Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health and the World Health Organization of the United Nations H6 + Technical Working Group on Adolescent Health and Well-Being consensus framework and the Coronavirus Health and Impact Survey. Associations between a priori defined social factors (e.g., relationship quality) and respondent self-reported mental health were evaluated using ordinal logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, and geographic location. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 483 (51.7%) children (11-14 years; 227, 47.0% girls) and 450 (48.3%) youth (15-18 years; 204, 45.3% girls). The parents of most children and youth had resided in Canada for over 20 years (678, 72.7%). Over one-quarter of children and youth self-identified as Black, Indigenous, or a Person of Color (134, 27.7%; 134, 29.8%, respectively). Over one-third of children and youth self-reported symptoms of worsened mood (149, 30.9%; 125, 27.8%, respectively), anxiety (181, 37.5%; 167, 37.1%, respectively), or irritability (160, 33.1%; 160, 35.6%, respectively) during, compared to pre-pandemic. In descending order of odds ratios (OR), for children and youth, worsened familial relationships (during compared to pre-pandemic) was associated with the self-reported symptoms of worsened mood (child: OR 4.22, 95%CI 2.51-6.88; youth: OR 6.65 95%CI 3.98-11.23), anxiety (child: OR 4.24, 95%CI2.69-6.75; youth: OR 5.28, 95%CI 3.17-8.86), and irritability (child: OR 2.83, 95%CI 1.76-4.56; youth: OR 6.46, 95%CI 3.88-10.90). CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported data from a nationally representative sample of children and youth suggest strong associations between social factors and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interventions targeting child and youth familial relationships may positively impact child and youth mental health.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

We sought in-depth understanding on the evolution of factors influencing COVID-19 booster dose and bivalent vaccine hesitancy in a longitudinal semi-structured interview-based qualitative study. Serial interviews were conducted between July 25th and September 1st, 2022 (Phase I: univalent booster dose availability), and between November 21st, 2022 and January 11th, 2023 (Phase II: bivalent vaccine availability). Adults (≥18 years) in Canada who had received an initial primary series and had not received a COVID-19 booster dose were eligible for Phase I, and subsequently invited to participate in Phase II. Twenty-two of twenty-three (96%) participants completed interviews for both phases (45 interviews). Nearly half of participants identified as a woman (n = 11), the median age was 37 years (interquartile range: 32-48), and most participants were employed full-time (n = 12); no participant reported needing to vaccinate (with a primary series) for their workplace. No participant reported having received a COVID-19 booster dose at the time of their interview in Phase II. Three themes relating to the development of hesitancy toward continued vaccination against COVID-19 were identified: 1) effectiveness (frequency concerns; infection despite vaccination); 2) necessity (less threatening, low urgency, alternate protective measures); and 3) information (need for data, contradiction and confusion, lack of trust, decreased motivation). The data from interviews with individuals who had not received a COVID-19 booster dose or bivalent vaccine despite having received a primary series of COVID-19 vaccines highlights actionable targets to address vaccine hesitancy and improve public health literacy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The ABCDEF bundle may improve delirium outcomes among intensive care unit (ICU) patients, however population-based studies are lacking. In this study we evaluated effects of a quality improvement initiative based on the ABCDEF bundle in adult ICUs in Alberta, Canada. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a pre-post, registry-based clinical trial, analysed using interrupted time series methodology. Outcomes were examined via segmented linear regression using mixed effects models. The main data source was a population-based electronic health record. RESULTS: 44,405 consecutive admissions (38,400 unique patients) admitted to 15 general medical/surgical and/or neurologic adult ICUs between 2014 and 2019 were included. The proportion of delirium days per ICU increased from 30.24% to 35.31% during the pre-intervention period. After intervention implementation it decreased significantly (bimonthly decrease of 0.34%, 95%CI 0.18-0.50%, p < 0.01) from 33.48% (95%CI 29.64-37.31%) in 2017 to 28.74% (95%CI 25.22-32.26%) in 2019. The proportion of sedation days using midazolam demonstrated an immediate decrease of 7.58% (95%CI 4.00-11.16%). There were no significant changes in duration of invasive ventilation, proportion of partial coma days, ICU mortality, or potential adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: An ABCDEF delirium initiative was implemented on a population-basis within adult ICUs and was successful at reducing the prevalence of delirium.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Untreated pain is associated with short-term and long-term consequences, including post-traumatic stress disorder and insomnia. Side effects of some analgesic medications include dysphoria, hallucinations and delirium. Therefore, both untreated pain and analgesic medications may be risk factors for delirium. Delirium is associated with longer length of stay or cognitive impairment. Our systematic review and meta-analysis will examine the relationship between pain or analgesic medications with delirium occurrence, duration and severity among critically ill adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials and a review of recent conference abstracts will be searched without restriction from inception to 15 May 2023. Study inclusion criteria are: (1) age≥18 years admitted to intensive care; (2) report a measure of pain, analgesic medications and delirium; (3) study design-randomised controlled trial, quasiexperimental designs and observational cohort and case-control studies excluding case reports. Study exclusion criteria are: (1) alcohol withdrawal delirium or delirium tremens; or (2) general anaesthetic emergence delirium; or (3) lab or animal studies. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Risk of Bias V.2 and risk of bias in non-randomised studies tools. There is no language restriction. Occurrence estimates will be transformed using the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine. Point estimates will be pooled using Hartung-Knapp Sidik-Jonkman random effects meta-analysis to estimate a pooled risk ratio. Statistical heterogeneity will be estimated with the I2 statistic. Risk of small study effects will be assessed using funnel plots and Egger test. Studies will be analysed for time-varying and unmeasured confounding using E values. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this is an analysis of published aggregated data. We will share our findings at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: The finalised protocol was submitted to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022367715).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 transmission, emergence of variants of concern, and weakened immunity have led to recommended vaccine booster doses for COVID-19. Vaccine hesitancy challenges broad immunization coverage. We deployed a cross-national survey to investigate knowledge, beliefs, and behaviours toward continued COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We administered a national, cross-sectional online survey among adults in Canada between March 16 and March 26, 2022. We utilized descriptive statistics to summarize our sample, and tested for demographic differences, perceptions of vaccine effectiveness, recommended doses, and trust in decisions, using the Rao-Scott correction for weighted chi-squared tests. Multivariable logistic regression was adjusted for relevant covariates to identify sociodemographic factors and beliefs associated with vaccine hesitancy. RESULTS: We collected 2202 completed questionnaires. Lower education status (high school: odds ratio (OR) 1.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29, 2.81) and having children (OR 1.89, CI 1.39, 2.57) were associated with increased odds of experiencing hesitancy toward a booster dose, while higher income ($100,000-$149,999: OR 0.60, CI 0.39, 0.91; $150,000 or more: OR 0.49, CI 0.29, 0.82) was associated with decreased odds. Disbelief in vaccine effectiveness (against infection: OR 3.69, CI 1.98, 6.90; serious illness: OR 3.15, CI 1.69, 5.86), disagreeing with government decision-making (somewhat disagree: OR 2.70, CI 1.38, 5.29; strongly disagree: OR 4.62, CI 2.20, 9.7), and beliefs in over-vaccinating (OR 2.07, CI 1.53, 2.80) were found associated with booster dose hesitancy. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy may develop or increase regarding subsequent vaccines. Our findings indicate factors to consider when targeting vaccine-hesitant populations.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La transmission de la COVID-19, l'émergence de variants préoccupants et l'affaiblissement de l'immunité ont conduit à recommander des doses de rappel de vaccin contre la COVID-19. L'hésitation à la vaccination remet en question une large couverture vaccinale. Nous avons déployé une enquête transnationale pour étudier les connaissances, les croyances et les comportements en faveur de la poursuite de la vaccination contre la COVID-19. MéTHODES: Nous avons mené une enquête nationale transversale en ligne auprès d'adultes au Canada, entre le 16 et le 26 mars 2022. Nous avons utilisé des statistiques descriptives pour résumer notre échantillon et testé les différences démographiques, les perceptions de l'efficacité des vaccins, les doses recommandées et la confiance dans les décisions, en utilisant la correction de Rao-Scott pour les tests du chi carré pondérés. La régression logistique multivariée a été ajustée pour les covariables pertinentes afin d'identifier les facteurs sociodémographiques et les croyances associés à l'hésitation à la vaccination. RéSULTATS: Nous avons collecté 2 202 questionnaires remplis. Un faible niveau d'éducation (lycée : rapport de cotes (OR) 1,90, intervalle de confiance (IC) à 95% 1,29, 2,81) et le fait d'avoir des enfants (OR 1,89, IC 1,39, 2,57) étaient associés à une probabilité accrue d'éprouver une hésitation à l'égard d'une dose de rappel, tandis qu'un revenu plus élevé (100 000 $­149 999 $ : OR 0,60, IC 0,39, 0,91; 150 000 $ ou plus : OR 0,49, IC 0,29, 0,82) était associé à une diminution des probabilités. Incrédulité dans l'efficacité du vaccin (contre l'infection : OR 3,69, IC 1,98, 6,90; maladie grave : OR 3,15, IC 1,69, 5,86), en désaccord avec la prise de décision du gouvernement (plutôt en désaccord : OR 2,70, IC 1,38, 5,29; fortement en désaccord : OR 4,62, IC 2,20, 9,7) et la croyance dans le sur-vaccination (OR 2,07, IC 1,53, 2,80) ont été associées à une hésitation à recevoir une dose de rappel. CONCLUSION: Une hésitation à l'égard du vaccin contre la COVID-19 peut se développer ou augmenter à l'égard des vaccins ultérieurs. Nos résultats indiquent des facteurs à prendre en compte lors du ciblage des populations hésitantes à la vaccination.

Asunto(s)