PurposeTo describe the epidemiology of intra-abdominal infection in an international cohort of ICU patients according to a new system that classifies cases according to setting of infection acquisition (community-acquired, early onset hospital-acquired, and late-onset hospital-acquired), anatomical disruption (absent or present with localized or diffuse peritonitis), and severity of disease expression (infection, sepsis, and septic shock).MethodsWe performed a multicenter (n = 309), observational, epidemiological study including adult ICU patients diagnosed with intra-abdominal infection. Risk factors for mortality were assessed by logistic regression analysis.ResultsThe cohort included 2621 patients. Setting of infection acquisition was community-acquired in 31.6%, early onset hospital-acquired in 25%, and late-onset hospital-acquired in 43.4% of patients. Overall prevalence of antimicrobial resistance was 26.3% and difficult-to-treat resistant Gram-negative bacteria 4.3%, with great variation according to geographic region. No difference in prevalence of antimicrobial resistance was observed according to setting of infection acquisition. Overall mortality was 29.1%. Independent risk factors for mortality included late-onset hospital-acquired infection, diffuse peritonitis, sepsis, septic shock, older age, malnutrition, liver failure, congestive heart failure, antimicrobial resistance (either methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacteria, or carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria) and source control failure evidenced by either the need for surgical revision or persistent inflammation.ConclusionThis multinational, heterogeneous cohort of ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection revealed that setting of infection acquisition, anatomical disruption, and severity of disease expression are disease-specific phenotypic characteristics associated with outcome, irrespective of the type of infection. Antimicrobial resistance is equally common in community-acquired as in hospital-acquired infection.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00134-019-05819-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Several studies have investigated the predictors of in-hospital mortality for COVID-19 patients who need to be admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). However, no data on the role of organizational issues on patients’ outcome are available in this setting. The aim of this study was therefore to assess the role of surge capacity organisation on the outcome of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs in Belgium. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of in-hospital mortality in Belgian ICU COVID-19 patients via the national surveillance database. Non-survivors at hospital discharge were compared to survivors using multivariable mixed effects logistic regression analysis. Specific analyses including only patients with invasive ventilation were performed. To assess surge capacity, data were merged with administrative information on the type of hospital, the baseline number of recognized ICU beds, the number of supplementary beds specifically created for COVID-19 ICU care and the “ICU overflow” (i.e. a time-varying ratio between the number of occupied ICU beds by confirmed and suspected COVID-19 patients divided by the number of recognized ICU beds reserved for COVID-19 patients; ICU overflow present when this ratio is ≥ 1.0). Findings Over a total of 13,612 hospitalised COVID-19 patients with admission and discharge forms registered in the surveillance period (March, 1 to August, 9 2020), 1903 (14.0%) required ICU admission, of whom 1747 had available outcome data. Non-survivors (n=632, 36.1%) were older and had more frequently various comorbid diseases than survivors. In the multivariable analysis, ICU overflow, together with older age, presence of comorbidities, shorter delay between symptom onset and hospital admission, absence of hydroxychloroquine therapy and use of invasive mechanical ventilation and of ECMO, was independently associated with an increased in-hospital mortality. Similar results were found among the subgroup of invasively ventilated patients. In addition, the proportion of supplementary beds specifically created for COVID-19 ICU care to the previously existing total number of ICU beds was associated with increased an in-hospital mortality among invasively ventilated patients. The model also indicated a significant between-hospital difference in in-hospital mortality, not explained by the available patients and hospital characteristics. Interpretation Surge capacity organisation as reflected by ICU overflow or the creation of COVID-19 specific supplementary ICU beds were found to negatively impact ICU patient outcomes. Funding No funding source was available for this study.

This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the impact of quality improvement interventions on central line-associated bloodstream infections in adult intensive care units. Studies were identified through Medline and manual searches (1995-June 2012). Random-effects meta-analysis obtained pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-regression assessed the impact of bundle/checklist interventions and high baseline rates on intervention effect. Forty-one before-after studies identified an infection rate decrease (OR, 0.39 [95% CI, .33-.46]; P < .001). This effect was more pronounced for trials implementing a bundle or checklist approach (P = .03). Furthermore, meta-analysis of 6 interrupted time series studies revealed an infection rate reduction 3 months postintervention (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, .10-.88]; P = .03). There was no difference in infection rates between studies with low or high baseline rates (P = .18). These results suggest that quality improvement interventions contribute to the prevention of central line-associated bloodstream infections. Implementation of care bundles and checklists appears to yield stronger risk reductions.

This retrospective multi-center matched cohort study assessed the risk for severe COVID-19 (combination of severity indicators), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality in hospitalized patients when infected with the Omicron variant compared to when infected with the Delta variant. The study is based on a causal framework using individually-linked data from national COVID-19 registries. The study population consisted of 954 COVID-19 patients (of which, 445 were infected with Omicron) above 18 years old admitted to a Belgian hospital during the autumn and winter season 2021–2022, and with available viral genomic data. Patients were matched based on the hospital, whereas other possible confounders (demographics, comorbidities, vaccination status, socio-economic status, and ICU occupancy) were adjusted for by using a multivariable logistic regression analysis. The estimated standardized risk for severe COVID-19 and ICU admission in hospitalized patients was significantly lower (RR = 0.63; 95% CI (0.30; 0.97) and RR = 0.56; 95% CI (0.14; 0.99), respectively) when infected with the Omicron variant, whereas in-hospital mortality was not significantly different according to the SARS-CoV-2 variant (RR = 0.78, 95% CI (0.28–1.29)). This study demonstrates the added value of integrated genomic and clinical surveillance to recognize the multifactorial nature of COVID-19 pathogenesis.