Purpose Prediction of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) failure in COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) may improve clinical management and stratification of patients for optimal treatment. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine performance of ROX index as a predictor of HFNC failure. Materials and methods Systematic search was performed in electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science and Cochrane Library) for articles published till 15 June 2021 investigating ROX index as a predictor for HFNC failure. Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to analyze risk of bias for prognostic factors, by two independent authors. Results Eight retrospective or prospective cohort studies involving 1301 patients showed a good discriminatory value, summary area under the curve (sAUC) 0.81 (95% CI, 0.77–0.84) with sensitivity of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.59–0.80) and specificity of 0.79 (95% CI, 0.67–0.88) for predicting HNFC failure. The positive and negative likelihood ratio were 3.0 (95% CI, 2.2–5.3) and 0.37 (95% CI, 0.28–0.50) respectively, and was strongly associated with a promising predictive accuracy (Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) 9, 95% CI, 5–16). Conclusion This meta-analysis suggests ROX index has good discriminating power for prediction of HFNC failure in COVID-19 patients with AHRF.

These guidelines, written for clinicians, contains evidence-based recommendations for the prevention of hospital acquired infections Hospital acquired infections are a major cause of mortality and morbidity and provide challenge to clinicians. Measures of infection control include identifying patients at risk of nosocomial infections, observing hand hygiene, following standard precautions to reduce transmission and strategies to reduce VAP, CR-BSI, CAUTI. Environmental factors and architectural lay out also need to be emphasized upon. Infection prevention in special subsets of patients - burns patients, include identifying sources of organism, identification of organisms, isolation if required, antibiotic prophylaxis to be used selectively, early removal of necrotic tissue, prevention of tetanus, early nutrition and surveillance. Immunodeficient and Transplant recipients are at a higher risk of opportunistic infections. The post tranplant timetable is divided into three time periods for determining risk of infections. Room ventilation, cleaning and decontamination, protective clothing with care regarding food requires special consideration. Monitoring and Surveillance are prioritized depending upon the needs. Designated infection control teams should supervise the process and help in collection and compilation of data. Antibiotic Stewardship Recommendations include constituting a team, close coordination between teams, audit, formulary restriction, de-escalation, optimizing dosing, active use of information technology among other measure. The recommendations in these guidelines are intended to support, and not replace, good clinical judgment. The recommendations are rated by a letter that indicates the strength of the recommendation and a Roman numeral that indicates the quality of evidence supporting the recommendation, so that readers can ascertain how best to apply the recommendations in their practice environments.

No abstract

Purpose: The DIANA study aimed to evaluate how often antimicrobial de-escalation (ADE) of empirical treatment is performed in the intensive care unit (ICU) and to estimate the effect of ADE on clinical cure on day 7 following treatment initiation. Methods: Adult ICU patients receiving empirical antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infection were studied in a prospective observational study from October 2016 until May 2018. ADE was defined as (1) discontinuation of an antimicrobial in case of empirical combination therapy or (2) replacement of an antimicrobial with the intention to narrow the antimicrobial spectrum, within the first 3 days of therapy. Inverse probability (IP) weighting was used to account for time-varying confounding when estimating the effect of ADE on clinical cure. Results: Overall, 1495 patients from 152 ICUs in 28 countries were studied. Combination therapy was prescribed in 50%, and carbapenems were prescribed in 26% of patients. Empirical therapy underwent ADE, no change and change other than ADE within the first 3 days in 16%, 63% and 22%, respectively. Unadjusted mortality at day 28 was 15.8% in the ADE cohort and 19.4% in patients with no change [p = 0.27; RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.60-1.14)]. The IP-weighted relative risk estimate for clinical cure comparing ADE with no-ADE patients (no change or change other than ADE) was 1.37 (95% CI 1.14-1.64). Conclusion: ADE was infrequently applied in critically ill-infected patients. The observational effect estimate on clinical cure suggested no deleterious impact of ADE compared to no-ADE. However, residual confounding is likely.

No abstract