The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has been designated a public health emergency of international concern.

No abstract

Purpose In the critically ill, hospital-acquired bloodstream infections (HA-BSI) are associated with significant mortality. Granular data are required for optimizing management, and developing guidelines and clinical trials. Methods We carried out a prospective international cohort study of adult patients (≥ 18 years of age) with HA-BSI treated in intensive care units (ICUs) between June 2019 and February 2021. Results 2600 patients from 333 ICUs in 52 countries were included. 78% HA-BSI were ICU-acquired. Median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 8 [IQR 5; 11] at HA-BSI diagnosis. Most frequent sources of infection included pneumonia (26.7%) and intravascular catheters (26.4%). Most frequent pathogens were Gram-negative bacteria (59.0%), predominantly Klebsiella spp. (27.9%), Acinetobacter spp . (20.3%), Escherichia coli (15.8%), and Pseudomonas spp . (14.3%). Carbapenem resistance was present in 37.8%, 84.6%, 7.4%, and 33.2%, respectively. Difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) was present in 23.5% and pan-drug resistance in 1.5%. Antimicrobial therapy was deemed adequate within 24 h for 51.5%. Antimicrobial resistance was associated with longer delays to adequate antimicrobial therapy. Source control was needed in 52.5% but not achieved in 18.2%. Mortality was 37.1%, and only 16.1% had been discharged alive from hospital by day-28. Conclusions HA-BSI was frequently caused by Gram-negative, carbapenem-resistant and DTR pathogens. Antimicrobial resistance led to delays in adequate antimicrobial therapy. Mortality was high, and at day-28 only a minority of the patients were discharged alive from the hospital. Prevention of antimicrobial resistance and focusing on adequate antimicrobial therapy and source control are important to optimize patient management and outcomes. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-022-06944-2.

Introduction. Adhesive tapes are used for taping eyelids closed and securing endotracheal tubes during general anesthesia. These tapes can cause facial skin injury. We compared the incidence of facial skin injury and patient satisfaction with different tapes used. Methods. A total of 60 adult patients at risk of skin trauma were randomized to use 3M™ Kind Removal Silicone Tape or standard acrylate tapes: 3M Durapore (endotracheal tube) and Medipore (eyelids). Patients were blinded to tape used. Postoperatively, a blinded recovery nurse assessed erythema, edema, and denudation of skin. Anesthesiologist in charge also assessed skin injury. On postoperative day 1, patients rated satisfaction with the condition of their skin over the eyelids and face on a 5-point Likert scale. Results. More patients had denudation of skin with standard tapes, 4 (13.3%) versus 0 with silicone tape (p = 0.026) and in anesthesiologist-evaluated skin injury 11 (37%) with standard versus 1 (3%) with silicone (p = 0.002). No significant differences were found in erythema and edema. Patient satisfaction score was higher with silicone tape: over eyelids: mean 3.83 (standard) versus 4.53 (silicone), Mann-Whitney U test, p < 0.001; over face: mean 3.87 (standard) versus 4.57 (silicone) (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Silicone tape use had less skin injury and greater patient satisfaction than standard acrylate tapes.

No abstract