Canadian Critical Care Trials Group Research Articles

Critical care capacity in Canada: results of a national cross-sectional study.

IntroductionIntensive Care Units (ICUs) provide life-supporting treatment; however, resources are limited, so demand may exceed supply in the event of pandemics, environmental disasters, or in the context of an aging population. We hypothesized that comprehensive national data on ICU resources would permit a better understanding of regional differences in system capacity.MethodsAfter the 2009–2010 Influenza A (H1N1) pandemic, the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group surveyed all acute care hospitals in Canada to assess ICU capacity. Using a structured survey tool administered to physicians, respiratory therapists and nurses, we determined the number of ICU beds, ventilators, and the ability to provide specialized support for respiratory failure.ResultsWe identified 286 hospitals with 3170 ICU beds and 4982 mechanical ventilators for critically ill patients. Twenty-two hospitals had an ICU that routinely cared for children; 15 had dedicated pediatric ICUs. Per 100,000 population, there was substantial variability in provincial capacity, with a mean of 0.9 hospitals with ICUs (provincial range 0.4-2.8), 10 ICU beds capable of providing mechanical ventilation (provincial range 6–19), and 15 invasive mechanical ventilators (provincial range 10–24). There was only moderate correlation between ventilation capacity and population size (coefficient of determination (R2) = 0.771).ConclusionICU resources vary widely across Canadian provinces, and during times of increased demand, may result in geographic differences in the ability to care for critically ill patients. These results highlight the need to evolve inter-jurisdictional resource sharing during periods of substantial increase in demand, and provide background data for the development of appropriate critical care capacity benchmarks.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0852-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Proceedings of the 5th Meeting of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative.

Proceedings of the 5th Meeting of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative.

Interrater Variability in Identifying Ventilator Associated Pneumonia Using Six Different Definitions

Objective: There is no widely accepted standard definition for Ventilator Associated Pneumonia (VAP). The reliability of the current definitions in use remains controversial. Our objective was to assess the reliability of six commonly used VAP definitions: The Loose, The Rigorous, The Modified Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (CPIS), The Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG), The International Sepsis Forum Consensus (ISFC) and The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Design: We examined the electronic health records of all the consecutively admitted adult patients at our institution who received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) for ≥ 48 hours, from January 2006 through December 2006.Patients were excluded if they developed pneumonia within the first 48 hours or if they had a tracheostomy before IMV. Two expert intensivists independently reviewed the following data for each patient: indications and duration of IMV, vital signs, oxygen requirements, the frequency of respiratory suctioning, amount, color and consistency of secretion, ventilator settings, leukocyte count, microbiologic and radiographic data. Interreviewer reliability in diagnosing VAP independently were compared using Cohen’sKappa statistics. Results: A total of 115 patients met the initial inclusion criteria of which 47 patients were excluded (40 had pneumonia on presentation, 6 developed pneumonia within 48 hours and 1 had a tracheostomy on admission). The inter-reviewer agreement Kappa for the Loose, the Rigorous, CPIS, CCCTG, ISFC and CDC definitions for VAP were 0.22, 0.49, 0.33, 0.41, 0.38 and 0.68 respectively. Conclusion: The CDC definition of VAP proved to be statistically more reliable than other tested definitions of VAP, as demonstrated by the lowest interrater variability between two independent reviewers.

Evaluating Perioperative Outcomes and Efficiency Following Total Joint Arthroplasty in the United States and Canada.

49. Hart A, Khalil JA, Carli A, Huk O, Zukor D, Antoniou J. Blood transfusion in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty: incidence, risk factors, and thirty-day complication rates. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(23):1945-1951. 50. McIntyre L, Hebert PC, Wells G, et al; Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Is a restrictive transfusion strategy safe for resuscitated and critically ill trauma patients? J Trauma. 2004;57(3):563-568.

Canadian Guidelines for the use of targeted temperature management (therapeutic hypothermia) after cardiac arrest: A joint statement from The Canadian Critical Care Society (CCCS), Canadian Neurocritical Care Society (CNCCS), and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG)

Canadian Guidelines for the use of targeted temperature management (therapeutic hypothermia) after cardiac arrest: A joint statement from The Canadian Critical Care Society (CCCS), Canadian Neurocritical Care Society (CNCCS), and the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG)

In ICUs, 24-, 16-, and 12-hour overnight resident duty schedules did not differ for patient adverse events

Source Citation Parshuram CS, Amaral AC, Ferguson ND, et al; Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. Patient safety, resident well-being and continuity of care with different resident duty schedules i...

ACP journal club. Dalteparin was at least as effective as UFH for VTE prevention in critically ill patients, with similar costs.

Source Citation Fowler RA, Mittmann N, Geerts W, et al; Canadian Critical Care Trials Group; Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group. Cost-effectiveness of dalteparin...

Evaluation of an Internal Review Process for Grants And Manuscripts in the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group

All grants and manuscripts bearing the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group name are submitted for internal peer review before submission. The authors sought to formally evaluate authors' and reviewers' perceptions of this process. The authors developed, tested and administered two electronic nine-item questionnaires for authors and two electronic 13-item questionnaires for reviewers. Likert scale, multiple choice and free-text responses were used. Twenty-one of 29 (72%) grant authors and 16 of 22 (73%) manuscript authors responded. Most author respondents were somewhat or very satisfied with the turnaround time, quality of the review and the review process. Two-thirds of grant (13 of 20 [65%]) and manuscript authors (11 of 16 [69%]) reported one or more successful submissions after review. Changes made to grants based on reviews were predominantly editorial and involved the background, rationale, significance⁄relevance and the methods⁄protocol sections. Twenty-one of 47 (45%) grant reviewers and 32 of 44 (73%) manuscript reviewers responded. Most reviewer respondents reported a good to excellent overall impression of the review process, good fit between their expertise and interests and the grants reviewed, and ample time to review. Although most respondents agreed with the current nonblinded review process, more grant than manuscript reviewers preferred a structured review format. The authors report a highly favourable evaluation of an existing internal review process. The present evaluation has assisted in understanding and improving the current internal review process.

Update on management options in the treatment of nosocomial and ventilator assisted pneumonia: review of actual guidelines and economic aspects of therapy

ObjectiveNosocomial or more exactly, hospital-acquired (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) are frequent conditions when treating intensive care unit (ICU) patients that are only exceeded by central line-associated bloodstream infections. In Germany, approximately 18,900 patients per year suffer from a VAP and another 4,200 from HAP. We therefore reviewed the current guidelines about HAP and VAP, from different sources, regarding the strategies to address individual patient risks and medication strategies for initial intravenous antibiotic treatment (IIAT).Material and methodsWe conducted an analysis of the recent guidelines for the treatment of HAP. The current guidelines of the American Thoracic Society, the treatment recommendations of the Paul-Ehrlich-Gesellschaft (PEG), the guidelines from the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, the VAP guideline of the Canadian Critical Care trials group, as well as the new German S3-guideline for HAP were examined.ResultsAll guidelines are based on grading systems that assess the evidence underlying the recommendations. However, each guideline uses different grading systems. One common aspect of these guidelines is the risk assessment of the patients for decision making regarding IIAT. Most guidelines have different recommendations depending on the risk of the presence of multidrug resistant (MDR) bacteria. In guidelines using risk assessment, for low-risk patients (early onset, no MDR risk) aminopenicillins with beta-lactamase inhibitors (BLI), second or third generation cephalosporins, quinolones, or ertapenem are recommended. For patients with higher risk, imipenem, meropenem, fourth generation cephalosporins, ceftazidime or piperacillin/tazobactam are recommended. The PEG recommendations include a combination therapy in cases of very high risk (late onset, MDR risk, ICU, and organ failure) of either piperacillin/tazobactam, dori-, imi- or meropenem or cefepime or ceftazidime with ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, fosfomycin or an aminoglycoside. For the treatment of HAP caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), either linezolid or vancomycin is recommended. With regard to the ZEPHyR-trial, linezolid has shown higher cure rates but, no difference in overall survival. Economic analyses show the relevance of guideline-adherent IIAT (GA-IIAT). Besides significantly better clinical outcomes, patients with GA-IIAT cause significantly lower costs (€28,033 versus (vs) €36,139) (P=0.006) and have a shorter length of stay in hospital (23.9 vs 28.3 days) (P=0.022).ConclusionWe conclude that most current treatment guidelines take into account the individual patient risk and that the correct choice of IIAT affects clinical as well as economical outcomes.

Rates and determinants of informed consent: A case study of an international thromboprophylaxis trial

BackgroundSuccessful completion of randomized trials depends upon efficiently and ethically screening patients and obtaining informed consent. Awareness of modifiable barriers to obtaining consent may inform ongoing and future trials. ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to describe and examine determinants of consent rates in an international heparin thromboprophylaxis trial (Prophylaxis for ThromboEmbolism in Critical Care Trial, clinicaltrials.gov NCT00182143). DesignThroughout the 4-year trial, research personnel approached eligible critically ill patients or their substitute decision makers for informed consent. Whether consent was obtained or declined was documented daily. SettingThe trial was conducted in 67 centers in 6 countries. Measurements and main resultsA total of 3764 patients were randomized. The overall consent rate was 82.2% (range, 50%-100%) across participating centers. Consent was obtained from substitute decision makers and patients in 90.1% and 9.9% of cases, respectively. Five factors were independently associated with consent rates. Research coordinators with more experience achieved higher consent rates (odds ratio [OR], 3.43; 95% confidence interval, 2.42-4.86; P < .001 for those with >10 years of experience). Consent rates were higher in smaller intensive care units with less than 15 beds compared with intensive care units with 15 to 20 beds, 21 to 25 beds, and greater than 25 beds (all ORs, <0.5; P < .001) and were higher in centers with more than 1 full-time research staff (OR, 1.95; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-2.99; P < .001). Consent rates were lower in centers affiliated with the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group or the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group compared with other centers (OR, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.77; P < .001). Finally, consent rates were highest during the pilot trial, lowest during the initiation of the full trial, and increased over years of recruitment (P < .001). ConclusionsCharacteristics of study centers, research infrastructure, and experience were important factors associated with successfully procuring informed consent to participate in this thromboprophylaxis trial.

Optimal Mode of clearance in critically ill patients with Acute Kidney Injury (OMAKI) - a pilot randomized controlled trial of hemofiltration versus hemodialysis: a Canadian Critical Care Trials Group project

IntroductionAmong critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) needing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), the effect of convective (via continuous venovenous hemofiltration [CVVH]) versus diffusive (via continuous venovenous hemodialysis [CVVHD]) solute clearance on clinical outcomes is unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of comparing these two modes in a randomized trial.MethodsThis was a multicenter open-label parallel-group pilot randomized trial of CVVH versus CVVHD. Using concealed allocation, we randomized critically ill adults with AKI and hemodynamic instability to CVVH or CVVHD, with a prescribed small solute clearance of 35 mL/kg/hour in both arms. The primary outcome was trial feasibility, defined by randomization of >25% of eligible patients, delivery of >75% of the prescribed CRRT dose, and follow-up of >95% of patients to 60 days. A secondary analysis using a mixed-effects model examined the impact of therapy on illness severity, defined by sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, over the first week.ResultsWe randomized 78 patients (mean age 61.5 years; 39% women; 23% with chronic kidney disease; 82% with sepsis). Baseline SOFA scores (mean 15.9, SD 3.2) were similar between groups. We recruited 55% of eligible patients, delivered >80% of the prescribed dose in each arm, and achieved 100% follow-up. SOFA tended to decline more over the first week in CVVH recipients (-0.8, 95% CI -2.1, +0.5) driven by a reduction in vasopressor requirements. Mortality (54% CVVH; 55% CVVHD) and dialysis dependence in survivors (24% CVVH; 19% CVVHD) at 60 days were similar.ConclusionsOur results suggest that a large trial comparing CVVH to CVVHD would be feasible. There is a trend toward improved vasopressor requirements among CVVH-treated patients over the first week of treatment.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00675818

A Canadian Critical Care Trials Group project in collaboration with the international forum for acute care trialists - Collaborative H1N1 Adjuvant Treatment pilot trial (CHAT): study protocol and design of a randomized controlled trial.

BackgroundSwine origin influenza A/H1N1 infection (H1N1) emerged in early 2009 and rapidly spread to humans. For most infected individuals, symptoms were mild and self-limited; however, a small number developed a more severe clinical syndrome characterized by profound respiratory failure with hospital mortality ranging from 10 to 30%. While supportive care and neuraminidase inhibitors are the main treatment for influenza, data from observational and interventional studies suggest that the course of influenza can be favorably influenced by agents not classically considered as influenza treatments. Multiple observational studies have suggested that HMGCoA reductase inhibitors (statins) can exert a class effect in attenuating inflammation. The Collaborative H1N1 Adjuvant Treatment (CHAT) Pilot Trial sought to investigate the feasibility of conducting a trial during a global pandemic in critically ill patients with H1N1 with the goal of informing the design of a larger trial powered to determine impact of statins on important outcomes.Methods/DesignA multi-national, pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) of once daily enteral rosuvastatin versus matched placebo administered for 14 days for the treatment of critically ill patients with suspected, probable or confirmed H1N1 infection. We propose to randomize 80 critically ill adults with a moderate to high index of suspicion for H1N1 infection who require mechanical ventilation and have received antiviral therapy for ≤ 72 hours. Site investigators, research coordinators and clinical pharmacists will be blinded to treatment assignment. Only research pharmacy staff will be aware of treatment assignment. We propose several approaches to informed consent including a priori consent from the substitute decision maker (SDM), waived and deferred consent. The primary outcome of the CHAT trial is the proportion of eligible patients enrolled in the study. Secondary outcomes will evaluate adherence to medication administration regimens, the proportion of primary and secondary endpoints collected, the number of patients receiving open-label statins, consent withdrawals and the effect of approved consent models on recruitment rates.DiscussionSeveral aspects of study design including the need to include central randomization, preserve allocation concealment, ensure study blinding compare to a matched placebo and the use novel consent models pose challenges to investigators conducting pandemic research. Moreover, study implementation requires that trial design be pragmatic and initiated in a short time period amidst uncertainty regarding the scope and duration of the pandemic.Trial Registration NumberISRCTN45190901

Does dalteparin PROTECT better than heparin?

Expanded abstractCitationThe PROTECT Investigators for the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group and the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group: Dalteparin versus Unfractionated Heparin in Critically Ill Patients. N Engl J Med 2011, 364:1305-1314.BackgroundIt is unclear whether there is a clinically significant advantage to prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) in mixed medical/surgical critically ill adult patients.MethodsObjective: To compare once daily dalteparin with twice daily unfractionated heparin for primary prophylaxis of proximal deep venous thrombosis in critically ill adults.Design: A superiority randomized double-blinded controlled trial from 2006 to 2010 in both medical and surgical ICUs. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00182143)Setting: Multi-center, international medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs)Subjects: Critically ill adults expected to remain in the ICU for at least 3 days.Intervention: Patients were randomized to either twice daily UFH or daily dalteparin for the duration of ICU admission.Outcomes: The primary endpoint was proximal leg deep venous thrombosis (DVT), at least three days after randomization, detected on twice weekly screening ultrasound. Secondary endpoints were: any DVT, pulmonary embolism (PE), venous thromboembolism (VTE), death, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), major bleeding, and composite death/VTE.ResultsThree thousand seven hundred and forty-six subjects were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Proximal leg DVT occurred in 96 of 1873 (5.1%) patients randomized to dalteparin versus 109 of 1873 (5.8%) patients randomized to UFH (hazard ratio in the dalteparin group, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.23; P = 0.57). The incidence of PE was 1.3% in the dalteparin group compared to 2.3% in the UFH group (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.88; P = 0.01). There was no mortality difference and no difference in major bleeding between the two study arms. There was a statistically significant decrease in incidence of HIT in the dalteparin group in the per-protocol analysis, but not in the intention-to-treat analysis.LimitationsComparing the incidence of PE was a secondary endpoint and the study was not appropriately powered for this conclusion.ConclusionsAmong critically ill adult patients, dalteparin was not superior to UFH at preventing proximal lower extremity DVTs. There is a suggestion that dalteparin might be superior to UFH at preventing pulmonary embolism but a larger trial is necessary to confirm this result.

Clinical Management of Pandemic 2009 Influenza A(H1N1) Infection

Antiviral therapy and vaccination are important strategies for controlling pandemic 2009 influenza A(H1N1) but efficacy depends on the timing of administration and is often limited by supply shortage. Patients with dyspnea, tachypnea, evidence of hypoxemia, and pulmonary infiltrates on chest radiograph should be hospitalized. Patients with severe illness or underlying medical conditions that increase the risk of more severe disease should be treated with oseltamivir or zanamivir as soon as possible, without waiting for the results of laboratory tests. Lung-protective ventilation strategy with a low tidal volume and adequate pressure, in addition to a conservative fluid management approach, is recommended when treating adult patients with ARDS. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation has emerged as an important rescue therapy for critically ill patients. Use of systemic steroids was associated with delayed viral clearance in severe acute respiratory syndrome and H3N2 infection. Low-dose corticosteroids may be considered in the treatment of refractory septic shock. Passive immunotherapy in the form of convalescent plasma or hyperimmune globulin may be explored as rescue therapy. More data are needed to explore the potential role of IV gamma globulin and other drugs with immunomodulating properties, such as statins, gemfibrozil, and N-acetyl-cysteine. Health-care workers must apply strict standard and droplet precautions when dealing with suspected and confirmed case and upgrade to airborne precautions when performing aerosol-generating procedures. Nonpharmacologic measures, such as early case isolation, household quarantine, school/workplace closure, good community hygiene, and restrictions on travel are useful measures in controlling an influenza pandemic at its early phase.

Ventilator-associated pneumonia: current status and future recommendations

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common hazardous complication in ICU patients. The aim of the current review is to give an update on the current status and future recommendations for VAP prevention. This article gives an updated review of the current literature on VAP. The first part briefly reviews pathogenesis and epidemiology while the second includes an in-depth review of evidence-based practice guidelines (EBPG) and new technologies developed for prevention of VAP. VAP remains a frequent and costly complication of critical illness with a pooled relative risk of 9-27% and mortality of 25-50%. Strikingly, VAP adds an estimated cost of more than $40,000 to a typical hospital admission. An important aetiological mechanism of VAP is gross or micro-aspiration of oropharyngeal organisms around the cuff of the endotracheal tube (ETT) into the distal bronchi. Prevention of VAP is preferable. Preventative measures can be divided into two main groups: the implemen- tation of EBPGs and use of device-based technologies. EBPGs have been authored jointly by the American Thoracic Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. The Canadian Critical Care Trials group also published VAP Guidelines in 2008. Their recommendations are detailed in this review. The current device-based technologies include drainage of subglottic secretions, silver coated ETTs aiming to influence the internal bio-layer of the ETT, better sealing of the lower airways with ultrathin cuffs and loops for optimal cuff pressure control. EBPG consensus includes: elevation of the head of the bed, use of daily "sedation vacations" and decontamination of the oropharynx. Technological solutions should aim to use the most comprehensive combination of subglottic suction of secretions, optimization of ETT cuff pressure and ultrathin cuffs. VAP is a type of hospital-acquired pneumonia that develops more than 48 h after endotracheal intubation. Its incidence is estimated to be 9-27%, with a mortality of 25-50% [Am J Respir Crit Care Med 171:388-416 (2005), Am J Med 85:499-506 (1988), Chest 122:2115-2121 (2002), Intensive Care Med 35:9-29 (2009)]. The most important target in VAP handling is its prevention. The aim of this article is to review the pathogenesis, epidemiology and the different strategies/technologies for prevention of VAP.

Critical Care Nephrology: Core Curriculum 2009

In the inpatient setting, a high proportion of nephrology consultations are requested for patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). These patients may have acute kidney injury (AKI) or may be critically ill and have end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Thus, nephrologists need to understand recent evidence-based advances in the field of critical care, as well as areas of ongoing controversy and investigation. In this article, we summarize the diagnosis and management of shock, as well as the management of sepsis, acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS), and fulminant hepatic failure, all of which are associated with high mortality in the critical care setting. We discuss infectious complications of critical care, including ventilator associated pneumonia and catheter related infections. Supportive care, including nutrition, insulin therapy and anemia management are reviewed. Dialysis considerations in critically ill patients are discussed. Lastly, we review the management of several life-threatening intoxications, many of which require early recognition and consideration of dialysis.

Investigator-led clinical research consortia: The Canadian Critical Care Trials Group

Advances in the care of critically ill patients are dependent upon rigorous clinical research undertaken to characterize natural history and risk factors, and determine optimal approaches to the management of the diseases of the critically ill patient. The Canadian Critical Care Trials Group (CCCTG) was formed in 1989 to foster such research. It has grown to become a national, multidisciplinary organization with more than 100 members, and more than 3 dozen active research programs. Its members have been highly successful in obtaining funding for, completing, and publishing well-designed studies that have informed international practice in areas such as transfusion, stress ulcer prophylaxis, long term outcomes from acute respiratory distress syndrome, diagnosis and management of infection in the intensive care unit, and end-of-life care. In the process, the CCCTG has developed a highly effective culture of scientific mentoring, and has served as a model for investigator-led critical care research groups around the world. This review summarizes the history, activities, approaches, and challenges of the CCCTG, in the conviction that investigator-led groups such as ours represent the future of intensive care unit-based research.

Enrollment of intensive care unit patients into clinical studies: A trinational survey of researchersʼ experiences, beliefs, and practices*

As critical care practice increases in scope, size, and complexity, enrollment of critically ill patients into clinical studies is increasing. To understand the experiences, beliefs, and practices of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group and Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group regarding enrollment of critically ill children and adults into clinical studies. Survey items generated by the research team were formatted in four domains: experiences, beliefs, practices, and demographics. Five research coordinators and five physicians pretested the survey, providing feedback on clarity and completeness. Intrarater reliability (16 participants, 2 wks apart) was very good. The response rate was 284 of 322 (88.2%). Respondents worked in intensive care units with a mean of 20.5 (SD 10) beds, caring for adults (72.2%), pediatric (18.8%), and both groups (9%) of critically ill patients. Clinical research was considered key to the future of improved clinical care. To enhance recruitment efficiency, respondents widely endorsed the effectiveness of increasing participating centers, after-hours, and weekend enrollment (all 3 scores 7 [6-7[sqb], reflecting median [interquartile range] on 1-7 scale). Overall, the effectiveness (6 [4-7]), feasibility (5 [4-6]) and ethics (5 [4-7]) of coenrollment into more than one randomized trial was endorsed. Half of respondents have adopted coenrollment with scientific and psychosocial provisos. Alternative designs, such as factorial and cluster randomized trials, were considered when suitable. Modifications to consent approaches (deferred consent (7 [6-7]), waived consent (7 [6-7]), or consent from two physicians in the absence of a substitute decision maker (6 [5-7])) were considered effective, but beliefs about the feasibility and ethics of some of these approaches varied. Clinical research is highly valued by these intensive care unit communities. Strategies to increase capacity involve enhancing recruitment efficiencies, considering alternative study designs and expanding consent procedures. Thoughtfully implementing these strategies may advance the care of critically ill adults and children.

Prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: possible role of antimicrobials administeredviathe respiratory tract

To the Editors: We read with interest the comprehensive and useful review of Lorente et al. 1 regarding the evidence concerning measures for prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The authors did not comment on the prophylactic use of antimicrobial agents administered via the respiratory tract as a potential preventive strategy for VAP. Relevant guidelines of the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group and the Canadian Critical Care Society 2 recommend against the prophylactic use of oral …

Discordance between perception and treatment practices associated with intensive care unit-acquired bacteriuria and funguria: A Canadian physician survey*

To determine physician practice and perception about the management of intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired bacteriuria and funguria. Cross-sectional, self-administered, Web-based survey. All provinces within Canada. Staff ICU physicians who are members of either the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group or the Canadian Critical Care Society. Survey items were developed by four ICU clinicians, and survey sensibility was assessed by five independent intensivists. Nonrespondents received three follow-up reminders. Participants were asked questions about general perceptions and practices regarding the management of ICU-acquired bacteriuria and funguria. Clinical scenarios were used to elicit management strategies, including antimicrobial prescriptions. Ninety of 198 physicians (45%) responded. Bacteriuria was perceived by 63% of the respondents to be a frequent but low-morbidity problem. Most intensivists (98%) did not use a protocol for management. Traditional symptoms were rarely used to interpret the significance of bacteriuria. Presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (93%), presence of hemodynamic changes (91%), and urinalysis (69%) were used often. Within clinical scenarios, source control via urinary catheter change was not universal, ranging from 44% to 67% in the various scenarios, even in patients presenting with septic shock. Prescription of antimicrobials was common across scenarios despite the low-morbidity perception. In an asymptomatic patient, 19% of respondents would prescribe antimicrobials. Changing the species from fungus to bacteria and the presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome or shock increased the likelihood of antimicrobial use up to 70% to 80%. ICU physicians perceive bacteriuria to have low morbidity. However, management approaches vary considerably, and systemic antimicrobials are frequently prescribed. Increased clinical instability and bacterial vs. fungal organisms isolated in urine cultures increased the use of antimicrobials. The considerable variability in practice and discordance between likelihood of urinary tract infection and antimicrobial prescription, highlights the need for additional clinical trials.