Browsing by Author "Cook, Deborah J"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for critically ill patients with bloodstream infection: a pilot randomized clinical trial
    (2018-02-17) Daneman, Nick; Rishu, Asgar H; Pinto, Ruxandra; Aslanian, Pierre; Bagshaw, Sean M; Carignan, Alex; Charbonney, Emmanuel; Coburn, Bryan; Cook, Deborah J; Detsky, Michael E; Dodek, Peter; Hall, Richard; Kumar, Anand; Lamontagne, Francois; Lauzier, Francois; Marshall, John C; Martin, Claudio M; McIntyre, Lauralyn; Muscedere, John; Reynolds, Steven; Sligl, Wendy; Stelfox, Henry T; Wilcox, M. E; Fowler, Robert A
    Abstract Background Shorter-duration antibiotic treatment is sufficient for a range of bacterial infections, but has not been adequately studied for bloodstream infections. Our systematic review, survey, and observational study indicated equipoise for a trial of 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment for bloodstream infections; a pilot randomized clinical trial (RCT) was a necessary next step to assess feasibility of a larger trial. Methods We conducted an open, pilot RCT of antibiotic treatment duration among critically ill patients with bloodstream infection across 11 intensive care units (ICUs). Antibiotic selection, dosing and route were at the discretion of the treating team; patients were randomized 1:1 to intervention arms consisting of two fixed durations of treatment – 7 versus 14 days. We recruited adults with a positive blood culture yielding pathogenic bacteria identified while in ICU. We excluded patients with severe immunosuppression, foci of infection with an established requirement for prolonged treatment, single cultures with potential contaminants, or cultures yielding Staphylococcus aureus or fungi. The primary feasibility outcomes were recruitment rate and adherence to treatment duration protocol. Secondary outcomes included 90-day, ICU and hospital mortality, relapse of bacteremia, lengths of stay, mechanical ventilation and vasopressor duration, antibiotic-free days, Clostridium difficile, antibiotic adverse events, and secondary infection with antimicrobial-resistant organisms. Results We successfully achieved our target sample size (n = 115) and average recruitment rate of 1 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.3–1.5) patient/ICU/month. Adherence to treatment duration was achieved in 89/115 (77%) patients. Adherence differed by underlying source of infection: 26/31 (84%) lung; 18/29 (62%) intra-abdominal; 20/26 (77%) urinary tract; 8/9 (89%) vascular-catheter; 4/4 (100%) skin/soft tissue; 2/4 (50%) other; and 11/12 (92%) unknown sources. Patients experienced a median (IQR) 14 (8–17) antibiotic-free days (of the 28 days after blood culture collection). Antimicrobial-related adverse events included hepatitis in 1 (1%) patient, Clostridium difficile infection in 4 (4%), and secondary infection with highly resistant microorganisms in 10 (9%). Ascertainment was complete for all study outcomes in ICU, in hospital and at 90 days. Conclusion It is feasible to conduct a RCT to determine whether 7 versus 14 days of antibiotic treatment is associated with comparable 90-day survival. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov , identifier: NCT02261506 . Registered on 26 September 2014.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Bereavement interventions to support informal caregivers in the intensive care unit: a systematic review
    (2021-05-12) Moss, Stephana J; Wollny, Krista; Poulin, Therese G; Cook, Deborah J; Stelfox, Henry T; Ordons, Amanda R d; Fiest, Kirsten M
    Abstract Background Informal caregivers of critically ill patients in intensive care unit (ICUs) experience negative psychological sequelae that worsen after death. We synthesized outcomes reported from ICU bereavement interventions intended to improve informal caregivers’ ability to cope with grief. Data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to October 2020. Study selection Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of bereavement interventions to support informal caregivers of adult patients who died in ICU. Data extraction Two reviewers independently extracted data in duplicate. Narrative synthesis was conducted. Data synthesis Bereavement interventions were categorized according to the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence three-tiered model of bereavement support according to the level of need: (1) Universal information provided to all those bereaved; (2) Selected or targeted non-specialist support provided to those who are at-risk of developing complex needs; and/or (3) Professional specialist interventions provided to those with a high level of complex needs. Outcome measures were synthesized according to core outcomes established for evaluating bereavement support for adults who have lost other adults to illness. Results Three studies of ICU bereavement interventions from 31 ICUs across 26 hospitals were included. One trial examining the effect of family presence at brain death assessment integrated all three categories of support but did not report significant improvement in emotional or psychological distress. Two other trials assessed a condolence letter intervention, which did not decrease grief symptoms and may have increased symptoms of depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, and a storytelling intervention that found no significant improvements in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, or complicated grief. Four of nine core bereavement outcomes were not assessed anytime in follow-up. Conclusions Currently available trial evidence is sparse and does not support the use of bereavement interventions for informal caregivers of critically ill patients who die in the ICU.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Erratum to: Pediatric intensive care stress ulcer prevention (PIC-UP): a protocol for a pilot randomized trial
    (2017-08-18) Duffett, Mark; Choong, Karen; Foster, Jennifer; Gilfoyle, Elaine; Lacroix, Jacques; Pai, Nikhil; Thabane, Lehana; Cook, Deborah J
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Pediatric intensive care stress ulcer prevention (PIC-UP): a protocol for a pilot randomized trial
    (2017-05-19) Duffett, Mark; Choong, Karen; Foster, Jennifer; Gilfoyle, Elaine; Lacroix, Jacques; Pai, Nikhil; Thabane, Lehana; Cook, Deborah J
    Abstract Background Despite sparse pediatric data on effectiveness, the majority of critically ill children receive medications to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Stress ulcer prophylaxis may have unintended consequences—increasing the risk of nosocomial infections—which may be more serious and common than the bleeding which these drugs are prescribed to prevent. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in pediatric critical care are exceptionally challenging to complete, thus a rigorous pilot RCT is crucial. The objective of this pilot RCT is to assess the feasibility of a large multicentre RCT of stress ulcer prophylaxis with pantoprazole to prevent upper GI bleeding vs. placebo. Methods A multi-centre blinded pilot RCT of 120 children in six Canadian PICUs. Children expected to require mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h will be randomized to receive intravenous pantoprazole 1 mg/kg or identical placebo once daily until they no longer need mechanical ventilation. We have four feasibility outcomes and will consider the trial successful if we achieve: 1. Effective screening: If >80% of eligible patients are approached for consent. 2. Timely enrollment: if >80% of participants receive their first dose of the assigned study drug within 1 day of becoming eligible. 3. Participant accrual: If the average monthly enrolment is two or more participants per centre per month. 4. Protocol adherence: if >90% of doses are administered according to the protocol. Discussion There are many uncertainties about the risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis. In an era of widespread use—where clinicians prescribe prophylaxis to the more severely ill—a large, rigorous RCT is required. A trial to determine if a strategy of withholding stress ulcer prophylaxis is not inferior to a strategy of routine stress ulcer prophylaxis will be challenging. A carefully designed and implemented pilot trial is essential. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02929563 (Registered October 3, 2016).