Psychological distress and trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic: survey of doctors practising anaesthesia, intensive care medicine, and emergency medicine in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland

Brugada syndrome (BrS), a type of sudden arrhythmic unexpected death syndrome (SADS), is characterized by specific electrocardiogram (ECG) changes, a structurally normal heart, and susceptibility to life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. General anesthesia (GA) is usually used for major surgery in patients with BrS due to concerns that some local anesthetic agents may precipitate critical arrhythmias. The majority of ophthalmic surgeries are successfully carried out under regional anesthesia (RA). The literature does not address the use of ophthalmic RA in patients with BrS except one report of peribulbar block for glaucoma surgery. This clinical case report and the liertature review suggests that for BrS patients presenting for vitreoretinal surgery, a sub-tenon block, with or without sedation may safely be used as a primary anaethestic technique.

Objectives: Iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome (IWS) associated with opioid and sedative use for medical purposes has a reported high prevalence and associated morbidity. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, utilization, and characteristics of opioid and sedative weaning and IWS policies/protocols in the adult ICU population. Design: International, multicenter, observational, point prevalence study. Setting: Adult ICUs. Patients: All patients aged 18 years and older in the ICU on the date of data collection who received parenteral opioids or sedatives in the previous 24 hours. Interventions: None. Measurements and main results: ICUs selected 1 day for data collection between June 1 and September 30, 2021. Patient demographic data, opioid and sedative medication use, and weaning and IWS assessment data were collected for the previous 24 hours. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients weaned from opioids and sedatives using an institutional policy/protocol on the data collection day. There were 2,402 patients in 229 ICUs from 11 countries screened for opioid and sedative use; 1,506 (63%) patients received parenteral opioids, and/or sedatives in the previous 24 hours. There were 90 (39%) ICUs with a weaning policy/protocol which was used in 176 (12%) patients, and 23 (10%) ICUs with an IWS policy/protocol which was used in 9 (0.6%) patients. The weaning policy/protocol for 47 (52%) ICUs did not define when to initiate weaning, and the policy/protocol for 24 (27%) ICUs did not specify the degree of weaning. A weaning policy/protocol was used in 34% (176/521) and IWS policy/protocol in 9% (9/97) of patients admitted to an ICU with such a policy/protocol. Among 485 patients eligible for weaning policy/protocol utilization based on duration of opioid/sedative use initiation criterion within individual ICU policies/protocols 176 (36%) had it used, and among 54 patients on opioids and/or sedatives ≥ 72 hours, 9 (17%) had an IWS policy/protocol used by the data collection day. Conclusions: This international observational study found that a small proportion of ICUs use policies/protocols for opioid and sedative weaning or IWS, and even when these policies/protocols are in place, they are implemented in a small percentage of patients.

A man in his 70s, admitted to intensive care unit following an out of hospital cardiac arrest, had a nasogastric (NG) tube inserted on admission. Correct placement of the NG tube had been confirmed using National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) criteria and was used for feeding without incident. He remained intubated and ventilated throughout his stay. On day 9 his oxygen requirements increased with subsequent chest imaging revealing an incidental gastric perforation secondary to NG tube migration. The NG tube was removed intact and undamaged. The patient appeared to improve without sequelae from the perforation or signs of abdominal sepsis. Unfortunately his condition deteriorated due to a large right atrial thrombus and life sustaining treatments were withdrawn.

Sodium valproate is a commonly prescribed anticonvulsant medication; however, it can cause uncommon side effects such as hyperammonaemia and encephalopathy. We present the case of a male in his early 50s brought to the emergency department after being found collapsed by his wife, with an empty bottle of sodium valproate tablets. The patient developed hyperammonaemic encephalopathy due to sodium valproate overdose and was treated with supportive care and renal replacement therapy. This case highlights the importance of recognising the potential complications of sodium valproate and its prompt treatment.

Background Non-medical prescriber numbers have increased rapidly over the last 10 years, with increasingly diverse roles and backgrounds. Previous evaluations of their antibiotic prescribing demonstrated it was generally of a high quality and guideline-driven, but recent evidence is lacking and the data are not easily accessible. Aims To describe changes in the non-medical prescriber population and patterns in dispensed antibiotic volumes between 2016–2021, highlighting evidence of good antimicrobial stewardship and where further interventions may be required. Methods An analysis of retrospective non-medical prescriber prescribing data was performed, to determine the numbers of independent non-medical prescribers and the patterns of prescribed community-dispensed antibiotics in England between 2016–2021. Findings Between 2016–2021, it was found that independent non-medical prescriber numbers in England rose by 54%. Whilst they remain predominantly nurses (76%), the numbers of pharmacists and allied health professionals have increased. Non-medical prescribers were responsible for 10.6% of all dispensed antibiotic items prescribed in primary care in England. However, the proportion of dispensed antibiotic items prescribed by these non-medical prescribers reduced by over 50%. Prescribing in 2020 differed from previous years, with increased high-risk antibiotic prescribing. Conclusion The quality of prescribing generally appears good and in accordance with national guidelines and principles of good antimicrobial stewardship. The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic prompted changes in antibiotic prescribing behaviour.

Introduction: Critical care pharmacists improve the quality and efficiency of medication therapy whilst reducing treatment costs where they are available. UK critical care pharmacist deployment was described in 2015, highlighting a deficit in numbers, experience level, and critical care access to pharmacy services over the 7-day week. Since then, national workforce standards have been emphasised, quality indicators published, and service commissioning documents produced, reinforced by care quality assessments. Whether these initiatives have resulted in further development of the UK critical care pharmacy workforce is unknown. This evaluation provides a 2020 status update. Methods: The 2015 electronic data entry tool was updated and circulated for completion by UK critical care pharmacists. The tool captured workforce data disposition as it was just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, at critical care unit level. Main findings: Data were received for 334 critical care units from 203 organisations (96% of UK critical care units). Overall, 98.2% of UK critical care units had specific clinical pharmacist time dedicated to the unit. The median weekday pharmacist input to each level 3 equivalent bed was 0.066 (0.043-0.088) whole time equivalents, a significant increase from the median position in 2015 (+ 0.021, p < 0.0001). Despite this progress, pharmacist availability remains below national minimum standards (0.1/level 3 equivalent bed). Most units (71.9%) had access to prescribing pharmacists. Geographical variation in pharmacist staffing levels were evident, and weekend services remain extremely limited. Conclusions: Availability of clinical pharmacists in UK adult critical care units is improving. However, national standards are not routinely met despite widely publicised quality indicators, commissioning specifications, and assessments. Additional measures are needed to address persistent deficits and realise gains in organisational and patient-level outcomes. These measures must include promotion of cross-professional collaborative working, adjusted funding models, and a nationally recognised training pathway for critical care pharmacists.

Objective: Advanced clinical practitioners are a growing part of the National Health Service workforce in the United Kingdom (UK). The concept stems from the progression of skills, knowledge, and experience of healthcare professionals (including nursing, physiotherapists, paramedics, and pharmacists) to a higher level of practice. The addition of advanced critical care practitioners (ACCPs) to the multidisciplinary team of the UK adult critical care is recent; they form part of the fabric of the advanced clinical practitioner workforce. This is a narrative review of the role of ACCPs, considering the evolution of the role, training, accreditation, and evidence supporting the safety profile in adult intensive care in the UK. Method: This is a narrative review. Conclusion: ACCPs have evolved from an ad hoc and local training structure, to a UK-wide competency standard and training developed within the Faculty of Intensive Care Medicine. This formed in concert with the advanced clinical practitioner concept. As advanced practice is very much multiprofessional in the UK, a single regulator for multiple base professions is likely neither feasible nor realistic. Over the last 5 years, the UK picture of advanced practice has slowly standardised; an ACCP securely fits under the advanced clinical practitioner umbrella. The ACCP workforce has moved from a handful of early adopters, regional hubs, to a position across most critical care units now have or are developing a team of practitioners. The evidence base for the safety profile of ACCPs is evolving and shows parity in outcomes in the areas currently investigated. The ACCP role provides a vision of a multiprofessional workforce for the future of staffing of critical care services that is diverse and inclusive, not with the intention of competing with our medical colleagues.