Rapid uptake of adjunctive corticosteroids for critically ill adults with septic shock following publication of ADRENAL trial. A multicenter, retrospective analysis of prescribing practices in Queensland Intensive Care Units

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Kyle C. White , Anis Chaba , Jason Meyer , Mahesh Ramanan , Alexis Tabah , Antony G. Attokaran , Aashish Kumar , James McCullough , Kiran Shekar , Peter Garrett , Philippa McIlroy , Siva Senthuran , Stephen Luke , Kevin B. Laupland , on behalf of the Queensland Critical Care Research Network (QCCRN)
{"title":"Rapid uptake of adjunctive corticosteroids for critically ill adults with septic shock following publication of ADRENAL trial. A multicenter, retrospective analysis of prescribing practices in Queensland Intensive Care Units","authors":"Kyle C. White ,&nbsp;Anis Chaba ,&nbsp;Jason Meyer ,&nbsp;Mahesh Ramanan ,&nbsp;Alexis Tabah ,&nbsp;Antony G. Attokaran ,&nbsp;Aashish Kumar ,&nbsp;James McCullough ,&nbsp;Kiran Shekar ,&nbsp;Peter Garrett ,&nbsp;Philippa McIlroy ,&nbsp;Siva Senthuran ,&nbsp;Stephen Luke ,&nbsp;Kevin B. Laupland ,&nbsp;on behalf of the Queensland Critical Care Research Network (QCCRN)","doi":"10.1016/j.accpm.2024.101435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Septic shock is common and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The ADRENAL trial examined the use of hydrocortisone in patients with septic shock, demonstrating no difference in patient-centred outcomes but a decrease in the time to shock resolution. The change in clinical practice related to the publication of the ADRENAL trial is currently unknown.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A retrospective cohort study examining the use of hydrocortisone in patients with septic shock was conducted in 12 intensive care units (ICUs). A segmented linear regression was performed to identify a stepwise change in hydrocortisone administration and 90-day mortality associated with the publication of the ADRENAL trial.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included 4,198 patients with a mean age of 58 years (standard deviation, SD17), and the median noradrenaline equivalent score (NEE) was 0.07 μg/kg/min (IQR 0.02–0.17). Segmented regression analysis for hydrocortisone administration identified two breakpoints, 3 months before and 6 months after publication, leading to three periods: Pre-publication, Transition, and Post-publication. Compared to the pre-publication period, the Transition and Post-publication cohorts had a higher proportion of hydrocortisone administration (28% <em>vs.</em> 34% <em>vs.</em> 43%; <em>p</em> &lt; 0.0001). Furthermore, after adjustment for temporal change, the transition period had a significant change in the slope of the proportion of patients receiving hydrocortisone (−0.1% per month <em>vs.</em> +1.4% per month; <em>p</em> = 0.026), whereas this was not statistically significant during the post-publication period (+0.1% per month, p = 0.66). After adjusting for confounders, the Transition and Post-publication periods were independently associated with an increase in hydrocortisone (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.14–1.77; <em>p</em> = 0.0015 and OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.74–2.36; <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, after adjusting for confounders, when compared to the Pre-transition period, the use of hydrocortisone was associated with a statistically significant decrease in 90-day mortality (14% <em>vs.</em> 24% absolute difference, aHR for hydrocortisone effect −0.81; 95% CI 0.65–0.99; <em>p</em> = 0.044).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Publication of the ADRENAL trial changed clinical practice in Queensland ICUs with increased prescription of hydrocortisone for patients with septic shock with an associated reduction in mortality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48762,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","volume":"43 6","pages":"Article 101435"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352556824000936","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Septic shock is common and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The ADRENAL trial examined the use of hydrocortisone in patients with septic shock, demonstrating no difference in patient-centred outcomes but a decrease in the time to shock resolution. The change in clinical practice related to the publication of the ADRENAL trial is currently unknown.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study examining the use of hydrocortisone in patients with septic shock was conducted in 12 intensive care units (ICUs). A segmented linear regression was performed to identify a stepwise change in hydrocortisone administration and 90-day mortality associated with the publication of the ADRENAL trial.

Results

We included 4,198 patients with a mean age of 58 years (standard deviation, SD17), and the median noradrenaline equivalent score (NEE) was 0.07 μg/kg/min (IQR 0.02–0.17). Segmented regression analysis for hydrocortisone administration identified two breakpoints, 3 months before and 6 months after publication, leading to three periods: Pre-publication, Transition, and Post-publication. Compared to the pre-publication period, the Transition and Post-publication cohorts had a higher proportion of hydrocortisone administration (28% vs. 34% vs. 43%; p < 0.0001). Furthermore, after adjustment for temporal change, the transition period had a significant change in the slope of the proportion of patients receiving hydrocortisone (−0.1% per month vs. +1.4% per month; p = 0.026), whereas this was not statistically significant during the post-publication period (+0.1% per month, p = 0.66). After adjusting for confounders, the Transition and Post-publication periods were independently associated with an increase in hydrocortisone (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.14–1.77; p = 0.0015 and OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.74–2.36; p < 0.001, respectively). Furthermore, after adjusting for confounders, when compared to the Pre-transition period, the use of hydrocortisone was associated with a statistically significant decrease in 90-day mortality (14% vs. 24% absolute difference, aHR for hydrocortisone effect −0.81; 95% CI 0.65–0.99; p = 0.044).

Conclusion

Publication of the ADRENAL trial changed clinical practice in Queensland ICUs with increased prescription of hydrocortisone for patients with septic shock with an associated reduction in mortality.
ADRENAL 试验公布后,成人脓毒性休克重症患者迅速使用辅助性皮质类固醇。昆士兰重症监护病房处方实践的多中心回顾性分析。
背景:脓毒性休克很常见,与严重的发病率和死亡率有关。ADRENAL 试验对脓毒性休克患者使用氢化可的松进行了研究,结果表明以患者为中心的治疗效果没有差异,但休克缓解的时间有所缩短。目前尚不清楚 ADRENAL 试验发表后临床实践发生了哪些变化:方法:在 12 个重症监护病房 (ICU) 中开展了一项回顾性队列研究,考察了脓毒性休克患者使用氢化可的松的情况。结果:我们纳入了 4,198 名脓毒症休克患者:我们共纳入了 4198 名患者,平均年龄为 58 岁(标准差,SD17),去甲肾上腺素等效评分(NEE)中位数为 0.07 µg/kg/min(IQR 0.02 - 0.17)。氢化可的松用药的分段回归分析确定了两个断点,分别是发表前 3 个月和发表后 6 个月,从而划分出三个时期:出版前、过渡期和出版后。与发表前相比,过渡期和发表后组群使用氢化可的松的比例更高(28% vs. 34% vs. 43%; p 结论:与发表前相比,过渡期和发表后组群使用氢化可的松的比例更高(28% vs. 34% vs. 43%; p):ADRENAL 试验的发表改变了昆士兰重症监护病房的临床实践,增加了脓毒性休克患者氢化可的松的处方量,从而降低了死亡率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.50%
发文量
150
审稿时长
18 days
期刊介绍: Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine (formerly Annales Françaises d''Anesthésie et de Réanimation) publishes in English the highest quality original material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信