Henry Silverman

Weaning covers the entire process of liberating the patient from mechanical support and from the endotracheal tube. Many controversial questions remain concerning the best methods for conducting this process. An International Consensus Conference was held in April 2005 to provide recommendations regarding the management of this process. An 11-member international jury answered five pre-defined questions. 1) What is known about the epidemiology of weaning problems? 2) What is the pathophysiology of weaning failure? 3) What is the usual process of initial weaning from the ventilator? 4) Is there a role for different ventilator modes in more difficult weaning? 5) How should patients with prolonged weaning failure be managed? The main recommendations were as follows. 1) Patients should be categorised into three groups based on the difficulty and duration of the weaning process. 2) Weaning should be considered as early as possible. 3) A spontaneous breathing trial is the major diagnostic test to determine whether patients can be successfully extubated. 4) The initial trial should last 30 min and consist of either T-tube breathing or low levels of pressure support. 5) Pressure support or assist-control ventilation modes should be favoured in patients failing an initial trial/trials. 6) Noninvasive ventilation techniques should be considered in selected patients to shorten the duration of intubation but should not be routinely used as a tool for extubation failure.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether myocardial hyporesponsiveness to administered catecholamines occurs in human sepsis and whether this phenomenon is associated with impaired beta-adrenergic receptor stimulation of cyclic adenosine monophosphate. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Medical ICU in a university hospital. PATIENTS: Normal human volunteers (n = 7), critically ill patients who were not septic (n = 9), septic patients not in shock (n = 16), and septic patients in shock (n = 17). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Pulmonary artery catheter-derived hemodynamic data were obtained in patients with sepsis and septic shock. Isoproterenol and sodium fluoride-stimulated cyclic adenosine monophosphate accumulations were measured in circulating lymphocytes. The hemodynamic response to sequential infusions of dobutamine, 5 and 10 micrograms/kg/min, was obtained in septic and septic shock patients. Baseline hemodynamic values for mean arterial pressure, cardiac index, left ventricular stroke work index, and oxygen delivery index at approximately 2 days after the onset of sepsis were significantly lower in septic shock patients compared with septic (nonshock) patients (p < .01 p < .05, p < .001, p < .01, respectively). Isoproterenol- and sodium fluoride-stimulated cyclic adenosine monophosphate accumulations were significantly reduced in septic shock patients compared with those accumulations observed in septic patients (p < .01 and p < .001, respectively). The heart rate response to 10 micrograms/kg/min of dobutamine was significantly (p < .01) lower in septic shock patients compared with septic patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with septic shock, impaired beta-adrenergic receptor stimulation of cyclic adenosine monophosphate is associated with myocardial hyporesponsiveness to catecholamines, suggesting that beta-adrenergic receptor dysfunction may contribute to the reduced myocardial performance observed in this shock state.

BACKGROUND: Moral distress occurs when constraints prevent healthcare providers from acting in accordance with their core moral values to provide good patient care. The experience of moral distress in nurses might be magnified during the current Covid-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To explore causes of moral distress in nurses caring for Covid-19 patients and identify strategies to enhance their moral resiliency. RESEARCH DESIGN: A qualitative study using a qualitative content analysis of focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. We purposively sampled 31 nurses caring for Covid-19 patients in the acute care units within large academic medical systems in Maryland and New York City during April to June 2020. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: We obtained approval from the Institutional Review Board at the University of Maryland, Baltimore. RESULTS: We identified themes and sub-themes representative of major causes of moral distress in nurses caring Covid-19 patients. These included (a) lack of knowledge and uncertainty regarding how to treat a new illness; (b) being overwhelmed by the depth and breadth of the Covid-19 illness; (c) fear of exposure to the virus leading to suboptimal care; (d) adopting a team model of nursing care that caused intra-professional tensions and miscommunications; (e) policies to reduce viral transmission (visitation policy and PPE policy) that prevented nurses to assume their caring role; (f) practicing within crisis standards of care; and (g) dealing with medical resource scarcity. Participants discussed their coping mechanisms and suggested future strategies. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Our study affirms new causes of moral distress related to the Covid-19 pandemic. Institutions need to develop a supportive ethical climate that can restore nurses' moral resiliency. Such a climate should include non-hierarchical interdisciplinary spaces where all providers can meet together as moral peers to discuss their experiences.

BACKGROUND: Institutional review boards (IRBs) are given discretion to interpret and apply the federal regulations governing the protection of human subjects in research. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent of the variability among different IRBs on their approved research practices and informed consent forms within the context of a multicenter trial that used a common protocol. DESIGN: Descriptive analysis of survey information and informed consent forms. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen IRBs from the institutions participating in a multicenter trial comparing lower vs. traditional tidal volume ventilation in patients with acute lung injury. MEASUREMENTS: Analysis of survey information on IRBs' approved research practices. Analysis of informed consent forms for the presence and the adequacy of description of each basic element of informed consent specified in the federal regulations. Reading levels of informed consent forms. MAIN RESULTS: Surveys and IRB-approved consent forms were obtained from all of the contacted IRBs (n = 16). Variability was observed among several of the research practices; one IRB waived the requirement for informed consent, five IRBs permitted telephone consent, and three IRBs allowed prisoners to be enrolled. Three consent forms contained all of the basic elements of informed consent outlined in the federal regulations, and 13 forms had varying numbers of these elements absent (six forms without one element, four without two, one without three, and two without four). Reading levels of the consent forms ranged from grades 8.2 to 13.4 (mean +/- sd was 11.6 +/- 1.2 grade level). CONCLUSIONS: Within a multicenter trial, IRBs reviewing a common protocol varied in several of their approved research practices and in the extent to which the basic elements of informed consent were included in their consent forms.