Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) and their families face existential physical, psychosocial and spiritual distress. Integrating palliative care (PC) into ICU care may benefit patients, relatives and ICU clinicians. Prior PC studies have shown a reduction in ICU length of stay (LOS) and distressing symptoms without altering overall mortality. A shorter ICU LOS may alleviate the burden for patients and relatives and help optimise the use of limited intensive care resources. PC in the ICU, however, remains underused, partly due to limited access and knowledge of ICU clinicians. Also, robust data regarding the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PC treatment in the ICU are scarce. We established the ‘enhancing palliative care in ICUs’ (EPIC) study to implement a system-based harmonised practice model across European ICUs. The aim is to investigate if early integration of PC via telemedicine, clinician education and bedside tools is effective and cost-effective, ultimately benefiting patients, relatives and ICU clinicians.
This multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised, non-blinded stepped-wedge design trial with crossover phase aims to recruit around 2,000 patients from five European countries. All adult patients admitted to participating ICUs—with an ICU LOS exceeding 72 hours, where cancer is not the primary cause of critical illness, and who are not expected to die within the next 24 hours—are screened for the need for specialised PC based on the attending physician’s judgement. This judgement is triggered by the presence of one or more of the following: (1) significant disagreement among ICU team members and/or relatives about the appropriateness of current ICU treatment, (2) considerations of limiting life-sustaining therapy or (3) the anticipation that a specialised PC consultation may benefit the patient, their relatives or the ICU team. Patients identified as needing specialised PC and their relatives are then enrolled after obtaining written informed consent.
The complex intervention consists of (a) a blended-learning programme to foster knowledge and attitude about PC among ICU clinicians, (b) bedside tools, including a checklist to identify patients in need of PC and a factsheet and (c) standardised telemedical consultations from trained EPIC interventionists. Patient and relative follow-up is conducted 3 months post-ICU discharge. Outcomes include clinical measures (including ICU LOS (primary outcome), severity of critical illness, invasive treatments and health-related quality of life), economic endpoints (resource use, costs, cost–consequence situation, cost-effectiveness), ICU clinician burnout and distress, and patient and family perception about the quality of symptom management, care and communication. Endpoint analyses will employ generalised linear mixed models, accounting for the clustered data structure and stepped wedge design.
EPIC complies with the Declaration of Helsinki and has been approved by all local ethics committees. A decision-making structure is established to ensure trial procedures are carried out according to Good Clinical Practice. Study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and communicated to participants, healthcare professionals and the public. Sets of anonymised study data will be made available following Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable principles.
To describe the associations between Rapid Response Team (RRT) patient review and other predefined clinical management actions, with risk of in-hospital cardiac arrest and in-hospital mortality in the first unplanned admission (UPA) to the adult intensive care unit (ICU) from the ward environment for each patient. To describe a novel RRT assessment tool for ward-based care for patients who were deteriorating.
A retrospective cohort study.
A large multispecialty, tertiary referral and teaching hospital in England, UK.
The study included 3175 consecutive adult ICU UPAs from hospital wards over a 6-year period (2014–2019).
Ward-based management of deterioration prior to ICU admission was assessed by the RRT, using a scored checklist—the UPA score. Admissions were compared in two groups according to their exposure to an RRT review in the 72 hours before ICU admission. Associations with in-hospital cardiac arrest within 24 hours before ICU admission and all-cause in-hospital mortality were estimated, using unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95%CI.
RRT review occurred in 1413 (44.5%) admissions and was associated with reduced odds of in-hospital cardiac arrest (aOR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.78; p
An RRT review in the 72 hours prior to ICU admission was associated with reduced odds of in-hospital cardiac arrest but did not impact in-hospital mortality. Higher UPA scores were associated with increased incidence of both in-hospital cardiac arrest and in-hospital mortality. In addition, this study describes a novel and adaptable RRT scoring tool (the UPA score) for safety monitoring and quality improvement.