The use of social media as a tool for professional communication and education in healthcare has been increasing; pros and cons of such platforms were extensively debated in recent years with mixed results. During the COVID-19 pandemic, social media use has accelerated to the point of becoming a ubiquitous part of modern healthcare systems. As with any tool in healthcare, its risks and benefits need to be carefully considered. In this article, we review the use of social media in the current pandemic. Importantly, we will illustrate this using experiences from the perspective of large medical organisations and also identify the common pitfalls.

Purpose To accommodate the unprecedented number of critically ill patients with pneumonia caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) expansion of the capacity of intensive care unit (ICU) to clinical areas not previously used for critical care was necessary. We describe the global burden of COVID-19 admissions and the clinical and organizational characteristics associated with outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients. Methods Multicenter, international, point prevalence study, including adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and a diagnosis of COVID-19 admitted to ICU between February 15th and May 15th, 2020. Results 4994 patients from 280 ICUs in 46 countries were included. Included ICUs increased their total capacity from 4931 to 7630 beds, deploying personnel from other areas. Overall, 1986 (39.8%) patients were admitted to surge capacity beds. Invasive ventilation at admission was present in 2325 (46.5%) patients and was required during ICU stay in 85.8% of patients. 60-day mortality was 33.9% (IQR across units: 20%–50%) and ICU mortality 32.7%. Older age, invasive mechanical ventilation, and acute kidney injury (AKI) were associated with increased mortality. These associations were also confirmed specifically in mechanically ventilated patients. Admission to surge capacity beds was not associated with mortality, even after controlling for other factors. Conclusions ICUs responded to the increase in COVID-19 patients by increasing bed availability and staff, admitting up to 40% of patients in surge capacity beds. Although mortality in this population was high, admission to a surge capacity bed was not associated with increased mortality. Older age, invasive mechanical ventilation, and AKI were identified as the strongest predictors of mortality.

Critical care ultrasound (CCUS) is an essential component of intensive care practice. Although existing international guidelines have focused on training principles and determining competency in CCUS, few countries have managed to operationalize this guidance into an accessible, well-structured programme for clinicians training in multidisciplinary intensive care. We seek to update and reaffirm appropriate CCUS scope so that it may be integrated into the international Competency-based Training in Intensive Care Medicine. The resulting recommendations offer the most contemporary and evolved set of core CCUS competencies for an intensive care clinician yet described. Importantly, we discuss the rationale for inclusion but also exclusion of competencies listed. Background/aim: Critical care ultrasound (CCUS) is an essential component of intensive care practice. The purpose of this consensus document is to determine those CCUS competencies that should be a mandatory part of training in multidisciplinary intensive care. Methods: A three-round Delphi method followed by face-to-face meeting among 32 CCUS experts nominated by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Agreement of at least 90% of experts was needed in order to enlist a competency as mandatory. Results: The final list of competencies includes 15 echocardiographic, 5 thoracic, 4 abdominal, deep vein thrombosis diagnosis and central venous access aid. Conclusion: The resulting recommendations offer the most contemporary and evolved set of core CCUS competencies for an intensive care clinician yet described.

Background: General pathophysiological mechanisms regarding associations between fluid administration and intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) are evident, but specific effects of type, amount, and timing of fluids are less clear. Objectives: This review aims to summarize current knowledge on associations between fluid administration and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and fluid management in patients at risk of intra-abdominal hypertension and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Methods: We performed a structured literature search from 1950 until May 2021 to identify evidence of associations between fluid management and intra-abdominal pressure not limited to any specific study or patient population. Findings were summarized based on the following information: general concepts of fluid management, physiology of fluid movement in patients with intra-abdominal hypertension, and data on associations between fluid administration and IAH. Results: We identified three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 38 prospective observational studies, 29 retrospective studies, 18 case reports in adults, two observational studies and 10 case reports in children, and three animal studies that addressed associations between fluid administration and IAH. Associations between fluid resuscitation and IAH were confirmed in most studies. Fluid resuscitation contributes to the development of IAH. However, patients with IAH receive more fluids to manage the effect of IAH on other organ systems, thereby causing a vicious cycle. Timing and approach to de-resuscitation are of utmost importance, but clear indicators to guide this decision-making process are lacking. In selected cases, only surgical decompression of the abdomen can stop deterioration and prevent further morbidity and mortality. Conclusions: Current evidence confirms an association between fluid resuscitation and secondary IAH, but optimal fluid management strategies for patients with IAH remain controversial.

Background: The use of ultrasound assessment, including the Venous Excess Ultrasound (VEXUS) score, is increasingly being utilised as part of fluid status assessment in clinical practice. We aimed to evaluate the ability of the VEXUS score to track fluid removal during the course of the dialysis session and explore the relationship between traditional measures of fluid status and venous congestion. Methods: Single-centre, observational study in patients undergoing intermittent haemodialysis, who presented above their target dry weight. Patients had serial assessment using VEXUS, lung ultrasound and selected echocardiographic measures, before, during and after fluid removal. Results: Amongst 33 patients analysed, 5 (15%) had an elevated VEXUS score (> 0). There was no difference in starting weight, dry weight or amount of fluid removed in patients with a normal VEXUS score and those with an elevated VEXUS score. In all patients with elevated VEXUS scores, the degree of venous congestion improved during the course of fluid removal. All patients with an elevated VEXUS score had evidence of both right and left ventricular systolic impairment. Conclusion: In patients with ESRF undergoing haemodialysis, the incidence of venous congestion as measured by the VEXUS is low. In patients with elevated VEXUS scores, removal of fluid through haemodialysis improves the venous congestion score. The pattern of LV and RV systolic dysfunction suggests that VEXUS may be a reflection of cardiac failure rather than venous volume status. Trial registration: Ethical approval was provided by South Central-Berkshire Research and Ethics Committee and registered on clinicaltrials.org (IRAS305720). Trial registration: ISRCTN14351189 – Retrospectively registered on 30/11/2023.

In the last 10 years, there has been increasing interest into the psychological wellbeing of healthcare providers. Within critical care, increasing attention is being paid to the concept of ‘burnout’ – a cluster of symptoms that adversely affect the health of critical care providers. Publications and statements from the major critical care societies have all addressed this syndrome and emphasised urgency in tackling it. The current COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally changed the way we work, communicate and learn. Even before the pandemic, there have been growing concerns and acknowledgement that healthcare practitioners in intensive care are at increased risk of burnout and burnout syndrome. There has never been greater pressure on intensive care or indeed healthcare as a whole to look after so many patients during this pandemic and yet there is global acknowledgement that key to overcoming these challenges is to look after the care providers – both physically and psychologically. In this paper, we review the issue of burnout amongst healthcare practitioners during current pandemic. We present the impact of burnout on the individual and the system as a whole but perhaps most importantly, we provide a review of steps being taken to mitigate against these adverse outcomes in the short and longer term.