Introduction: Culture-negative sepsis is a common but relatively understudied condition. The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics and outcomes of culture-negative versus culture-positive severe sepsis. Methods: This was a prospective observational cohort study of 1001 patients who were admitted to the medical intensive care unit (ICU) of a university hospital from 2004 to 2009 with severe sepsis. Patients with documented fungal, viral, and parasitic infections were excluded. Results: There were 415 culture-negative patients (41.5%) and 586 culture-positive patients (58.5%). Gram-positive bacteria were isolated in 257 patients, and gram-negative bacteria in 390 patients. Culture-negative patients were more often women and had fewer comorbidities, less tachycardia, higher blood pressure, lower procalcitonin levels, lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (median 25.0 (interquartile range 19.0 to 32.0) versus 27.0 (21.0 to 33.0), P = 0.001) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores, less cardiovascular, central nervous system, and coagulation failures, and less need for vasoactive agents than culture-positive patients. The lungs were a more common site of infection, while urinary tract, soft tissue and skin infections, infective endocarditis and primary bacteremia were less common in culture-negative than in culture-positive patients. Culture-negative patients had a shorter duration of hospital stay (12 days (7.0 to 21.0) versus 15.0 (7.0 to27.0), P = 0.02) and lower ICU mortality than culture-positive patients. Hospital mortality was lower in the culture-negative group (35.9%) than in the culture-positive group (44.0%, P = 0.01), the culture-positive subgroup, which received early appropriate antibiotics (41.9%, P = 0.11), and the culture-positive subgroup, which did not (55.5%, P < 0.001). After adjusting for covariates, culture positivity was not independently associated with mortality on multivariable analysis. Conclusions: Significant differences between culture-negative and culture-positive sepsis are identified, with the former group having fewer comorbidities, milder severity of illness, shorter hospitalizations, and lower mortality.

Few data on asthma management are available for the Asia-Pacific region. This study examined asthma symptoms, health care use, and management in the Asia-Pacific region. We performed a cross-sectional survey, followed by administration of a questionnaire in a face-to-face setting in the respondents' homes in their language of choice. Urban centers in 8 areas were surveyed: China, Hong Kong, Korea, Malaysia, The Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, and Vietnam. A population sample of 3207 respondents with physician-diagnosed asthma was identified by screening 108,360 households. Daytime asthma symptoms were reported by 51.4% of respondents, and 44.3% reported sleep disturbance caused by asthma in the preceding 4 weeks. At least 2 in every 5 respondents (43.6%) had been hospitalized, attended a hospital emergency department, or made unscheduled emergency visits to other health care facilities for treatment of asthma during the previous 12 months. Overall, 15.3% of respondents reported that they had required admission to the hospital for asthma treatment. Asthma severity correlated with the frequencies of hospitalizations and emergency visits for asthma in the past year. Even in those patients with severe persistent asthma, 34.3% regarded their disease as being well or completely controlled. Current use of an inhaled corticosteroid was reported by only 13.6% of respondents, and 56.3% used quick-relief bronchodilators. Absence from school and work in the past year was reported by 36.5% of children and 26.5% of adults. As reported for other regions, current levels of asthma control in the Asia-Pacific region fall markedly short of goals specified in international guidelines for asthma management.

Background: Despite international differences in cultural perspectives on end-of-life issues, little is known of the care for the dying in the general wards of acute hospitals in Asia. Methods: We performed a retrospective medical chart review of all 683 adult patients who died without intensive care unit (ICU) admission in our Singaporean hospital in 2007. We first evaluated the prevalence of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders and orders for or against life-sustaining therapies; second, if such orders were discussed with the patients and/or family members; and third, the actual treatments provided before death. Results: There were DNR orders for 66.2% of patients and neither commitment for DNR nor cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for 28.1%. Orders to limit life-sustaining therapies, including ICU admission, intubation, and vasopressors/inotropes were infrequent. Only 6.2% of the alert and conversant patients with DNR orders were involved in discussions on these orders. In contrast, such discussions with their family members occurred 82.9% of the time. Interventions in the last 24 hours of life included CPR (9.4%), intubation (6.4%), vasopressors/inotropes (14.8%), tube feeding (24.7%), and antibiotics (44.9%). Analgesia was provided in 29.1% of patients. Conclusions: There was a lack of commitment by doctors on orders for DNR/CPR and to limit life-sustaining therapies, infrequent discussions with patients on end-of-life decisions, and excessive burdensome interventions with inadequate palliative care for the dying. These findings may reflect certain Asian cultural biases. More work is required to improve our quality of end-of-life care.

The widespread use of empiric broad spectrum antibiotics has contributed to the global increase of Resistant Gram-Negative Bacilli (RGNB) infections in intensive care units (ICU). The aim of this study was to develop a tool to predict nosocomial RGNB infections among ICU patients for targeted therapy. We conducted a prospective observational study from August'07 to December'11. All adult patients who were admitted and stayed for more than 24 hours at the medical and surgical ICU's were included. All patients who developed nosocomial RGNB infections 48 hours after ICU admission were identified. A prediction score was formulated by using independent risk factors obtained from logistic regression analysis. This was prospectively validated with a subsequent cohort of patients admitted to the ICUs during the following time period of January-September 2012. Seventy-six patients with nosocomial RGNB Infection (31bacteremia) were compared with 1398 patients with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) without any gram negative bacterial infection/colonization admitted to the ICUs during the study period. The following independent risk factors were obtained by a multivariable logistic regression analysis - prior isolation of Gram negative organism (coeff: 1.1, 95% CI 0.5-1.7); Surgery during current admission (coeff: 0.69, 95% CI 0.2-1.2); prior Dialysis with end stage renal disease (coeff: 0.7, 95% CI 0.1-1.1); prior use of Carbapenems (coeff: 1.3, 95% CI 0.3-2.3) and Stay in the ICU for more than 5 days (coeff: 2.4, 95% CI 1.6-3.2). It was validated prospectively in a subsequent cohort (n = 408) and the area-under-the-curve (AUC) of the GSDCS score for predicting nosocomial ICU acquired RGNB infection and bacteremia was 0.77 (95% CI 0.68-0.89 and 0.78 (95% CI 0.69-0.89) respectively. The GSDCS (0-4.3) score clearly differentiated the low (0-1.3), medium (1.4-2.3) and high (2.4-4.3) risk patients, both for RGNB infection (p:0.003) and bacteremia (p:0.009). GSDCS is a simple bedside clinical score which predicts RGNB infection and bacteremia with high predictive value and differentiates low versus high risk patients. This score will help clinicians to choose appropriate, timely targeted antibiotic therapy and avoid exposure to unnecessary treatment for patients at low risk of nosocomial RGNB infection. This will reduce the selection pressure and help to contain antibiotic resistance in ICUs.

The effect of employing severity scores to identify severe community-acquired pneumonia (SCAP) cases for early aggressive resuscitation is unknown. Optimising pre-intensive care unit (ICU) care may improve outcomes in patients at risk of SCAP.We conducted a before-and-after study of patients classified into control and intervention groups (January 2004 to December 2007 and January 2008 to December 2010, respectively). Our intervention was two-pronged, using the 2007 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)/American Thoracic Society (ATS) minor criteria to identify SCAP for aggressive emergency department resuscitation. Patients with SCAP, defined as those with three or more IDSA/ATS minor criteria, were targeted. Differences in mortality, triage and compliance with emergency department resuscitation were compared between the groups.The hospital mortality rate was lower in the interventionversusthe control group (5.7%versus23.8%, p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, the intervention group was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09–0.67). ICU admission rates decreased from 52.9% to 38.6% (p=0.008) and inappropriately delayed ICU admissions decreased from 32.0% to 14.8% (p<0.001). There was increased compliance with the aggressive resuscitation protocol after the intervention.A combined intervention, using a pneumonia score to identify those at risk of SCAP early and an aggressive pre-ICU resuscitation protocol may reduce mortality and ICU admissions.