Erratum to “Is inhaled prophylactic heparin useful for prevention and management of pneumonia in ventilated ICU patients? The IPHIVAP investigators of the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group” Journal of Critical Care 34 (2016) 95–102

2016 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 230
Author(s):  
Hiran Bandeshe ◽  
Rob Boots ◽  
Joel Dulhunty ◽  
Rachael Dunlop ◽  
Anthony Holley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Critical Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Intensive Care Society ◽  
Care Society ◽  
Icu Patients

scholarly journals Erratum 1

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 242-242
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Intensive Care Society ◽  
Care Society ◽  
Care Research ◽  
Paediatric Study ◽  
Paediatric Critical Care

Raman S, Brown G, Long D, et al; the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Paediatric Study Group (ANZICS PSG). Priorities for paediatric critical care research: a modified Delphi study by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Paediatric Study Group. Crit Care Resusc 2021; 23: 194-201. In this article, on page 200, the Acknowledgements section should read: “We thank Mark Peters, University College London, UK, for sharing his expertise at the Hanlon stage of this exercise. The data team within the Paediatric Critical Care Research Group, Brisbane, Australia helped with the surveys and analyses of the data. We thank Kate Masterson, Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne, and all staff from PICUs in Australia and New Zealand and the ANZICS PSG Committee who participated in this study. We acknowledge the local research coordinators and research staff, who assisted with study distribution, promotion and the prioritisation process.”

scholarly journals CRITCON-Pandemic levels: A stepwise ethical approach to clinician responsibility

2020 ◽  
pp. 175114372095054
Author(s):  
Dan Harvey ◽  
Dale Gardiner ◽  
Andrew McGee ◽  
Thearina DeBeer ◽  
David Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Operational Matrix ◽  
Ethical Principle ◽  
Intensive Care Society ◽  
Care Society ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Ethical Approach ◽  
Care Activity ◽  
Practical Guidance

CRITCON-Pandemic levels with an associated operational responsibility matrix were recently published by the Intensive Care Society as a modification to Winter Flu CRITCON levels, to better account for differences between a winter flu surge in critical care activity and the capacity challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this paper, we propose an expansion and explanation of the operational matrix to suggest a stepwise ethical approach to clinician responsibility. We propose and outline the main ethical risks created at each level and discuss how those risks can be mitigated through a balanced application of the predominant ethical principle which in turn provides practical guidance to clinician responsibility. We thus seek to specify the ethical and legal principles that should be used in applying the operational matrix, and what the practical effects could be.

scholarly journals Infusion medication concentrations in UK’s critical care areas: Are the Intensive Care Society’s recommendations being used?

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yovita D Titiesari ◽  
Greg Barton ◽  
Mark Borthwick ◽  
Susan Keeling ◽  
Peter Keeling
Keyword(s):  
Critical Care ◽  
Patient Safety ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Intensive Care Society ◽  
Care Society ◽  
Critical Care Units ◽  
The Uk

Following two studies done in 2007 and 2009, a follow-up of the adherence to the suggested guidelines on drug standardisation has been performed with a suggestion for future standards that can be achieved, to complement the recently published Carter report. The Intensive Care Society (ICS) introduced recommendations for infusion concentrations of 16 medications commonly used in critical care areas. The importance being improvement in patient safety and rationalised use of available critical care resources. Five years after publication of these recommendations, a further audit has been undertaken to assess the level of acceptance and application. This revealed that 89.5% of the 133 surveyed units (representing 42.49% critical care units across the UK) have adopted the recommendations. There are further medication concentrations which could also be standardised.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document