OBJECTIVES: Randomized clinical trials informing clinical practice (e.g., like large, pragmatic, and late-phase trials) should ideally mostly use harmonized outcomes that are important to patients, family members, clinicians, and researchers. Core outcome sets for specific subsets of ICU patients exist, for example, respiratory failure, delirium, and COVID-19, but not for ICU patients in general. Accordingly, we aimed to develop a core outcome set for adult general ICU patients. DESIGN: We developed a core outcome set in Denmark following the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Handbook. We used a modified Delphi consensus process with multiple methods design, including literature review, survey, semi-structured interviews, and discussions with initially five Danish research panels. The core outcome set was internationally validated and revised based on feedback from research panels in all countries. SETTING: There were five Danish research panels and 17 panels in 13 other countries. Interviews and the three-round Delphi survey was conducted in Denmark, followed by validation of the core outcome set across 14 countries in Europe, Australasia, and India. SUBJECTS: Adult ICU survivors, family members, clinicians, and researchers. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 329 published outcomes, of which 50 were included in the 264 participant Delphi survey. In semi-structured interviews of 82, no additional outcomes were added. The first Delphi survey round was completed by 249 (94%) participants, and 202 (82%) contributed to the third and final round. The initial core outcome set comprised six outcomes. International validation involved 217 research panel members and resulted in the final core outcome set comprising survival, free of life support, free of delirium, out of hospital, health-related quality of life, and cognitive function. CONCLUSIONS: We developed and internationally validated a core outcome set with six core outcomes to be used in research, specifically clinical trials involving adult general ICU patients.

• MeSH
• delfská metoda * MeSH
• dospělí MeSH
• hodnocení výsledků zdravotní péče MeSH
• jednotky intenzivní péče * organizace a řízení   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• Check Tag
• dospělí MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• Geografické názvy
• Dánsko MeSH

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication in critically ill patients, who often have multiple risk factors. Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis is widely applied to lower this risk, but guidelines lack dosing recommendations. OBJECTIVE: This survey aims to assess current thromboprophylaxis preferences and willingness to participate in future randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on this topic. METHOD: We conducted an international online survey between February and May 2023 among intensive care unit (ICU) physicians, including 16 questions about preferences in relation to thromboprophylaxis and preferences on topics for a future RCT. The survey was distributed through the network of the Collaboration for Research in Intensive Care. RESULTS: A total of 715 physicians from 170 ICUs in 23 countries contributed information, with a mean response rate of 36%. In most ICUs, both pharmacological (n = 166, 98%) and mechanical thromboprophylaxis (n = 143, 84%) were applied. A total of 36 pharmacological thromboprophylaxis regimens were reported. Use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was most common (n = 149 ICUs, 87%), followed by subcutaneous unfractionated heparin (n = 44 ICUs, 26%). Seventy-five percent of physicians indicated that they used enoxaparin 40 mg (4000 IU), dalteparin 5000 IU, or tinzaparin 4500 IU once daily, whereas 25% reported the use of 16 other LMWH type and dose combinations. Dose adjustment according to weight was common (78 ICUs, 46%). Participants perceived high variation in the application of thromboprophylaxis and were willing to consider an alternative LMWH type (n = 542, 76%) or dose (n = 538, 75%) in the context of an RCT. CONCLUSION: LMWH was the preferred agent for thromboprophylaxis in critically ill patients. There was considerable variation in the application of LMWH for prophylaxis, reflected by the use of different types, doses, and dosing strategies. Most physicians would be willing to participate in an RCT on thromboprophylaxis. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This survey demonstrates current patterns in implementation preferences for critically ill patients. While there is one approach and drug that is commonly preferred, these findings show that there is some variation in practice.

• MeSH
• antikoagulancia * terapeutické užití   aplikace a dávkování   MeSH
• heparin nízkomolekulární * terapeutické užití   aplikace a dávkování   MeSH
• internacionalita MeSH
• jednotky intenzivní péče * MeSH
• kritický stav MeSH
• lékaři MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• péče o pacienty v kritickém stavu metody   MeSH
• průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
• žilní tromboembolie * prevence a kontrola   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH