ABSTRACT The use of echocardiography by physicians who are not echocardiographers has become common throughout the world across highly diverse settings where the care of acutely ill patients is provided. Echocardiographic evaluation performed in a point-of-care manner can provide relevant information regarding the mechanism of causes of shock, for example, increasing the rates of correct diagnosis and allowing for faster informed decision-making than through evaluation methods. Considering that the accurate diagnosis of life-threatening situations is essential for professionals working with acutely ill patients, several international associations recommend that physicians responsible for critically ill patients acquire and develop the ability to perform bedside ultrasound examinations, including echocardiographic examinations. However, there is no consensus in the literature regarding which specific applications should be included in the list of skills for nonechocardiographer physicians. Taking into account the multiplicity of applications of echocardiography in different scenarios related to acutely ill patients; the differences in the published protocols, with regard to both the teaching methodology and competence verification; and the heterogeneity of training among highly diverse specialties responsible for their care at different levels, this consensus document aimed to reflect the position of representatives of related Brazilian medical societies on the subject and may thus serve as a starting point both for standardization among different specialties and for the transmission of knowledge and verification of the corresponding competencies.

RESUMO O emprego da ecocardiografia por médicos não ecocardiografistas tem se tornado comum em todo o mundo nos mais diversos ambientes em que se dá o cuidado do paciente agudamente doente. A avaliação ecocardiográfica realizada de forma point-of-care pode fornecer informações pertinentes em relação ao mecanismo das causas de choque, por exemplo, incrementando as taxas de diagnóstico correto e possibilitando a tomada de decisão fundamentada de forma mais rápida do que por meio dos métodos tradicionais de avaliação. Considerando que o diagnóstico preciso de situações ameaçadoras à vida é indispensável a profissionais atuando junto a pacientes agudamente enfermos, diversas entidades associativas internacionais recomendam que médicos responsáveis por pacientes gravemente doentes devam adquirir e desenvolver a habilidade para realizar exames ultrassonográficos à beira do leito, inclusive ecocardiográficos. Entretanto, não há consenso na literatura acerca de quais aplicações específicas devam compor o rol de habilidades do médico não ecocardiografista. Levando-se em consideração a multiplicidade de aplicações da ecocardiografia em diversos cenários relativos ao paciente agudamente enfermo; as diferenças nos protocolos publicados, tanto no que diz respeito à metodologia de ensino como de verificação de competências, bem como a heterogeneidade da formação entre as mais diversas especialidades responsáveis pelo seu cuidado em diferentes níveis, este documento de consenso teve o objetivo de refletir o posicionamento de representantes de sociedades médicas brasileiras afins acerca do tema, podendo, assim, servir de ponto de partida para a uniformização entre diferentes especialidades, bem como para a transmissão de conhecimento e a verificação das competências correspondentes.

ABSTRACT Echocardiography in critically ill patients has become essential in the evaluation of patients in different settings, such as the hospital. However, unlike for other matters related to the care of these patients, there are still no recommendations from national medical societies on the subject. The objective of this document was to organize and make available expert consensus opinions that may help to better incorporate echocardiography in the evaluation of critically ill patients. Thus, the Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, the Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência, and the Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Hospitalar formed a group of 17 physicians to formulate questions relevant to the topic and discuss the possibility of consensus for each of them. All questions were prepared using a five-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined a priori as at least 80% of the responses between one and two or between four and five. The consideration of the issues involved two rounds of voting and debate among all participants. The 27 questions prepared make up the present document and are divided into 4 major assessment areas: left ventricular function, right ventricular function, diagnosis of shock, and hemodynamics. At the end of the process, there were 17 positive (agreement) and 3 negative (disagreement) consensuses; another 7 questions remained without consensus. Although areas of uncertainty persist, this document brings together consensus opinions on several issues related to echocardiography in critically ill patients and may enhance its development in the national scenario.

RESUMO A ecocardiografia do paciente grave tem se tornado fundamental na avaliação de pacientes em diferentes cenários e ambientes hospitalares. Entretanto, ao contrário de outras áreas relativas ao cuidado com esses pacientes, ainda não existem recomendações de sociedades médicas nacionais acerca do assunto. O objetivo deste documento foi organizar e disponibilizar opiniões de consenso de especialistas que possam auxiliar a melhor incorporação dessa técnica na avaliação de pacientes graves. Dessa forma, a Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira, a Associação Brasileira de Medicina de Emergência e a Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Hospitalar compuseram um grupo de 17 médicos para formular questões pertinentes ao tópico e debater a possibilidade de consenso de especialistas para cada uma delas. Todas as questões foram elaboradas no formato de escala Likert de cinco pontos. Consenso foi definido, a priori, como um somatório de, ao menos, 80% das respostas entre um e dois ou entre quatro e cinco. A apreciação das questões envolveu dois ciclos de votação e debate entre todos os participantes. As 27 questões elaboradas compõem o presente documento e estão divididas em 4 grandes áreas de avaliação: da função ventricular esquerda; da função ventricular direita; diagnóstica dos choques e hemodinâmica. Ao fim do processo, houve 17 consensos positivos (concordância) e 3 negativos (discordância); outras 7 questões persistiram sem consenso. Embora persistam áreas de incerteza, este documento reúne opiniões de consenso para diversas questões relativas à ecocardiografia do paciente grave e pode potencializar seu desenvolvimento no cenário nacional.

ABSTRACT Background: COVID-19 pandemic caused increased workload and stress for health professionals involved in the care of such patients. We aimed to describe the health-related quality of life, and burnout in frontline physicians diagnosed with anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted during the first-wave phase of COVID19, from September to October 2020. Questionnaires were sent electronically to 450 physicians from State of Bahia, assessing symptoms of anxiety, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and burnout syndrome. For the categorical variables, the Pearson’s chi-square test was used and difference between means was compare using the Mann-Whitney test. was Groups with and without anxiety symptoms were compared using prevalence ratios (PR). Pearson’s correlation measured the correlation between WHOQOL-BREF and MBI (Maslach Burnout Inventory) domains. The Fisher r-to-z transformation was used to assess the significance of the difference between two correlation coefficients. The significance level was <0.05. Results: Out of the 450 physicians, 223 (49,6%) completely answered the questionnaire and 38 (17%) showed symptoms of anxiety. Physicians with anxiety had higher scores in emotional exhaustion (EE) (38.31 ± 8.59 vs 25.31±0.87; p = 0.0001) and depersonalization (DP) (9.0 ± 5.6 vs 5.9 ± 5.3; p = 0.001) domains, and lower scores in personal accomplishment (PA) (32.1 ± 8.2 vs 36.3 ± 7.6; p = 0.004), than those without anxiety. All correlations between WHOQOL-BREF domains and MBI in physicians without anxiety were significant (p = 0.01). Conclusion: Physicians with anxiety showed more emotional exhaustion, less personal accomplishment, and lower quality of life. All domains of WHOQOL BREF were correlated with all MBI domains among physicians without anxiety. Differences in correlation according to anxiety were remarkable in psychological HOQOL BREF domain and emotional exhaustion and depersonalization MBI domains. The effect of anxiety leading to poorer levels of perceived health needs to be further investigated.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to compare the sensitivity and specificity of three diagnostic tools for delirium (the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist, the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units and the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet) in a mixed population of critically ill patients, and to validate the Brazilian Portuguese Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units. METHODS: The study was conducted in four intensive care units in Brazil. Patients were screened for delirium by a psychiatrist or neurologist using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Patients were subsequently screened by an intensivist using Portuguese translations of the three tools. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen patients were evaluated and 38.6% were diagnosed with delirium by the reference rater. The Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units had a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 96.2%; the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet had a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 96.2%; the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist had a sensitivity of 96.0% and a specificity of 72.4%. There was strong agreement between the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units and the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet (kappa coefficient = 0.96) CONCLUSION: All three instruments are effective diagnostic tools in critically ill intensive care unit patients. In addition, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units is a valid and reliable instrument for the assessment of delirium among critically ill patients.