Search

Background: Patients with acute respiratory failure have multiple risk factors for disability following their intensive care unit stay. Interventions to facilitate independence at hospital discharge may be more effective if personalized for patient subtypes. Objectives: To identify subtypes of patients with acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation and compare post–intensive care functional disability and intensive care unit mobility level among subtypes. Methods: Latent class analysis was conducted in a cohort of adult medical intensive care unit patients with acute respiratory failure receiving mechanical ventilation who survived to hospital discharge. Demographic and clinical medical record data were collected early in the stay. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were compared among subtypes by using Kruskal-Wallis tests and χ2 tests of independence. Results: In a cohort of 934 patients, the 6-class model provided the optimal fit. Patients in class 4 (obesity and kidney impairment) had worse functional impairment at hospital discharge than patients in classes 1 through 3. Patients in class 3 (alert patients) had the lowest magnitude of functional impairment (P <.001) and achieved the earliest out-of-bed mobility and highest mobility level of all subtypes (P <.001). Conclusions: Acute respiratory failure survivor subtypes identified from clinical data available early in the intensive care unit stay differ in post–intensive care functional disability. Future research should target high-risk patients in early rehabilitation trials in the intensive care unit. Additional investigation of contextual factors and mechanisms of disability is critical to improving quality of life in acute respiratory failure survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: The prevalence of frailty (diminished physiologic reserve) and its effect on outcomes for those aged 18 years and older with critical illness is unclear.Objectives: We hypothesized greater frailty would be associated with subsequent mortality, disability, and cognitive impairment, regardless of age.Methods: At enrollment, we measured frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale (range, 1 [very fit] to 7 [severely frail]). At 3 and 12 months post-discharge, we assessed vital status, instrumental activities of daily living, basic activities of daily living, and cognition. We used multivariable regression to analyze associations between Clinical Frailty Scale scores and outcomes, adjusting for age, sex, education, comorbidities, baseline disability, baseline cognition, severity of illness, delirium, coma, sepsis, mechanical ventilation, and sedatives/opiates.Measurements and Main Results: We enrolled 1,040 patients who were a median (interquartile range) of 62 (53-72) years old and who had a median Clinical Frailty Scale score of 3 (3-5). Half of those with clinical frailty (i.e., Clinical Frailty Scale score ≥5) were younger than 65 years old. Greater Clinical Frailty Scale scores were independently associated with greater mortality (P = 0.01 at 3 mo and P < 0.001 at 12 mo) and with greater odds of disability in instrumental activities of daily living (P = 0.04 at 3 mo and P = 0.002 at 12 mo). Clinical Frailty Scale scores were not associated with disability in basic activities of daily living or with cognition.Conclusions: Frailty is common in critically ill adults aged 18 years and older and is independently associated with increased mortality and greater disability. Future studies should explore routine screening for clinical frailty in critically ill patients of all ages. Interventions to reduce mortality and disability among patients with heightened vulnerability should be developed and tested. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 00392795 and NCT 00400062). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An update of evidence-based guidelines concerning liberation from mechanical ventilation is needed as new evidence has become available. The American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) and the American Thoracic Society (ATS) have collaborated to provide recommendations to clinicians concerning liberation from the ventilator.Methods: Comprehensive evidence syntheses, including meta-analyses, were performed to summarize all available evidence relevant to the guideline panel's questions. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and the results were summarized in evidence profiles. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations developed and approved by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation.Results: Recommendations for three population, intervention, comparator, outcome (PICO) questions concerning ventilator liberation are presented in this document. The guideline panel considered the balance of desirable (benefits) and undesirable (burdens, adverse effects, costs) consequences, quality of evidence, feasibility, and acceptability of various interventions with respect to the selected questions. Conditional (weak) recommendations were made to use inspiratory pressure augmentation in the initial spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) and to use protocols to minimize sedation for patients ventilated for more than 24 h. A strong recommendation was made to use preventive noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for high-risk patients ventilated for more than 24 h immediately after extubation to improve selected outcomes. The recommendations were limited by the quality of the available evidence.Conclusions: The guideline panel provided recommendations for inspiratory pressure augmentation during an initial SBT, protocols minimizing sedation, and preventative NIV, in relation to ventilator liberation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study which investigated the association between duration of delirium in the intensive care unit and long-term cognitive impairment after critical illness requiring mechanical ventilation. The setting of the prospective cohort study was a medical intensive care unit in a large U.S. community hospital. The patients involved in the study underwent comprehensive cognitive assessments months after discharge.

Up to 60% of patients who develop severe sepsis in the United States are &ges;65 years of age, and the incidence of sepsis in this population is steadily increasing. Elderly individuals have an increased risk of developing sepsis, compared with younger patients, because of frequent comorbidities, institutionalization, declining performance status, and altered immune function. The clinical presentation of older patients with sepsis is often atypical, leading to a difficult and delayed diagnosis. Although increasing age appears to confer a high risk of death due to severe sepsis, recent evidence shows that many older patients respond well to selected interventions when the interventions are initiated in a timely fashion. Newly published clinical practice guidelines outline key recommendations regarding the treatment of patients with severe sepsis. Clinicians must be aware of the level of evidence in support of various interventions and must keenly screen older survivors for ongoing deficits that will limit their functional recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Clinical protocols may decrease unnecessary variation in care and improve compliance with desirable therapies. We evaluated whether highly protocolized ICUs have superior patient outcomes compared with less highly protocolized ICUs.Design: Observational study in which participating ICUs completed a general assessment and enrolled new patients 1 day each week.Patients: A total of 6,179 critically ill patients.Setting: Fifty-nine ICUs in the United States Critical Illness and Injury Trials Group Critical Illness Outcomes Study.Interventions: None.Measurements and Main Results: The primary exposure was the number of ICU protocols; the primary outcome was hospital mortality. A total of 5,809 participants were followed prospectively, and 5,454 patients in 57 ICUs had complete outcome data. The median number of protocols per ICU was 19 (interquartile range, 15-21.5). In single-variable analyses, there were no differences in ICU and hospital mortality, length of stay, use of mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, or continuous sedation among individuals in ICUs with a high versus low number of protocols. The lack of association was confirmed in adjusted multivariable analysis (p = 0.70). Protocol compliance with two ventilator management protocols was moderate and did not differ between ICUs with high versus low numbers of protocols for lung protective ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome (47% vs 52%; p = 0.28) and for spontaneous breathing trials (55% vs 51%; p = 0.27).Conclusions: Clinical protocols are highly prevalent in U.S. ICUs. The presence of a greater number of protocols was not associated with protocol compliance or patient mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Sedation in mechanically ventilated adults in the intensive care unit (ICU) is commonly achieved with intravenous infusions of propofol, dexmedetomidine or benzodiazepines. Significant limitations associated with each can impact their usage. Inhaled isoflurane has potential benefit for ICU sedation due to its safety record, sedation profile, lack of metabolism and accumulation, and fast wake-up time. Administration in the ICU has historically been restricted by the lack of a safe and effective delivery system for the ICU. The Sedaconda Anaesthetic Conserving Device-S (Sedaconda ACD-S) has enabled the delivery of inhaled volatile anaesthetics for sedation with standard ICU ventilators, but it has not yet been rigorously evaluated in the USA. We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of inhaled isoflurane delivered via the Sedaconda ACD-S compared with intravenous propofol for sedation of mechanically ventilated ICU adults in USA hospitals., Methods and Analysis: INhaled Sedation versus Propofol in REspiratory failure in the ICU (INSPiRE-ICU1) is a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, assessor-blinded trial that aims to enrol 235 critically ill adults in 14 hospitals across the USA. Eligible patients are randomised in a 1.5:1 ratio for a treatment duration of up to 48 (±6) hours or extubation, whichever occurs first, with primary follow-up period of 30 days and additional follow-up to 6 months. Primary outcome is percentage of time at target sedation range. Key secondary outcomes include use of opioids during treatment, spontaneous breathing efforts during treatment, wake-up time at end of treatment and cognitive recovery after treatment., Ethics and Dissemination: Trial protocol has been approved by US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and central (Advarra SSU00208265) or local institutional review boards ((IRB), Cleveland Clinic IRB FWA 00005367, Tufts HS IRB 20221969, Houston Methodist IRB PRO00035247, Mayo Clinic IRB Mod22-001084-08, University of Chicago IRB21-1917-AM011 and Intermountain IRB 033175). Results will be presented at scientific conferences, submitted for publication, and provided to the FDA., Trial Registration Number: NCT05312385., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CB, TDG, JK and CH have received consulting fees from Sedana Medical AB as members of their US Trials Steering Committee. JWD has received speaker honoraria from Sedana Medical AB. IS and MF and PVS are employed by Sedana Medical AB., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with long-term impairments in brain and muscle function that significantly impact the quality of life of those who survive the acute illness. The mechanisms underlying these impairments are not yet well understood, and evidence-based interventions to minimize the burden on patients remain unproved. The NHLBI of the NIH assembled a workshop in April 2023 to review the state of the science regarding ARDS-associated brain and muscle dysfunction, to identify gaps in current knowledge, and to determine priorities for future investigation. The workshop included presentations by scientific leaders across the translational science spectrum and was open to the public as well as the scientific community. This report describes the themes discussed at the workshop as well as recommendations to advance the field toward the goal of improving the health and well-being of ARDS survivors.

Background: Sleep and circadian disruption (SCD) is common and severe in the ICU. On the basis of rigorous evidence in non-ICU populations and emerging evidence in ICU populations, SCD is likely to have a profound negative impact on patient outcomes. Thus, it is urgent that we establish research priorities to advance understanding of ICU SCD. Methods: We convened a multidisciplinary group with relevant expertise to participate in an American Thoracic Society Workshop. Workshop objectives included identifying ICU SCD subtopics of interest, key knowledge gaps, and research priorities. Members attended remote sessions from March to November 2021. Recorded presentations were prepared and viewed by members before Workshop sessions. Workshop discussion focused on key gaps and related research priorities. The priorities listed herein were selected on the basis of rank as established by a series of anonymous surveys. Results: We identified the following research priorities: establish an ICU SCD definition, further develop rigorous and feasible ICU SCD measures, test associations between ICU SCD domains and outcomes, promote the inclusion of mechanistic and patient-centered outcomes within large clinical studies, leverage implementation science strategies to maximize intervention fidelity and sustainability, and collaborate among investigators to harmonize methods and promote multisite investigation. Conclusions: ICU SCD is a complex and compelling potential target for improving ICU outcomes. Given the influence on all other research priorities, further development of rigorous, feasible ICU SCD measurement is a key next step in advancing the field.

Background: The temporal association of delirium during critical illness with mortality is unclear, along with the associations of hypoactive and hyperactive motoric subtypes of delirium with mortality. We aimed to evaluate the relationship of delirium during critical illness, including hypoactive and hyperactive motoric subtypes, with mortality in the hospital and after discharge up to 1 year., Methods: We analyzed a prospective cohort study of adults with respiratory failure and/or shock admitted to university, community, and Veterans Affairs hospitals. We assessed patients using the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and the Confusion Assessment Method for the intensive care unit (ICU) and defined the motoric subtype according to the corresponding Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale if delirium was present. We used Cox proportional hazard models, adjusted for baseline characteristics, coma, and daily hospital events, to determine whether delirium on a given day predicted mortality the following day in patients in the hospital and also to determine whether delirium presence and duration predicted mortality after discharge up to 1 year in patients who survived to hospital discharge. We performed similar analyses for hypoactive and hyperactive subtypes of delirium., Results: Among 1040 critically ill patients, 214 (21%) died in the hospital and 204 (20%) died out-of-hospital by 1 year. Delirium was common, occurring in 740 (71%) patients for a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 4 (2-7) days. Hypoactive delirium occurred in 733 (70%) patients, and hyperactive occurred in 185 (18%) patients, with a median (IQR) of 3 (2-7) days and 1 (1-2) days, respectively. Delirium on a given day (hazard ratio [HR], 2.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-6.21; P = .008), in particular the hypoactive subtype (HR, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.51-7.46; P = .003), was independently associated with an increased risk of death the following day in the hospital. Hyperactive delirium was not associated with an increased risk of death in the hospital (HR, 4.00; 95% CI, 0.49-32.51; P = .19). Among hospital survivors, neither delirium presence (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.82-1.24; P = .95) nor duration (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.01; P = .56), regardless of motoric subtype, was associated with mortality after hospital discharge up to 1 year., Conclusions: Delirium during critical illness is associated with nearly a 3-fold increased risk of death the following day for patients in the hospital but is not associated with mortality after hospital discharge. This finding appears primarily driven by the hypoactive motoric subtype. The independent relationship between delirium and mortality occurs early during critical illness but does not persist after hospital discharge., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background and Aims: Risk factors for poor outcomes after critical illness are incompletely understood. While nutritional risk is associated with mortality in critically ill patients, its association with disability, cognitive, and health-related quality of life is unclear in survivors of critical illness. This study's objective was to determine whether greater nutritional risk at ICU admission is associated with greater disability, worse cognition, and worse HRQOL at 3 and 12-month follow-up., Methods: We enrolled adults (≥18 years of age) with respiratory failure or shock treated in medical and surgical intensive care units from two U.S. centers. We measured nutritional risk using the modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) score (range 0-9 [highest risk]) at intensive care unit admission. We measured associations between mNUTRIC scores and discharge destination, disability in basic activities of daily living (ADLs) using the Katz ADL, instrumental ADLs using the Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ), global cognition using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), executive function using the Trail Making Test Part B (Trails B), and health-related quality of life using the SF-36, adjusting for sex, education, BMI, baseline frailty, disability, and cognition, severity of illness, days of delirium, coma, and mechanical ventilation., Results: Of the 821 patients enrolled in the ICU, 636 patients survived to hospital discharge. We assessed outcomes in 448 of 535 survivors (84%) at 3 months and 382 of 476 survivors (80%) at 12 months. Higher mNUTRIC scores predicted greater odds of discharge to an institution (OR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.6 to 2.6; P < 0.01). Higher mNUTRIC scores were associated with a trend towards greater disability in basic activities of daily living (IRR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.7) at 3 months that did not reach significance (p = 0.09) with no association demonstrated at 12 months. There were no associations between mNUTRIC scores and FAQ, RBANS, or Trails B scores. mNUTRIC scores were inconsistently associated with SF-36 physical and mental component scale scores., Conclusions: Greater nutritional risk at ICU admission is associated with disability in survivors of critical illness. Future studies should evaluate interventions in those at high nutritional risk as a means to speed recovery., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Dr. Mart received grant funding through the Vanderbilt University Medical Center Arthur and Lisa Wheeler Critical Care Research grant and research training support from the National Institutes of Health, under award number T32HL087738. Dr. Girard received grant funding from the NIH under award numbers R01AG035117 and R01HL135144. Dr. Pandharipande received a research grant from Hospira Inc, in collaboration with the NIH, and received grant funding from the NIH under award number R01HL111111. Dr. Ely has received honoraria from Pfizer and Lilly, and he has received grant funding from the NIH under award numbers R01AG027472, R01AG035117, R01HL111111, R01GM120484, and R01AG058639. Dr. Brummel received grant funding from the NIH, under award number K76AG054864. The remaining authors disclose that they do not have any other conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.)

Background: Adults hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) are at high risk for short-term mortality. However, it is unclear whether improvements in in-hospital pneumonia care could substantially lower this risk. We extensively reviewed all in-hospital deaths in a large prospective CAP study to assess the cause of each death and assess the extent of potentially preventable mortality., Methods: We enrolled adults hospitalized with CAP at five tertiary-care hospitals in the United States. Five physician investigators reviewed the medical record and study database for each patient who died to identify the cause of death, the contribution of CAP to death, and any preventable factors potentially contributing to death., Results: Among 2,320 enrolled patients, 52 (2.2%) died during initial hospitalization. Among these 52 patients, 33 (63.4%) were ≥ 65 years old, and 32 (61.5%) had ≥ two chronic comorbidities. CAP was judged to be the direct cause of death in 27 patients (51.9%). Ten patients (19.2%) had do-not-resuscitate orders prior to admission. Four patients were identified in whom a lapse in quality of care potentially contributed to death; preexisting end-of-life limitations were present in two of these patients. Two patients seeking full medical care experienced a lapse in in-hospital quality of pneumonia care that potentially contributed to death., Conclusions: In this study of adults with CAP at tertiary-care hospitals with a low mortality rate, most in-hospital deaths did not appear to be preventable with improvements in in-hospital pneumonia care. Preexisting end-of-life limitations in care, advanced age, and high comorbidity burden were common among those who died., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Chest Physicians. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Hospital-level variations in structure and process may affect clinical outcomes in ICUs. We sought to characterize the organizational structure, processes of care, use of protocols, and standardized outcomes in a large sample of U.S. ICUs., Design: We surveyed 69 ICUs about organization, size, volume, staffing, processes of care, use of protocols, and annual ICU mortality., Setting: ICUs participating in the United States Critical Illness and Injury Trials Group Critical Illness Outcomes Study., Subjects: Sixty-nine intensivists completed the survey., Measurements and Main Results: We characterized structure and process variables across ICUs, investigated relationships between these variables and annual ICU mortality, and adjusted for illness severity using Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II. Ninety-four ICU directors were invited to participate in the study and 69 ICUs (73%) were enrolled, of which 25 (36%) were medical, 24 (35%) were surgical, and 20 (29%) were of mixed type, and 64 (93%) were located in teaching hospitals with a median number of five trainees per ICU. Average annual ICU mortality was 10.8%, average Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was 19.3, 58% were closed units, and 41% had a 24-hour in-house intensivist. In multivariable linear regression adjusted for Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II and multiple ICU structure and process factors, annual ICU mortality was lower in surgical ICUs than in medical ICUs (5.6% lower [95% CI, 2.4-8.8%]) or mixed ICUs (4.5% lower [95% CI, 0.4-8.7%]). We also found a lower annual ICU mortality among ICUs that had a daily plan of care review (5.8% lower [95% CI, 1.6-10.0%]) and a lower bed-to-nurse ratio (1.8% lower when the ratio decreased from 2:1 to 1.5:1 [95% CI, 0.25-3.4%]). In contrast, 24-hour intensivist coverage (p = 0.89) and closed ICU status (p = 0.16) were not associated with a lower annual ICU mortality., Conclusions: In a sample of 69 ICUs, a daily plan of care review and a lower bed-to-nurse ratio were both associated with a lower annual ICU mortality. In contrast to 24-hour intensivist staffing, improvement in team communication is a low-cost, process-targeted intervention strategy that may improve clinical outcomes in ICU patients.