Search

Purpose: To determine the prevalence of provider-documented anxiety in critically ill patients, associated risk factors, and related patient outcomes. Method: Chart review of 100 randomly sampled, adult patients, with a length of stay -48 hours in a medical or trauma/surgical intensive care unit (ICU). Provider-documented anxiety was identified based on a comprehensive retrospective chart review of the ICU stay, searching for any acute episode of anxiety (e.g., documented words related to anxiety, panic, and/or distress). Results: Of 100 patients, 45% (95% confidence interval: 35%-55%) had documented anxiety, with similar prevalence in medical vs. trauma/surgical ICU. Patients with documented anxiety more frequently had history of anxiety (22% vs. 4%, p = .004) and substance abuse (40% vs. 22%, p = .048). In the ICU, they had greater severity of illness (median (IQR) Acute Physiology Score 16(13,21) vs. 13(8,19), p = .018), screened positive for delirium at least once during ICU stay, (62% vs. 31%, p = .002), benzodiazepines and antipsychotics use (87% vs. 58%, p = .002; 33% vs. 13%, p = .013, respectively), and mental health consultation (31% vs. 18%, p = .132). These patients also had longer ICU and hospital lengths of stay (6(4,11) vs. 4(3,6), p<.001 and 18(10,30) vs. 10(6,16) days, p<.001, respectively) and less frequent discharge back to home (27% vs. 44%, p = .079). Conclusions: Documented anxiety, occurring in almost half of ICU patients with length of stay -48 hours, was associated with a history of anxiety and/or substance abuse, and greater ICU severity of illness, delirium, psychiatric medications, and length of stay. Increased awareness along with more standardized protocols for assessment of anxiety in the ICU, as well as greater evaluation of non-pharmacological treatments for anxiety symptoms in the ICU are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose/Objective: U.S. health organizations, including Division 22 of the American Psychological Association, the Society for Critical Care Medicine, and the American Thoracic Society advocate for psychological treatment that improves long-term outcomes in critical illness survivors. However, limited information exists with regard to psychology training opportunities in intensive care settings. We aim to identify and describe (a) existing psychology programs with training in intensive care settings and (b) barriers to finding these training opportunities. Research Method/Design: Using aspects of the Arksey and O'Malley Framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews reporting checklist as guides, two independent reviewers searched the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) Directory and Universal Psychology Postdoctoral Directory (UPPD) to identify programs with training experiences in intensive care settings. Results: Searching the APPIC Directory did not reliably or accurately identify training opportunities in intensive care settings. Thus, only programs identified in the more reliable UPPD search were considered for inclusion. After duplicates were removed, searches using the UPPD yielded 31 programs for review. Of those, 22 programs met inclusion, offering heterogeneous training in intensive care settings. Conclusions/Implications: These results suggest few opportunities exist for psychology training in intensive care settings and available opportunities are difficult to identify using standard search methods. The identified challenges also emphasize the need for advanced search features for training opportunities within APPIC/UPPD and/or a list of programs offering these training opportunities. Our results highlight the importance of program descriptions that accurately and comprehensively reflect training opportunities—particularly relating to opportunities in intensive care settings. Impact and Implications: This report adds to the existing literature in rehabilitation psychology education and training as well as critical care psychology, an emerging subspecialty of rehabilitation psychology, by identifying challenges and emphasizing the need for improved directory search features for specialty training; and highlighting the gap between a current clinical need and limited psychology workforce development opportunities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has placed many individuals in need of critical care, with a high proportion of hospitalized patients being admitted to intensive care units (ICU) to treat acute outcomes of COVID-19 (e.g., respiratory failure via mechanical ventilation). The ICU is known to be a setting where individuals are at a high risk of experiencing significant psychological difficulties, and patients with COVID-19 are particularly susceptible to such experiences, which can impact their recovery process (e.g., postintensive care syndrome). This article seeks to highlight the intersection between critical care related to trauma and COVID-19 and point providers toward opportunities for anticipating and managing secondary effects in effort to promote psychological adaptation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).