Objective: The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of intensive care unit (ICU)–initiated transitional care interventions for patients and families on elements of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) and/or PICS-family (PICS–F). Review method used: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis Sources: The authors searched in biomedical bibliographic databases including PubMed, Embase (OVID), CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library and included studies written in English conducted up to October 8, 2020. Review methods: We included (non)randomised controlled trials focussing on ICU-initiated transitional care interventions for patients and families. Two authors conducted selection, quality assessment, and data extraction and synthesis independently. Outcomes were described using the three elements of PICS, which were categorised into (i) physical impairments (pulmonary, neuromuscular, and physical function), (ii) cognitive impairments (executive function, memory, attention, visuo-spatial and mental processing speed), and (iii) psychological health (anxiety, depression, acute stress disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and depression). Results: From the initially identified 5052 articles, five studies were included (i.e., two randomised controlled trials and three nonrandomised controlled trials) with varied transitional care interventions. Quality among the studies differs from moderate to high risk of bias. Evidence from the studies shows no significant differences in favour of transitional care interventions on physical or psychological aspects of PICS-(F). One study with a nurse-led structured follow-up program showed a significant difference in physical function at 3 months. Conclusions: Our review revealed that there is a paucity of research about the effectiveness of transitional care interventions for ICU patients with PICS. All, except one of the identified studies, failed to show a significant effect on the elements of PICS. However, these results should be interpreted with caution owing to variety and scarcity of data. Prospero registration: CRD42020136589 (available via https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020136589).
DOCUMENT
Blood draws for laboratory investigations are essential for patient management in neonatal intensive care units (NICU). When blood samples clot before analysis, they are rejected, which delays treatment decisions and necessitates repeated sampling.
LINK
Objectives: In Europe, there is a distinction between two different healthcare organisation systems, the tax-based healthcare system (THS) and the social health insurance system (SHI). Our aim was to investigate whether the characteristics, treatment and mortality of older, critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) differed between THS and SHI. Setting: ICUs in 16 European countries. Participants: In total, 7817 critically ill older (≥80 years) patients were included in this study, 4941 in THS and 2876 in the SHI systems. Primary and secondary outcomes measures: We chose generalised estimation equations with robust standard errors to produce population average adjusted OR (aOR). We adjusted for patient-specific variables, health economic data, including gross domestic product (GDP) and human development index (HDI), and treatment strategies. Results: In SHI systems, there were higher rates of frail patients (Clinical Frailty Scale>4; 46% vs 41%; p<0.001), longer length of ICU stays (90±162 vs 72±134 hours; p<0.001) and increased levels of organ support. The ICU mortality (aOR 1.50, 95%CI 1.09 to 2.06; p=0.01) was consistently higher in the SHI; however, the 30-day mortality (aOR 0.89, 95%CI 0.66 to 1.21; p=0.47) was similar between THS and SHI. In a sensitivity analysis stratifying for the health economic data, the 30-day mortality was higher in SHI, in low GDP per capita (aOR 2.17, 95%CI 1.42 to 3.58) and low HDI (aOR 1.22, 95%CI 1.64 to 2.20) settings. Conclusions: The 30-day mortality was similar in both systems. Patients in SHI were older, sicker and frailer at baseline, which could be interpreted as a sign for a more liberal admission policy in SHI. We believe that the observed trend towards ICU excess mortality in SHI results mainly from a more liberal admission policy and an increase in treatment limitations.
DOCUMENT
Delirium has been a recognised syndrome in the intensive care unit for some years. This systematic review reports risk factors for delirium studied in the intensive care unit. Four predisposing and 21 precipitating factors, including nine laboratory blood values and seven items relating to the use or the administration of medication, were found to influence the onset of delirium in the intensive care unit in six publications. The APACHE II score and hypertension were the only factors reported twice. Risk factors for the development of intensive care delirium were understudied and underreported in the literature.
DOCUMENT
Emerging evidence suggests that exogenous protein/amino acid supplementation has the potential to improve the recovery of critically ill patients. After a careful review of the published evidence, experts have concluded that critically ill patients should receive up to 2.0-2.5 g/kg/d of protein. Despite this, however, recent review of current International Nutrition Survey data suggests that protein in critically ill patients is underprescribed and grossly underdelivered. Furthermore, the survey suggests that most of protein administration comes from enteral nutrition (EN) despite the availability of products and protocols that enhance the delivery of protein/amino acids in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. While future research clarifies the dose, timing, and composition for exogenous protein administration, as well as identification of patients who will benefit the most, ongoing process improvement initiatives should target a concerted effort to increase protein intake in the critically ill. This assertion follows from the notion that current patients are possibly being harmed while we wait for confirmatory evidence. Further research should also develop better tools to enable bedside practitioners to monitor optimal or adequate protein intake for individual patients. Finally, exploring the effect of combining adequate protein delivery with early mobility and/or resistance exercise in the ICU setting has the greatest potential for improving the functional outcomes of survivors of critical illness and warrants further study.
DOCUMENT
OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations for effective and safe diagnostic assessment and intervention strategies for the physiotherapy treatment of patients in intensive care units.METHODS: We used the EBRO method, as recommended by the 'Dutch Evidence Based Guideline Development Platform' to develop an 'evidence statement for physiotherapy in the intensive care unit'. This method consists of the identification of clinically relevant questions, followed by a systematic literature search, and summary of the evidence with final recommendations being moderated by feedback from experts.RESULTS: Three relevant clinical domains were identified by experts: criteria to initiate treatment; measures to assess patients; evidence for effectiveness of treatments. In a systematic literature search, 129 relevant studies were identified and assessed for methodological quality and classified according to the level of evidence. The final evidence statement consisted of recommendations on eight absolute and four relative contra-indications to mobilization; a core set of nine specific instruments to assess impairments and activity restrictions; and six passive and four active effective interventions, with advice on (a) physiological measures to observe during treatment (with stopping criteria) and (b) what to record after the treatment.CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations form a protocol for treating people in an intensive care unit, based on best available evidence in mid-2014.
MULTIFILE
OBJECTIVE: To describe the long-term functioning of patients who survived a COVID-19-related admission to the intensive care unit and their family members, in the physical, social, mental and spiritual domain.DESIGN: A single-centre, prospective cohort study with a mixed-methods design.SETTING: The intensive care unit of the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To study functioning 12 months after intensive care discharge several measurements were used, including a standardised list of physical problems, the Clinical Frailty Scale, the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey, the McMaster Family Assessment Device, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Spiritual Needs Questionnaire, as well as open questions and interviews with survivors and their family members.RESULTS: A total of 56 survivors (77%) returned the 12-month questionnaire, whose median age was 62 (inter-quartile range [IQR]: 55.0-68.0). Moreover, 67 family members (66%) returned the 12-month questionnaire, whose median age was 58 (IQR: 43-66). At least one physical problem was reported by 93% of the survivors, with 22% reporting changes in their work-status. Both survivors (84%) and their family members (85%) reported at least one spiritual need. The need to feel connected with family was the strongest. The main theme was 'returning to normal' in the interviews with survivors and 'if the patient is well, I am well' in the interviews with family members.CONCLUSIONS: One year after discharge, both COVID-19 intensive care survivors and their family members positively evaluate their health-status. Survivors experience physical impairments, and their family members' well-being is strongly impacted by the health of the survivor.
DOCUMENT
Physiotherapy, Dietetics and Occupational Therapy have been collaborating over recent years to develop an optimal healthcare programme for patients with Post Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS). This case is an example of PICS symptomatology and focuses on the collaboration between Physiotherapy and Dietetics. What is PICS? Owing to healthcare improvements, more and more patients are surviving the intensive Care Unit (ICU), and recovery during and after ICU stay has been receiving more attention [1, 2]. Approximately 30% of the patients admitted to an ICU have persistent symptoms including muscle weakness, reduced walking ability, fatigue, concentration deficits, memory problems, malnutrition, sleep and mood disorders sometimes even years after discharge [3-8]. Since 2012, this combination of physical, cognitive and psychiatric manifestations and reduced quality of life after staying in an ICU has been recognised as Post Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS) [9]. The impact of PICS is often not limited to the patient as it may also impact the mental status of the patient’s immediate family. This is known as PICS-Family (PICS-F) [10-12]. Treatment of PICS: Approximately 80% of PICS patients need primary care physiotherapy. Physiotherapists and GPs are often the only primary care professionals involved in the recovery process of these patients after hospital discharge [13, 14]. Both patients and healthcare professionals report a number of difficulties, e.g. limited transmural continuity in healthcare, coordination of multidisciplinary activities, supportive treatment guidelines and specific knowledge of pathology, treatment and prognosis. Patients report that they are not adequately supported when resuming their professional activities and that medical and allied healthcare treatments do not fully meet their needs at that time [15-18]. The REACH project: In order to improve the situation, the REACH project (REhabilitation After Critical illness and Hospital discharge) was started in Amsterdam region in the Netherlands. Within REACH, a Community of Practice – consisting of professionals (physiotherapists, occupational therapists, dieticians), those who live or have lived with the condition and researchers – has developed a transmural rehab programme. A special attribute of this programme is the integration of the concept of “positive health”. The case in this article describes the treatment of a PICS patient treated within the REACH network.
DOCUMENT
Evaluating protein kinetics in the critically ill population remains a very difficult task. Heterogeneity in the intensive care unit (ICU) population and wide spectrum of disease processes creates complexity in assessing protein kinetics. Traditionally, protein has been delivered in the context of total energy. Focus on energy delivery has recently come into question, as the importance of supplemental protein in patient outcomes has been shown in several recent trials. The ICU patient is prone to catabolism, immobilization, and impaired immunity, which is a perfect storm for massive loss of lean body tissue with a unidirectional flow of amino acids from muscle to immune tissue for immunoglobulin production, as well as liver for gluconeogenesis and acute phase protein synthesis. The understanding of protein metabolism in the ICU has been recently expanded with the discovery of how the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 is regulated. The concept of "anabolic resistance" and identifying the quantity of protein required to overcome this resistance is gaining support among critical care nutrition circles. It appears that a minimum of at least 1.2 g/kg/d with levels up to 2.0 g/kg/d of protein or amino acids appears safe for delivery in the ICU setting and may yield a better clinical outcome.
DOCUMENT
Insight into protein requirements of intensive care unit (ICU) patients is urgently needed, but at present, it is unrealistic to define protein requirements for different diagnostic groups of critical illness or at different stages of illness. No large randomized controlled trials have randomized protein delivery, adequately addressed energy intake, and evaluated relevant clinical outcomes. As a pragmatic approach, experimental studies have focused on protein requirements of heterogeneous ICU patients. Data are scarce and the absolute value of protein requirements therefore is an approximation. Experimental studies indicate a protein requirement of >1.2 g/kg protein, which is supported by several outcome-based observational studies. Protein intake levels of up to 2.0-2.5 g/kg appear to be safe. A higher level of personalized treatment, within 1.2 and 2.5 g/kg, must involve identification of patients with low muscle protein mass that might benefit most from adequate protein nutrition in the ICU.
DOCUMENT
