ObjectivesInsight into older adults’ physical resilience is needed to predict functional recovery after hospitalization. We assessed functional trajectories in response to acute illness and subsequent hospitalization and investigated baseline variables and dynamic variables associated with these trajectories.DesignProspective observational cohort study (Hospitalization-Associated Disability and impact on daily Life Study).Setting and ParticipantsThis study included 207 older adults (aged 79.8 ± 6.9 years, 49% female, 57% frail) acutely hospitalized in 6 Dutch hospitals.MethodsFunctional disability was assessed using the 15-item modified activities of daily living index retrospectively 2 weeks before admission, and prospectively from admission up to 3 months after discharge. Baseline variables including frailty, somatic, physical, and psychosocial factors were assessed at admission. Dynamic variables (step count, pain, fatigue, and fear of falling) were continuously or repeatedly assessed during hospitalization. We performed individual spline modeling using random effects. Baseline variables and within-person mean levels and variability in the dynamic variables were assessed as predictors of functional trajectories.ResultsFunctional disability significantly increased before admission and decreased from admission to 3 months post discharge. Frail participants had a significantly higher increase in functional disability before admission compared with nonfrail participants. Lower step count, higher pain scores, and higher within-person variability in fear of falling were significantly associated with higher increase in functional disability before admission. Higher within-person variability in fear of falling was associated with more recovery.Conclusions and ImplicationsOlder adults increase in functional disability before hospitalization and start to recover from admission onward. Frailty and dynamic variables are associated with a higher increase in functional disability after acute illness. Our findings give more insight into older adults’ physical resilience, which may improve the prediction of functional recovery and may improve therapeutic decision-making and rehabilitation strategies to improve functional recovery after acute hospitalization.
BACKGROUND: The quality standards of the Dutch Society of Intensive Care require monitoring of the satisfaction of patient's relatives with respect to care. Currently, no suitable instrument is available in the Netherlands to measure this. This study describes the development and psychometric evaluation of the questionnaire-based Consumer Quality Index 'Relatives in Intensive Care Unit' (CQI 'R-ICU'). The CQI 'R-ICU' measures the perceived quality of care from the perspective of patients' relatives, and identifies aspects of care that need improvement.METHODS: The CQI 'R-ICU' was developed using a mixed method design. Items were based on quality of care aspects from earlier studies and from focus group interviews with patients' relatives. The time period for the data collection of the psychometric evaluation was from October 2011 until July 2012. Relatives of adult intensive care patients in one university hospital and five general hospitals in the Netherlands were approached to participate. Psychometric evaluation included item analysis, inter-item analysis, and factor analysis.RESULTS: Twelve aspects were noted as being indicators of quality of care, and were subsequently selected for the questionnaire's vocabulary. The response rate of patients' relatives was 81% (n = 455). Quality of care was represented by two clusters, each showing a high reliability: 'Communication' (α = .80) and 'Participation' (α = .84). Relatives ranked the following aspects for quality of care as most important: no conflicting information, information from doctors and nurses is comprehensive, and health professionals take patients' relatives seriously. The least important care aspects were: need for contact with peers, nuisance, and contact with a spiritual counsellor. Aspects that needed the most urgent improvement (highest quality improvement scores) were: information about how relatives can contribute to the care of the patient, information about the use of meal-facilities in the hospital, and involvement in decision-making on the medical treatment of the patient.CONCLUSIONS: The CQI 'R-ICU' evaluates quality of care from the perspective of relatives of intensive care patients and provides practical information for quality assurance and improvement programs. The development and psychometric evaluation of the CQI 'R-ICU' led to a draft questionnaire, sufficient to justify further research into the reliability, validity, and the discriminative power of the questionnaire.
MULTIFILE
PURPOSE: We investigated changes in ARDS severity and associations with outcome in COVID-19 ARDS patients.METHODS: We compared outcomes in patients with ARDS classified as 'mild', 'moderate' or 'severe' at calendar day 1, and after reclassification at calendar day 2. The primary endpoint was 28-day mortality. We also identified which ventilatory parameters had an association with presence of severe ARDS at day 2. We repeated the analysis for reclassification at calendar day 4.RESULTS: Of 895 patients, 8.5%, 60.1% and 31.4% had mild, moderate and severe ARDS at day 1. These proportions were 13.5%, 72.6% and 13.9% at day 2. 28-day mortality was 25.3%, 31.3% and 32.0% in patients with mild, moderate and severe ARDS at day 1 (p = 0.537), compared to 28.6%, 29.2% and 44.3% in patients reclassified at day 2 (p = 0.005). No ventilatory parameter had an independent association with presence of severe ARDS at day 2. Findings were not different reclassifying at day 4.CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of COVID-19 patients, ARDS severity and mortality between severity classes changed substantially over the first 4 days of ventilation. These findings are important, as reclassification could help identify target patients that may benefit from alternative approaches.
MULTIFILE
