Abstract Background: 30 to 60% of the acute hospitalized older adults experience functional decline after hospitalization. The first signs of functional decline after discharge can often be observed in the inability to perform mobility tasks, such as raising from a chair or walking. Information how mobility develops over time is scarce. Insight in the course of mobility is needed to prevent and decrease mobility limitations. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to determine (i) the course of mobility of acute hospitalized older adults and (ii) the association between muscle strength and the course of mobility over time controlled for influencing factors. Methods: In a multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study, measurements were taken at admission, discharge, one- and three months post-discharge. Mobility was assessed by the De Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) and muscle strength by the JAMAR. The longitudinal association between muscle strength and mobility was analysed with a Linear Mixed Model and controlled for potential confounders. Results: 391 older adults were included in the analytic sample with a mean (SD) age of 79.6 (6.7) years. Mobility improved significantly from admission up to three months post-discharge but did not reach normative levels. Muscle strength was associated with the course of mobility (beta=0.64; p<0.01), even after controlling for factors as age, cognitive impairment, fear of falling and depressive symptoms (beta=0.35; p<0.01). Conclusion: Muscle strength is longitudinally associated with mobility. Interventions to improve mobility including muscle strength are warranted, in acute hospitalized older adults.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Cardiac Care Bridge (CCB) nurse-led transitional care program in older (≥70 years) cardiac patients compared to usual care.MethodsThe intervention group (n = 153) received the CCB program consisting of case management, disease management and home-based cardiac rehabilitation in the transition from hospital to home on top of usual care and was compared with the usual care group (n = 153). Outcomes included a composite measure of first all-cause unplanned hospital readmission or mortality, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and societal costs within six months follow-up. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Statistical uncertainty surrounding Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) was estimated by using bootstrapped seemingly unrelated regression.ResultsNo significant between group differences in the composite outcome of readmission or mortality nor in societal costs were observed. QALYs were statistically significantly lower in the intervention group, mean difference -0.03 (95% CI: -0.07; -0.02). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the maximum probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 0.31 at a Willingness To Pay (WTP) of €0,00 and 0.14 at a WTP of €50,000 per composite outcome prevented and 0.32 and 0.21, respectively per QALY gained.ConclusionThe CCB program was on average more expensive and less effective compared to usual care, indicating that the CCB program is dominated by usual care. Therefore, the CCB program cannot be considered cost-effective compared to usual care.
MULTIFILE
BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence indicates the potential benefits of restricted fluid management in critically ill patients. Evidence lacks on the optimal fluid management strategy for invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients. We hypothesized that the cumulative fluid balance would affect the successful liberation of invasive ventilation in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).METHODS: We analyzed data from the multicenter observational 'PRactice of VENTilation in COVID-19 patients' study. Patients with confirmed COVID-19 and ARDS who required invasive ventilation during the first 3 months of the international outbreak (March 1, 2020, to June 2020) across 22 hospitals in the Netherlands were included. The primary outcome was successful liberation of invasive ventilation, modeled as a function of day 3 cumulative fluid balance using Cox proportional hazards models, using the crude and the adjusted association. Sensitivity analyses without missing data and modeling ARDS severity were performed.RESULTS: Among 650 patients, three groups were identified. Patients in the higher, intermediate, and lower groups had a median cumulative fluid balance of 1.98 L (1.27-7.72 L), 0.78 L (0.26-1.27 L), and - 0.35 L (- 6.52-0.26 L), respectively. Higher day 3 cumulative fluid balance was significantly associated with a lower probability of successful ventilation liberation (adjusted hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.95, P = 0.0047). Sensitivity analyses showed similar results.CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of invasively ventilated patients with COVID-19 and ARDS, a higher cumulative fluid balance was associated with a longer ventilation duration, indicating that restricted fluid management in these patients may be beneficial. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04346342 ); Date of registration: April 15, 2020.
