Measurement of Mobility and Physical Function in Patients Hospitalized With Hip Fracture: A Systematic Review of Instruments and Their Measurement Properties.

OBJECTIVE: Hip fractures are common and significantly impact mobility and physical function. Measurement of patient progress post hip fracture in the acute hospital setting is important to monitor early recovery and outcomes. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the measurement properties (reliability, validity, responsiveness), interpretability, and clinical utility of instruments used to measure mobility and physical function in patients with hip fracture in the acute hospital setting. METHODS: Three databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL) were searched. Studies reporting direct clinician assessment instruments to measure mobility or physical function in patients with hip fracture were included. Data were extracted by 2 reviewers, and the quality of each study was determined using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments risk of bias checklist. RESULTS: Sixty-eight studies were included with 19 measurement instruments identified. The most frequently used instruments were the Timed "Up & Go" Test (TUG) (19 studies), Barthel Index (BI) (18 studies), Cumulated Ambulation Score (CAS) (18 studies), and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) (14 studies). All 4 of these instruments demonstrated good predictive validity (clinical outcomes and mortality) and responsiveness over time (effect sizes 0.63-2.79). The BI and CAS also had good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] >0.70). Floor effects were demonstrated for the TUG, CAS, and FIM (16%-60% of patients). The TUG, CAS, and BI all had good clinical utility. CONCLUSION: Depending on the context (use by treating clinicians, research, benchmarking), 1 or a combination of the BI, CAS, and TUG provide robust measurement of mobility and physical function for patients with hip fracture in the acute hospital setting. IMPACT: This study identified 3 instruments suitable for measuring mobility and physical function in hospitalized patients following hip fracture. This provides clinicians with tools to measure patient progress and benchmark across sites to improve patient outcomes.

Comparison of 6-Month Outcomes of Survivors of COVID-19 versus Non-COVID-19 Critical Illness.

Rationale: The outcomes of survivors of critical illness due to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) compared with non-COVID-19 are yet to be established. Objectives: We aimed to investigate new disability at 6 months in mechanically ventilated patients admitted to Australian ICUs with COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19. Methods: We included critically ill patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 from two prospective observational studies. Patients were eligible if they were adult (age ⩾ 8 yr) and received ⩾24 hours of mechanical ventilation. In addition, patients with COVID-19 were eligible with a positive laboratory PCR test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Measurements and Main Results: Demographic, intervention, and hospital outcome data were obtained from electronic medical records. Survivors were contacted by telephone for functional outcomes with trained outcome assessors using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Between March 6, 2020, and April 21, 2021, 120 critically ill patients with COVID-19, and between August 2017 and January 2019, 199 critically ill patients without COVID-19, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Patients with COVID-19 were older (median [interquartile range], 62 [55-71] vs. 58 [44-69] yr; P = 0.019) with a lower Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (17 [13-20] vs. 19 [15-23]; P = 0.011). Although duration of ventilation was longer in patients with COVID-19 than in those without COVID-19 (12 [5-19] vs. 4.8 [2.3-8.8] d; P < 0.001), 180-day mortality was similar between the groups (39/120 [32.5%] vs. 70/199 [35.2%]; P = 0.715). The incidence of death or new disability at 180 days was similar (58/93 [62.4%] vs. 99/150 [66/0%]; P = 0.583). Conclusions: At 6 months, there was no difference in new disability for patients requiring mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure due to COVID-19 compared with non-COVID-19. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04401254).

The impact of COVID-19 critical illness on new disability, functional outcomes and return to work at 6 months: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There are few reports of new functional impairment following critical illness from COVID-19. We aimed to describe the incidence of death or new disability, functional impairment and changes in health-related quality of life of patients after COVID-19 critical illness at 6 months. METHODS: In a nationally representative, multicenter, prospective cohort study of COVID-19 critical illness, we determined the prevalence of death or new disability at 6 months, the primary outcome. We measured mortality, new disability and return to work with changes in the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 12L (WHODAS) and health status with the EQ5D-5LTM. RESULTS: Of 274 eligible patients, 212 were enrolled from 30 hospitals. The median age was 61 (51-70) years, and 124 (58.5%) patients were male. At 6 months, 43/160 (26.9%) patients died and 42/108 (38.9%) responding survivors reported new disability. Compared to pre-illness, the WHODAS percentage score worsened (mean difference (MD), 10.40% [95% CI 7.06-13.77]; p < 0.001). Thirteen (11.4%) survivors had not returned to work due to poor health. There was a decrease in the EQ-5D-5LTM utility score (MD, - 0.19 [- 0.28 to - 0.10]; p < 0.001). At 6 months, 82 of 115 (71.3%) patients reported persistent symptoms. The independent predictors of death or new disability were higher severity of illness and increased frailty. CONCLUSIONS: At six months after COVID-19 critical illness, death and new disability was substantial. Over a third of survivors had new disability, which was widespread across all areas of functioning. Clinical trial registration NCT04401254 May 26, 2020.

Role of real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for detection of respiratory viruses in critically ill children with respiratory disease: Is it time for a change in algorithm?

OBJECTIVES: To identify the respiratory viral pathogens associated with acute lower respiratory tract infection in critically ill pediatric patients by using real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, and compare results with those of direct fluorescence antibody assay testing. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Pediatric intensive care unit at a tertiary care academic hospital. PATIENTS: Pediatric patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit with severe respiratory symptoms consistent with viral lower respiratory tract infection. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: Respiratory samples of pediatric patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit with severe respiratory symptoms between January 2008 and July 2009 were tested with direct fluorescence antibody assay and real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. MAIN RESULTS: At least one viral agent was detected in 70.5% of specimens by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and in 16.5% by direct fluorescence antibody assay (p < .001). Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction increased the total viral yield five-fold compared to direct fluorescence antibody assay. Rhinovirus was the most commonly identified virus (41.6%). For viruses included in the direct fluorescence antibody assay panel, direct fluorescence antibody assay had a sensitivity of 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.25-0.61) and a specificity of 1 (95% confidence interval 0.86-1.00) compared with real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. Coinfections were not uncommon, in particular with rhinovirus, and these patients tended to have higher mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Direct fluorescence antibody assay testing is a suboptimal method for the detection of respiratory viruses in critically ill children with lower respiratory tract infection. Given the importance of a prompt and accurate viral diagnosis for this group of patients, we suggest that real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction becomes part of the routine diagnostic algorithm in critically ill children when a viral etiology is suspected, even if conventional tests yield a negative result.