Protected therapy services for critical care: A subanalysis of the UK-wide workforce survey.

BACKGROUND: The existing United Kingdom (UK) allied health professional (AHP) workforce in critical care does not meet national standards, with widespread variation in the source of funding, service availability, and regularity of input. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this subanalysis was to determine the impact of protected services on the involvement of AHPs on direct and nondirect aspects of patient care. METHODS: This is a subanalysis of the previously published AHPs in critical care UK-wide workforce survey, an observational study using online surveys distributed to 245 critical care units across the UK. RESULTS/FINDINGS: Services with protected funding provided more daily input within critical care. This was most apparent for occupational therapy where daily input varied from 82.1% of units with protected services compared to just 10.3% in those without (p < 0.001). For all professions, most notably occupational therapy and speech and language therapy, protected services increased the regularity in which specific interventions were completed and had impact on involvement in nonclinical aspects of care including involved in multidisciplinary team meetings, clinical governance, and research. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of protected AHP services reduces compliance with national standards for therapy workforce. Based on these findings, UK and international critical care guidelines should promote protected AHP services for critical care.

Models of Peer Support to Remediate Post-Intensive Care Syndrome: A Report Developed by the Society of Critical Care Medicine Thrive International Peer Support Collaborative.

OBJECTIVES: Patients and caregivers can experience a range of physical, psychologic, and cognitive problems following critical care discharge. The use of peer support has been proposed as an innovative support mechanism. DESIGN: We sought to identify technical, safety, and procedural aspects of existing operational models of peer support, among the Society of Critical Care Medicine Thrive Peer Support Collaborative. We also sought to categorize key distinctions between these models and elucidate barriers and facilitators to implementation. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Seventeen Thrive sites from the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia were represented by a range of healthcare professionals. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Via an iterative process of in-person and email/conference calls, members of the Collaborative defined the key areas on which peer support models could be defined and compared, collected detailed self-reports from all sites, reviewed the information, and identified clusters of models. Barriers and challenges to implementation of peer support models were also documented. Within the Thrive Collaborative, six general models of peer support were identified: community based, psychologist-led outpatient, models-based within ICU follow-up clinics, online, groups based within ICU, and peer mentor models. The most common barriers to implementation were recruitment to groups, personnel input and training, sustainability and funding, risk management, and measuring success. CONCLUSIONS: A number of different models of peer support are currently being developed to help patients and families recover and grow in the postcritical care setting.

Enablers and Barriers to Implementing ICU Follow-Up Clinics and Peer Support Groups Following Critical Illness: The Thrive Collaboratives.

OBJECTIVES: Data are lacking regarding implementation of novel strategies such as follow-up clinics and peer support groups, to reduce the burden of postintensive care syndrome. We sought to discover enablers that helped hospital-based clinicians establish post-ICU clinics and peer support programs, and identify barriers that challenged them. DESIGN: Qualitative inquiry. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to organize and analyze data. SETTING: Two learning collaboratives (ICU follow-up clinics and peer support groups), representing 21 sites, across three continents. SUBJECTS: Clinicians from 21 sites. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Ten enablers and nine barriers to implementation of "ICU follow-up clinics" were described. A key enabler to generate support for clinics was providing insight into the human experience of survivorship, to obtain interest from hospital administrators. Significant barriers included patient and family lack of access to clinics and clinic funding. Nine enablers and five barriers to the implementation of "peer support groups" were identified. Key enablers included developing infrastructure to support successful operationalization of this complex intervention, flexibility about when peer support should be offered, belonging to the international learning collaborative. Significant barriers related to limited attendance by patients and families due to challenges in creating awareness, and uncertainty about who might be appropriate to attend and target in advertising. CONCLUSIONS: Several enablers and barriers to implementing ICU follow-up clinics and peer support groups should be taken into account and leveraged to improve ICU recovery. Among the most important enablers are motivated clinician leaders who persist to find a path forward despite obstacles.

Therapy professionals in critical care: A UK wide workforce survey.

Introduction: National guidelines suggest recommended staffing levels for therapies. The aim of this study was to capture information on existing staffing levels, roles and responsibilities and service structures. Methods: An observational study using online surveys distributed to 245 critical care units across the United Kingdom (UK). Surveys consisted of a generic and five profession specific surveys. Results: Eight hundred sixty-two responses were received from 197 critical care units across the UK. Of those that responded, over 96% of units had input from dietetics, physiotherapy and SLT. Whereas only 59.1% and 48.1% had an OT or psychology service respectively. Units with ring fenced services had improved therapist to patient ratios. Discussion: There is significant variation in access to therapists for patients admitted to critical care in the UK, with many services not having services for core therapies such as psychology and OT. Where services do exist, they fall below the recommended guidance.

Mixed methods evaluation of the impact of the COVID-19 ICU remote-learning rehabilitation course for frontline health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

Background: Optimising outcomes for critically ill patients with COVID-19 patients requires early interdisciplinary rehabilitation. As admission numbers soared through the pandemic, the redeployed workforce needed rapid, effective training to deliver these rehabilitation interventions. Methods: The COVID-19 ICU Remote-Learning Rehab Course (CIRLC-rehab) is a one-day interdisciplinary course developed after the success of CIRLC-acute. The aim of CIRLC-rehab was to rapidly train healthcare professionals to deliver physical, nutritional and psychological rehabilitation strategies in the ICU/acute setting. The course used blended learning with interactive tutorials delivered by shielding critical care professionals. CIRLC-rehab was evaluated through a mixed-methods approach, including questionnaires, and follow-up semi-structured interviews to evaluate perceived impact on clinical practice. Quantitative data are reported as n (%) and means (SD). Inductive descriptive thematic analysis with methodological triangulation was used to analyse the qualitative data from the questionnaires and interviews. Results: 805 candidates completed CIRLC-rehab. 627 (78.8%) completed the post-course questionnaire. 95% (n = 596) found CIRLC-rehab extremely or very useful and 96.0% (n = 602) said they were very likely to recommend the course to colleagues. Overall confidence rose from 2.78/5 to 4.14/5. The course promoted holistic and humanised care, facilitated informal networks, promoted interdisciplinary working and equipped the candidates with practical rehabilitation strategies that they implemented into clinical practice. Conclusion: This pragmatic solution to educating redeployed staff during a pandemic increased candidates' confidence in the rehabilitation of critically ill patients. There was also evidence of modifications to clinical care utilising learning from the course that subjectively facilitated holistic and humanised rehabilitation, combined with the importance of recognising the humanity, of those working in ICU settings themselves. Whilst these data are self-reported, we believe that this work demonstrates the real-term benefits of remote, scalable and rapid educational delivery.

Exploration of therapists' views of practice within critical care.

INTRODUCTION: Therapists are increasing recognised as core members of the critical care multiprofessional team. Each therapy profession provides specialist assessments and interventions, but also work collaboratively across the rehabilitation pathway. Despite inclusion in several national guidance documents, there remains a lack of evidence regarding the perceived role of therapists working within critical care, the unique contributions of each profession and opinion on the day-to-day tasks and responsibilities of each therapy profession. METHOD: A descriptive qualitative methodology was used involving seven focus groups. Purposeful sampling was used to recruit therapists via professional specialist interest groups. All focus groups were uniprofessional and discussions based on a predesigned framework. Data were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Participants (n=65) from across the UK were recruited to seven focus groups with an average of 18.3 years postgraduate clinical experience of which 11.6 years was within critical care. Three core themes were generated from 875 codes and 237 potential subthemes. The final themes were (1) professional characteristics; (2) multidisciplinary team and (3) staffing. An additional theme of 'COVID-19 pandemic' was also identified. Findings were similar across all profession groups particularly regarding the need for holistic, patient-centred care. Expected variation was observed for professional characteristics especially regarding specific assessments and interventions. DISCUSSION: Therapy services are an essential component to the delivery of critical care especially regarding recovery and rehabilitation. Through three core themes, this qualitative study has provided new evidence of the perceptions and opinions of the role that therapists undertake within critical care.

Key mechanisms by which post-ICU activities can improve in-ICU care: results of the international THRIVE collaboratives.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the key mechanisms that clinicians perceive improve care in the intensive care unit (ICU), as a result of their involvement in post-ICU programs. METHODS: Qualitative inquiry via focus groups and interviews with members of the Society of Critical Care Medicine's THRIVE collaborative sites (follow-up clinics and peer support). Framework analysis was used to synthesize and interpret the data. RESULTS: Five key mechanisms were identified as drivers of improvement back into the ICU: (1) identifying otherwise unseen targets for ICU quality improvement or education programs-new ideas for quality improvement were generated and greater attention paid to detail in clinical care. (2) Creating a new role for survivors in the ICU-former patients and family members adopted an advocacy or peer volunteer role. (3) Inviting critical care providers to the post-ICU program to educate, sensitize, and motivate them-clinician peers and trainees were invited to attend as a helpful learning strategy to gain insights into post-ICU care requirements. (4) Changing clinician's own understanding of patient experience-there appeared to be a direct individual benefit from working in post-ICU programs. (5) Improving morale and meaningfulness of ICU work-this was achieved by closing the feedback loop to ICU clinicians regarding patient and family outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The follow-up of patients and families in post-ICU care settings is perceived to improve care within the ICU via five key mechanisms. Further research is required in this novel area.