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).

Long-Term Functional Outcome and Quality of Life Following In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest-A Longitudinal Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the functional outcome and health-related quality of life of in-hospital cardiac arrest survivors at 6 and 12 months. DESIGN: A longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Seven metropolitan hospitals in Australia. PATIENTS: Data were collected for hospitalized adults (≥ 18 yr) who experienced in-hospital cardiac arrest, defined as "a period of unresponsiveness, with no observed respiratory effort and the commencement of external cardiac compressions." INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Prior to hospital discharge, patients were approached for consent to participate in 6-month and 12-month telephone interviews. Outcomes included the modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index, Euro-Quality of Life 5 Dimension 5 Level, return to work and hospital readmissions. Forty-eight patients (80%) consented to follow-up interviews. The mean age of participants was 67.2 (± 15.3) years, and 33 of 48 (68.8%) were male. Good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score ≤ 3) was reported by 31 of 37 participants (83.8%) at 6 months and 30 of 33 (90.9%) at 12 months. The median Euro-Quality of Life-5D index value was 0.73 (0.33-0.84) at 6 months and 0.76 (0.47-0.88) at 12 months. The median Euro-Quality of Life-Visual Analogue Scale score at 6 months was 70 (55-80) and 75 (50-87.5) at 12 months. Problems in all Euro-Quality of Life-5D-5 L dimension were reported frequently at both time points. Hospital readmission was reported by 23 of 37 patients (62.2%) at 6 months and 16 of 33 (48.5%) at 12 months. Less than half of previously working participants had returned to work by 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of in-hospital cardiac arrest survivors had a good functional outcome and health-related quality of life at 6 months, and this was largely unchanged at 12 months. Despite this, many reported problems with mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain, and anxiety/depression. Return to work rates was low, and hospital readmissions were common.

Functional outcomes following an in-hospital cardiac arrest: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Whilst much is known about the survival outcomes of patients that suffer an in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in Australia very little is known about the functional outcomes of survivors. This study aimed to describe the functional outcomes of a cohort of patients that suffered an in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) and survived to hospital discharge in a regional Australian hospital. METHODS: This is a single-centre retrospective observational cohort study conducted in a regional Australian hospital. All adult patients that had an IHCA in the study hospital between 1 Jan 2017 and 31 Dec 2019 and survived to hospital discharge were included in the study. Functional outcomes were reported using the Modified Rankin Scale (mRS), a six-point scale for which increasing scores represent increasing disability. Scores were assigned through a retrospective review of medical notes. RESULTS: Overall, 102 adult patients had an IHCA during the study period, of whom 50 survived to hospital discharge. The median age of survivors was 68 years, and a third had a shockable initial arrest rhythm. Of survivors, 47 were able to be assigned both mRS scores. At discharge, 81% of patients achieved a favourable functional outcome (mRS 0-3 or equivalent function at discharge equal to admission). CONCLUSIONS: Most survivors to hospital discharge following an IHCA have a favourable functional outcome and are discharged home. Although these results are promising, larger studies across multiple hospitals are required to further inform what is known about functional outcomes in Australian IHCA survivors.

The perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation of early mobilisation within a multicentre, phase 3 randomised controlled trial: A qualitative process evaluation study.

BACKGROUND: Process evaluation within clinical trials provides an assessment of the study implementation's accuracy and quality to explain causal mechanisms and highlight contextual factors associated with variation in outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators of implementing early mobilisation (EM) within a trial. METHODS: This is a qualitative process evaluation study within the Trial of Early Activity and Mobilisation (TEAM) phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Semistructured interviews were conducted remotely with multiprofessional clinicians (physiotherapists, medical staff, and nursing staff) involved in the delivery of the TEAM intervention at Australian hospitals participating in the TEAM study. Inductive coding was used to establish themes which were categorised into the Behaviour system involving domains of Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation (COM-B), which allowed barriers and enablers affecting EM to be identified. FINDINGS: Semistructured interviews were conducted in three different states of Australia. There were 16 participants, including 10 physiotherapists, five physicians, and one nurse. The key themes that facilitated EM were mentoring, champions, additional staff, organisation of the environment, cultural changes, communication, and documented safety criteria. In contrast, the main factors that hindered EM were lack of expertise and confidence in delivering EM, heavy sedation, interdisciplinary conflicts, and perceived risks related to EM. CONCLUSION: A wide range of barriers and facilitators that influenced EM within the TEAM study were identified using the COM-B framework. Many of these have been previously identified in the literature; however, participation in the study was viewed positively by multidisciplinary team members.

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.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors need both cardiological and neurological rehabilitation!

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Most survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) suffer from cardiologic symptoms and approximately half of them experience cognitive problems because of hypoxic brain damage. Symptoms of anxiety and depression are also common. This review aims to give an overview of recent literature on rehabilitation treatment aiming at improvement of quality of life after OHCA. RECENT FINDINGS: Existing cognitive screening tools are now validated for OHCA survivors. OHCA patients with cognitive deficits may have lower exercise capacity. Cardiac rehabilitation seems to be well tolerated for OHCA survivors, with outcomes comparable to myocardial infarction patients. Many caregivers suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder and emotional stress. Interventions for them are available. Implementation of integrated programs covering both cognitive and cardiac rehabilitation is hampered by lack of knowledge and organizational barriers. SUMMARY: OHCA survivors should be routinely screened for cognitive and emotional problems. When patients with mild cognitive deficits participate in cardiac rehabilitation, their program should be adjusted to their cognitive abilities. For patients with severe cognitive or emotional problems, individualized rehabilitation seems favorable. Integrated rehabilitation treatment between cardiac and cognitive rehabilitation departments is recommended. Attention should be paid to the burden of caregivers.

"How Do I Test the Waters? How Do I Go Forward?": Codesigning a Supportive Pathway after Critical Illness.

Rationale: Long-term recovery after critical illness can be affected by post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), a significant burden, which can impact return to activities and work. There is a need for streamlined support for intensive care unit (ICU) patients in their recovery while enduring PICS symptoms. Objectives: To explore critical illness recovery from the experiences, perspectives, and beliefs of former ICU patients, their caregivers, and multidisciplinary clinicians to design a future rehabilitation intervention prototype to support ICU patients. Methods: This was an experience-based codesign (EBCD) study underpinned by the Behavior Change Wheel framework involving ICU patients (<5 years after illness), caregivers, and multidisciplinary clinicians with current clinical experience with ICU recovery at any point along the care continuum (ICU, acute, subacute, or community settings) from two metropolitan hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Two rounds of experience-based codesign workshops were held between August 2021 and February 2022. Workshop content was analyzed via a reflective thematic approach to determine themes and develop an intervention. The intervention was mapped according to the template for intervention description and replication framework. Results: Forty people participated in the codesign process: 15 ICU patients, 2 caregivers, and 23 clinicians. Fifteen major themes were identified in the experience of ICU recovery. Returning home was a key time point for change, acceptance, and adjustment, with the burden of physical limitations and mental health problems becoming apparent. Most participants expressed that PICS was poorly understood in the community, and there was a lack of support to aid recovery. Based on these results, an intervention prototype was developed with a primary goal of improving care after hospital discharge. This was further refined in the second round of workshops. A resource toolkit was deemed most acceptable to end-users, including a hospital-directed support program involving psychology and physical therapy and an accompanying digital health package. Conclusions: A critical time point for more support in the recovery journey was the transition from hospital to home. To address this, a rehabilitation prototype including a physical and psychological support intervention and supporting digital health toolkit was codesigned. The intervention package will be developed and trialed with future ICU patients and their families. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05044221).

Physiotherapy-assisted prone or modified prone positioning in ward-based patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate short-term change in oxygenation and feasibility of physiotherapy-assisted prone or modified prone positioning in awake, ward-based patients with COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: General wards, single-centre tertiary hospital in Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Patients were included if ≥18 years, had COVID-19, required FiO2 ≥ 0.28 or oxygen flow rate ≥4 l/minute and consented to positioning. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility measures included barriers to therapy, assistance required, and comfort. Short-term change in oxygenation (SpO2) and oxygen requirements before and 15 minutes after positioning. RESULTS: Thirteen patients, mean age 75 (SD 14) years; median Clinical Frailty Scale score 6 (IQR 4 to 7) participated in 32 sessions of prone or modified prone positioning from a total of 125 ward-based patients admitted with COVID-19 who received physiotherapy intervention. Nine of thirteen patients (69%) required physiotherapy assistance and modified positions were utilised in 8/13 (62%). SpO2 increased in 27/32 sessions, with a mean increase from 90% (SD 5) pre-positioning to 94% (SD 4) (mean difference 4%; 95%CI 3 to 5%) after 15 minutes. Oxygen requirement decreased in 14/32 sessions, with a mean pre-positioning requirement of 8 l/minute (SD 4) to 7 l/minute (SD 4) (mean difference 2 l/minute; 95%CI 1 to 3 l/minute) after 15 minutes. In three sessions oxygen desaturation and discomfort occurred but resolved immediately by returning supine. CONCLUSION: Physiotherapy-assisted prone or modified prone positioning may be a feasible option leading to short-term improvements in oxygenation in awake, ward-based patients with hypoxemia due to COVID-19. Further research exploring longerterm health outcomes and safety is required.