Delirium, depression, and long-term cognition.

OBJECTIVES: We examined whether preadmission history of depression is associated with less delirium/coma-free (DCF) days, worse 1-year depression severity and cognitive impairment. DESIGN AND MEASUREMENTS: A health proxy reported history of depression. Separate models examined the effect of preadmission history of depression on: (a) intensive care unit (ICU) course, measured as DCF days; (b) depression symptom severity at 3 and 12 months, measured by the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II); and (c) cognitive performance at 3 and 12 months, measured by the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) global score. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted to the medical/surgical ICU services were eligible. RESULTS: Of 821 subjects eligible at enrollment, 261 (33%) had preadmission history of depression. After adjusting for covariates, preadmission history of depression was not associated with less DCF days (OR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.59-1.03 p = 0.077). A prior history of depression was associated with higher BDI-II scores at 3 and 12 months (3 months OR 2.15, 95% CI, 1.42-3.24 p = <0.001; 12 months OR 1.89, 95% CI, 1.24-2.87 p = 0.003). We did not observe an association between preadmission history of depression and cognitive performance at either 3 or 12 months (3 months beta coefficient -0.04, 95% CI, -2.70-2.62 p = 0.97; 12 months 1.5, 95% CI, -1.26-4.26 p = 0.28). CONCLUSION: Patients with a depression history prior to ICU stay exhibit a greater severity of depressive symptoms in the year after hospitalization.

Vulnerability to functional decline is associated with noncardiovascular cause of 90-day readmission in hospitalized patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmission is common among patients with heart failure. Vulnerability to decline in physical function may increase the risk of noncardiovascular readmission for these patients, but the association between vulnerability and the cause of unplanned readmission is poorly understood, inhibiting the development of effective interventions. OBJECTIVES: We examined the association of vulnerability with the cause of readmission (cardiovascular vs. noncardiovascular) among hospitalized patients with acute decompensated heart failure. DESIGNS, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective longitudinal study is part of the Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the cause of unplanned readmission (cardiovascular vs. noncardiovascular). The primary independent variable was vulnerability, measured using the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13). RESULTS: Among 804 hospitalized patients with acute decompensated heart failure, 315 (39.2%) experienced an unplanned readmission within 90 days of discharge. In a multinomial logistic model with no readmission as the reference category, higher vulnerability was associated with readmission for noncardiovascular causes (relative risk ratio [RRR] = 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-1.75) in the first 90 days after discharge. The VES-13 score was not associated with readmission for cardiovascular causes (RRR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.75-1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Vulnerability to functional decline predicted noncardiovascular readmission risk among hospitalized patients with heart failure. The VES-13 is a brief, validated, and freely available tool that should be considered in planning care transitions. Additional work is needed to examine the efficacy of interventions to monitor and mitigate noncardiovascular concerns among vulnerable patients with heart failure being discharged from the hospital.

Identifying Barriers and Facilitators to Veterans Affairs Whole Health Integration Using the Updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: Veterans Affairs (VA) implemented the Veteran-centered Whole Health System initiative across VA sites with approaches to implementation varying by site. PURPOSE: Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), we aimed to synthesize systemic barriers and facilitators to Veteran use with the initiative. Relevance to healthcare quality, systematic comparison of implementation procedures across a national healthcare system provides a comprehensive portrait of strengths and opportunities for improvement. METHODS: Advanced fellows from 11 VA Quality Scholars sites performed the initial data collection, and the final report includes CFIR-organized results from six sites. RESULTS: Key innovation findings included cost, complexity, offerings, and accessibility. Inner setting barriers and facilitators included relational connections and communication, compatibility, structure and resources, learning centeredness, and information and knowledge access. Finally, results regarding individuals included innovation deliverers, implementation leaders and team, and individual capability, opportunity, and motivation to implement and deliver whole health care. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Examination of barriers and facilitators suggest that Whole Health coaches are key components of implementation and help to facilitate communication, relationship building, and knowledge access for Veterans and VA employees. Continuous evaluation and improvement of implementation procedures at each site is also recommended.