Quality of life improves with return of voice in tracheostomy patients in intensive care: An observational study.

PURPOSE: To measure patient-reported change of mood, communication-related quality of life, and general health status with return of voice among mechanically ventilated tracheostomy patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational study in a tertiary ICU was conducted. Communication-related quality of life was measured daily using the Visual Analogue Self-Esteem Scale. General health status was measured weekly using the EuroQol-5D. RESULTS: Aspects of communication self-esteem that significantly improved with the return of voice were ability to be understood by others (P = .006) and cheerfulness (P = .04), both with a median difference from before to after return of voice of 1 on the 5-point scale. Return of voice was not associated with a significant improvement in confidence, sense of outgoingness, anger, sense of being trapped, optimism, or frustration. Reported general health status did not significantly improve. CONCLUSIONS: Return of voice was associated with significant improvement in patient reported self-esteem, particularly in being understood by others and in cheerfulness. Improved self-esteem may also improve quality of life; however, further research is needed to confirm this relationship. Early restoration of voice should be investigated as a way to improve the experience of ICU for tracheostomy patients.

Return of Voice for Ventilated Tracheostomy Patients in ICU: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Early-Targeted Intervention.

OBJECTIVES: A cuffed tracheostomy tube facilitates prolonged mechanical ventilation and weaning but usually leads to prolonged voicelessness, which can be one of the most negative experiences of hospitalization. No randomized trials have examined the effects of targeted early communication intervention for the restoration of voice in ventilated tracheostomy patients in the ICU. DESIGN: A prospective randomized clinical trial. SETTING: The trial was conducted in the ICU of an urban tertiary level hospital. PATIENTS: Thirty adult participants enrolled, with 15 randomly allocated to the intervention and control groups. INTERVENTIONS: The early intervention group received early cuff deflation and insertion of an in-line speaking valve during mechanical ventilation. The control group received standard cuff deflation and a speaking valve during self-ventilation. A speech-language pathologist provided all treatments. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was time from tracheostomy insertion to phonation. Early intervention significantly hastened return to phonation (median difference = 11 d; hazard ratio = 3.66; 95% CI, 1.54-8.68) with no significant effect on duration of tracheostomy cannulation (hazard ratio = 1.40; 95% CI, 0.65-3.03), duration of mechanical ventilation in days from tracheostomy insertion (hazard ratio = 1.19; 95% CI, 0.58-2.51), length of stay in ICU (hazard ratio = 1.16; 95% CI, 0.54-2.52), or time to return to oral intake (hazard ratio = 2.35; 95% CI, 0.79-6.98). Adverse events were low and equal in both groups. There was no significant change in measures of quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Focused early intervention for communication during mechanical ventilation allows the restoration of phonation significantly sooner than standard treatment, with no increase in complications in a small patient cohort. Although these results are favorable, further research is needed to determine whether the effects on any of the secondary outcomes are statistically significant and clinically important.

Are potential organ donors missed on general wards? A 6-month audit of hospital deaths.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether potential organ donors are being missed on general wards by the DonateLife Audit, which concentrates on patients dying in emergency departments and intensive care units. DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS: Six-month (1 July to 31 December 2012) retrospective audit of patient deaths in a 700-bed metropolitan Australian tertiary referral and teaching hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Potential organ donor suitability as assessed by a panel of organ donation specialists. RESULTS: In total, 427 patients died, including nine neonates (2.1%) who were not further assessed and 175 patients (41.0%) who were excluded on the basis of age contraindicating organ donation (≥ 80 years). Seventy-eight (18.3%) were excluded on the basis of active cancer or palliative care for cancer and 143 (33.5%) were deemed otherwise not medically suitable. Twelve (2.8%) had been referred to the DonateLife team for consideration for organ donation. Ten (2.3%) were submitted for panel review, and of these only three were considered to have "potential to develop brain death within 24 hours". These patients would have required mechanical ventilation if potential organ donation were to be realised. One additional potential candidate for donation after circulatory death was identified in the intensive care unit. CONCLUSION: We identified very few potential organ donors among patients who died outside the emergency department and intensive care unit. For these patients to have progressed to organ donation, medical interventions not in keeping with standard Australian practice would have been required. The DonateLife Audit appears to be a robust tool for identifying realistic potential organ donors.