Risk factors for long-term invasive mechanical ventilation: a longitudinal study using German health claims data.

BACKGROUND: Long-term invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a major burden for those affected and causes high costs for the health care system. Early risk assessment is a prerequisite for the best possible support of high-risk patients during the weaning process. We aimed to identify risk factors for long-term IMV within 96 h (h) after the onset of IMV. METHODS: The analysis was based on data from one of Germany's largest statutory health insurance funds; patients who received IMV ≥ 96 h and were admitted in January 2015 at the earliest and discharged in December 2017 at the latest were analysed. OPS and ICD codes of IMV patients were considered, including the 365 days before intubation and 30 days after discharge. Long-term IMV was defined as evidence of invasive home mechanical ventilation (HMV), IMV ≥ 500 h, or readmission with (re)prolonged ventilation. RESULTS: In the analysis of 7758 hospitalisations, criteria for long-term IMV were met in 38.3% of cases, of which 13.9% had evidence of HMV, 73.1% received IMV ≥ 500 h and/or 40.3% were re-hospitalised with IMV. Several independent risk factors were identified (p < 0.005 each), including pre-diagnoses such as pneumothorax (OR 2.10), acute pancreatitis (OR 2.64), eating disorders (OR 1.99) or rheumatic mitral valve disease (OR 1.89). Among ICU admissions, previous dependence on an aspirator or respirator (OR 5.13), and previous tracheostomy (OR 2.17) were particularly important, while neurosurgery (OR 2.61), early tracheostomy (OR 3.97) and treatment for severe respiratory failure such as positioning treatment (OR 2.31) and extracorporeal lung support (OR 1.80) were relevant procedures in the first 96 h after intubation. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive analysis of health claims has identified several risk factors for the risk of long-term ventilation. In addition to the known clinical risks, the information obtained may help to identify patients at risk at an early stage. Trial registration The PRiVENT study was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05260853). Registered at March 2, 2022.

E-learning-an interventional element of the PRiVENT project to improve weaning expertise.

BACKGROUND: PRiVENT (PRevention of invasive VENTilation) is an evaluation of a bundle of interventions aimed at the prevention of long-term invasive mechanical ventilation. One of these elements is an e-learning course for healthcare professionals to improve weaning expertise. The aim of our analysis is to examine the implementation of the course in cooperating intensive care units. METHODS: The course has been developed through a peer review process by pulmonary and critical care physicians in collaboration with respiratory therapists, supported by health services researchers and a professional e-learning agency. The e-learning platform "weLearn" was made available online to participating healthcare professionals. Feedback on the e-learning programme was obtained and discussed in quality circles (QCs). We measured the acceptance and use of the programme through access statistics. RESULTS: The e-learning course "Joint Prevention of Long-Term Ventilation" consists of 7 separate modules with practice-oriented training units as well as a cross-module area and corresponding interactive case studies. Users can receive 23 CME (continuing medical education) credits. The platform was released on July 1, 2021. By June 28, 2023, 214 users from 33 clinics had registered. Most users (77-98%) completed the modules, thus performing well in the test, where 90-100% passed. In the QCs, the users commended the structure and practical relevance of the programme, as well as the opportunity to earn CME credits. CONCLUSION: Especially for medical staff in intensive care units, where continuous training is often a challenge during shift work, e-learning is a useful supplement to existing medical training. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PRiVENT study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05260853) on 02/03/2022.

Prevention of invasive ventilation (PRiVENT)-a prospective, mixed-methods interventional, multicentre study with a parallel comparison group: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a standard therapy for intensive care patients with respiratory failure. With increasing population age and multimorbidity, the number of patients who cannot be weaned from IMV increases, resulting in impaired quality of life and high costs. In addition, human resources are tied up in the care of these patients. METHODS: The PRiVENT intervention is a prospective, mixed-methods interventional, multicentre study with a parallel comparison group selected from insurance claims data of the health insurer Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse Baden-Württemberg (AOK-BW) conducted in Baden-Württemberg, Germany, over 24 months. Four weaning centres supervise 40 intensive care units (ICUs), that are responsible for patient recruitment. The primary outcome, successful weaning from IMV, will be evaluated using a mixed logistic regression model. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using mixed regression models. DISCUSSION: The overall objective of the PRiVENT project is the evaluation of strategies to prevent long-term IMV. Additional objectives aim to improve weaning expertise in and cooperation with the adjacent Intensive Care Units. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05260853).

Risk Factors for Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation and Weaning Failure: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) and weaning failure are factors associated with prolonged hospital length of stay and increased morbidity and mortality. In addition to the burden these places on patients and their families, it also imposes high costs on the public health system. The aim of this systematic review was to identify risk factors for PMV and weaning failure. METHODS: The study was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. After a comprehensive search of the COCHRANE Library, CINHAL, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and the LILACS Database a PubMed request was made on June 8, 2020. Studies that examined risk factors for PMV, defined as mechanical ventilation ≥96 h, weaning failure, and prolonged weaning in German and English were considered eligible; reviews, meta-analyses, and studies in very specific patient populations whose results are not necessarily applicable to the majority of ICU patients as well as pediatric studies were excluded from the analysis. This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO register under the number CRD42021271038. RESULTS: Of 532 articles identified, 23 studies with a total of 23,418 patients met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen studies investigated risk factors of PMV including prolonged weaning, 9 studies analyzed risk factors of weaning failure. The concrete definitions of these outcomes varied considerably between studies. For PMV, a variety of risk factors were identified, including comorbidities, site of intubation, various laboratory or blood gas parameters, ventilator settings, functional parameters, and critical care scoring systems. The risk of weaning failure was mainly related to age, previous home mechanical ventilation (HMV), cause of ventilation, and preexisting underlying diseases. Elevated PaCO2 values during spontaneous breathing trials were indicative of prolonged weaning and weaning failure. CONCLUSION: A direct comparison of risk factors was not possible because of the heterogeneity of the studies. The large number of different definitions and relevant parameters reflects the heterogeneity of patients undergoing PMV and those discharged to HMV after unsuccessful weaning. Multidimensional scores are more likely to reflect the full spectrum of patients ventilated in different ICUs than single risk factors.

The Agreement Between Diagnoses as Stated by Patients and Those Contained in Routine Health Insurance Data.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of medical diagnoses is a figure of central importance in epidemiology and health services research. Prevalence estimates vary depending on the underlying data. For a better understanding of such discrepancies, we compared patients' diagnoses as reported by themselves in response to our questioning with their diagnoses as stated in the routine data of their health insurance carrier. METHODS: For 6558 adults insured by BARMER, one of the statutory health insurance carriers in Germany, we compared the diagnoses of various illnesses over a twelve-month period, as reported by the patients themselves in response to our questioning (October to December 2021), with their ICD-10-based diagnosis codes (Q4/2020-Q3/2021). The degree of agreement was assessed with two kappa values, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: The patients' stated diagnoses of diabetes and hypertension agreed well or very well with their diagnosis codes, with kappa and PABAK values near 0.8, as well as very high sensitivity and specificity. Moderately good agreement with respect to kappa was seen for the diagnoses of heart failure (0.4), obesity, anxiety disorder, depression, and coronary heart disease (0.5 each). The poorest agreement (kappa ≤ 0.3) was seen for posttraumatic stress disorder, alcohol-related disorder, and mental and somatoform disorder. Agreement was worse with increasing age. CONCLUSION: Diagnoses as stated by patients often differ from those found in routine health insurance data. Discrepancies that can be considered negligible were found for only two of the 11 diseases that we studied. Our investigation confirms that these two sources of data yield different estimates of prevalence. Age is a key factor; further reasons for the discrepancies should be investigated, and avoidable causes should be addressed.