Nutrition in the intensive care unit and early recovery influence functional outcomes for survivors of critical illness: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients who are critically ill may receive suboptimal nutrition that leads to weight loss and increased risk of functional deficits. METHODS: Our overarching hypothesis is that nutrition in the intensive care unit (ICU) and the early recovery phase associates with functional outcomes at short-term follow-up. We enrolled adult patients who attended the University of Kentucky ICU recovery clinic (ICU-RC) from November 2021 to June 2022. Patients participated in muscle and functional assessments. Nutrition intake and status during the ICU stay were analyzed. The Subjective Global Assessment and a nutrition questionnaire were used to identify changes in intake, ongoing gastrointestinal symptoms, and patient's access to food at the ICU-RC appointment. RESULTS: Forty-one patients enrolled with a median hospital length of stay (LOS) of 23 days. Patients with 0 days of nil per os (NPO) status throughout hospitalization had a shorter LOS (P = 0.05), were able to complete the five times sit-to-stand test (P = 0.02), and were less likely to experience ICU-acquired weakness (P = 0.04) at short-term follow-up compared with patients with ≥1 day of NPO status. Twenty (48%) patients reported changes in nutrition intake in early recovery compared with before hospitalization. Eight (20%) patients reported symptoms leading to decreased intake and four (10%) reported access to food as a barrier to intake. CONCLUSION: Barriers to nutrition exist during critical illness and persist after discharge, with almost half of patients reporting a change in intake. Inpatient nutrition intake is associated with functional outcomes and warrants further exploration.

Safety and Feasibility of an Interdisciplinary Treatment Approach to Optimize Recovery From Critical Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVES: Examine the safety and feasibility of a multimodal in-person or telehealth treatment program, administered in acute recovery phase for patients surviving critical coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Pragmatic, pre-post, nonrandomized controlled trial with patients electing enrollment into one of the two recovery pathways. SETTING: ICU Recovery Clinic in an academic medical center. PATIENTS: Adult patients surviving acute respiratory failure due to critical coronavirus disease 2019. INTERVENTIONS: Patients participated in combined ICU Recovery clinic and 8 weeks of physical rehabilitation delivered: 1) in-person or 2) telehealth. Patients received medical care by an ICU Recovery Clinic interdisciplinary team and physical rehabilitation focused on aerobic, resistance, and respiratory muscle training. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-two patients enrolled with mean age 57 ± 12, 62% were male, and the median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 9.5. There were no differences between the two groups except patients in telehealth pathway (n = 10) lived further from clinic than face-to-face patients (162 ± 60 vs 31 ± 47 kilometers, t = 6.06, p < 0.001). Four safety events occurred: one minor adverse event in the telehealth group, two minor adverse events, and one major adverse event in the in-person group. Three patients did not complete the study (two in-person and one telehealth). Six-minute walk distance increased to 101 ± 91 meters from pre to post (n = 29, t = 6.93, p < 0.0001), which was similar between the two groups (110 vs 80 meters, t = 1.34, p = 0.19). Self-reported levels of anxiety, depression, and distress were high in both groups with similar self-report quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: A multimodal treatment program combining care from an interdisciplinary team in an ICU Recovery Clinic with physical rehabilitation is safe and feasible in patients surviving the ICU for coronavirus disease 2019 acute respiratory failure.

Physical Therapy Management of an Individual With Post-COVID Syndrome: A Case Report.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this case report is to provide the clinical presentation and physical therapist management for a patient with post-COVID syndrome. Secondarily, the report highlights the importance of assessing cognitive and emotional health in patients with post-COVID syndrome. METHODS (CASE DESCRIPTION): A 37-year-old woman tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and developed mild COVID-19 disease but did not require supplemental oxygen or hospitalization. The patient experienced persistent symptoms, including dyspnea, headaches, and cognitive fog. On day 62, they participated in an outpatient physical therapist evaluation that revealed deficits in exercise capacity, obtaining 50% of their age-predicted 6-minute walk distance. They had minor reductions in muscle strength and cognitive function. Self-reported quality of life was 50, and they scored above established cut-off scores for provisional diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). RESULTS: The patient participated in biweekly physical therapist sessions for 8 weeks, which included aerobic training, strengthening exercises, diaphragmatic breathing techniques, and mindfulness training. Metabolic equivalent for task levels increased with variability over the course of the program. The patient's muscle strength, physical function, and exercise capacity improved. 6-Minute walk distance increased by 199 m, equating to 80% of their age-predicted distance. Quality of life and PTSD scores did not improve. At evaluation after physical therapy, the patient was still experiencing migraines, dyspnea, fatigue, and cognitive dysfunction. CONCLUSION: This case report described the clinical presentation and physical therapist management of a person with post-COVID syndrome, a novel health condition for which little evidence exists to guide rehabilitation examination and interventions. Physical therapists should consider cognitive function and emotional health in their plan of care for patients with post-COVID syndromes. IMPACT: This case alerts physical therapists to post-COVID syndrome-which can include debilitating symptoms of decreased aerobic tolerance, anxiety, PTSD, and cognitive dysfunction-and to the role that therapists can play in assessing these symptoms and managing these patients.

ICU Recovery Clinic Attendance, Attrition, and Patient Outcomes: The Impact of Severity of Illness, Gender, and Rurality.

OBJECTIVES: The primary purpose is to characterize patients attending ICU recovery clinic and then describe their trajectory of cognitive and emotional health in 1 year. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study to assess attendance, attrition, and patient outcomes. SETTING: ICU Recovery Clinic. PATIENTS: Adult patients recently admitted to ICU for sepsis or acute respiratory failure and who were referred to clinic. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients (63%) attended ICU recovery clinic with a mean age of 53.2 ± 16 years (range, 20-82 yr), 42% female and mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores at an ICU admission of 9.4 ± 2.9 participated in outcomes. Twelve patients (32%) were lost to follow up and 12 patients (32%) were transferred to different providers before the end of 1 year. Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were negatively associated with health-related quality of life at baseline (r = -0.41; p = 0.033; n = 28) and short term (r = -0.40; p = 0.037; n = 27). Male patients had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores (mean difference = 2.4; t = 2.779; p = 0.008) and longer hospital length of stay (mean difference = 9.3; t = 2.27; p = 0.029). Female patients had higher scores on Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (mean difference = 7.2; t = 2.74; p = 0.01) and Impact of Events Scale-Revised (mean difference = 18.9; t = 2.74; p = 0.011) at the initial follow-up visit. Patients never attending clinic were more likely to live further away, have a tracheotomy, and spent longer time in the ICU. CONCLUSIONS: Attendance and attrition in ICU recovery clinic are related to patient factors (living in rural area) and ICU factors. Data suggest different recovery trajectories exist based on gender, severity of illness, and self-reported outcomes.

Recovery from COVID-19 and acute respiratory distress syndrome: the potential role of an intensive care unit recovery clinic: a case report.

BACKGROUND: In this case report, we describe the trajectory of recovery of a young, healthy patient diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 who developed acute respiratory distress syndrome. The purpose of this case report is to highlight the potential role of intensive care unit recovery or follow-up clinics for patients surviving acute hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019. CASE PRESENTATION: Our patient was a 27-year-old Caucasian woman with a past medical history of asthma transferred from a community hospital to our medical intensive care unit for acute hypoxic respiratory failure due to bilateral pneumonia requiring mechanical ventilation (ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fraction of inspired oxygen, 180). On day 2 of her intensive care unit admission, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction confirmed coronavirus disease 2019. Her clinical status gradually improved, and she was extubated on intensive care unit day 5. She had a negative test result for coronavirus disease 2019 twice with repeated reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction before being discharged to home after 10 days in the intensive care unit. Two weeks after intensive care unit discharge, the patient returned to our outpatient intensive care unit recovery clinic. At follow-up, the patient endorsed significant fatigue and exhaustion with difficulty walking, minor issues with sleep disruption, and periods of memory loss. She scored 10/12 on the short performance physical battery, indicating good physical function. She did not have signs of anxiety, depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder through self-report questionnaires. Clinically, she was considered at low risk of developing post-intensive care syndrome, but she required follow-up services to assist in navigating the healthcare system, addressing remaining symptoms, and promoting return to her pre-coronavirus disease 2019 societal role. CONCLUSION: We present this case report to suggest that patients surviving coronavirus disease 2019 with subsequent development of acute respiratory distress syndrome will require more intense intensive care unit recovery follow-up. Patients with a higher degree of acute illness who also have pre-existing comorbidities and those of older age who survive mechanical ventilation for coronavirus disease 2019 will require substantial post-intensive care unit care to mitigate and treat post-intensive care syndrome, promote reintegration into the community, and improve quality of life.