Participant retention in follow-up studies of intensive care unit survivors - A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize participant retention data and related reporting in studies evaluating post-hospital outcomes of survivors of critical illness after an intensive care unit (ICU) stay. REVIEW METHOD USED: A synthesis of literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry. Hand searched reference lists and personal files of relevant narrative and systematic review articles. REVIEW METHODS: Articles were screened by pairs of independent reviewers. Similarly, data were abstracted by pairs of data collectors, with conflicts resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer. RESULTS: We included 243 publications, from 225 unique studies of 87,602 participants. Participant retention could not be calculated for any time-points in 13% of studies nor in 22% of all follow-up time-points. Retention ranged from 18-100%. When compared to follow-up before 1-month, retention at each later timepoint was not significantly different. Age and sex were not associated with retention and more recent studies had decreased retention (odds ratio: 0.94 [95% confidence interval: 0.92-0.96; p < 0.001]). Reporting of retention-related study methodology was inconsistent. CONCLUSION: Retention rate could not be calculated for 22% of study follow-up time-points, with retention at the remaining time-points generally being high (≥85%), but with high variability (18% - 100%). ICU survivorship research could be improved via: (i) more detailed guidance on reporting participant retention, and (ii) use of existing resources and best practices to facilitate better study design and to improve participant retention to preserve statistical power and reduce selection bias.

Inaccuracy of Initial Clinical Mobility Assessment in Venous Thromboembolism Risk Stratification.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism risk increases in hospitals due to reduced patient mobility. However, initial mobility evaluations for thromboembolism risk are often subjective and lack standardization, potentially leading to inaccurate risk assessments and insufficient prevention. METHODS: A retrospective study at a quaternary academic hospital analyzed patients using the Padua risk tool, which includes a mobility question, and the Johns Hopkins-Highest Level of Mobility (JH-HLM) scores to objectively measure mobility. Reduced mobility was defined as JH-HLM scores ≤3 over ≥3 consecutive days. The study evaluated the association between reduced mobility and hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism using multivariable logistic regression, comparing admitting health care professional assessments with JH-HLM scores. Symptomatic, hospital-acquired thromboembolisms were diagnosed radiographically by treating providers. RESULTS: Of 1715 patients, 33 (1.9%) developed venous thromboembolism. Reduced mobility, as determined by the JH-HLM scores, showed a significant association with thromboembolic events (adjusted OR: 2.53, 95%CI:1.23-5.22, P = .012). In contrast, the initial Padua assessment of expected reduced mobility at admission did not. The JH-HLM identified 19.1% of patients as having reduced mobility versus 6.5% by admitting health care professionals, suggesting 37 high-risk patients were misclassified as low risk and were not prescribed thrombosis prophylaxis; 4 patients developed thromboembolic events. JH-HLM detected reduced mobility in 36% of thromboembolic cases, compared to 9% by admitting health care professionals. CONCLUSION: Initial mobility evaluations by admitting health care professionals during venous thromboembolism risk assessment may not reflect patient mobility over their hospital stay. This highlights the need for objective measures like JH-HLM in risk assessments to improve accuracy and potentially reduce thromboembolism incidents.

Dynamic Prediction of Post-Acute Care Needs for Hospitalized Medicine Patients.

OBJECTIVES: Use patient demographic and clinical characteristics at admission and time-varying in-hospital measures of patient mobility to predict patient post-acute care (PAC) discharge. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis of electronic medical records. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients admitted to the two participating Hospitals from November 2016 through December 2019 with ≥72 hours in a general medicine service. METHODS: Discharge location (PAC vs home) was the primary outcome, and 2 time-varying measures of patient mobility, Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) Mobility "6-clicks" and Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility, were the primary predictors. Other predictors included demographic and clinical characteristics. For each day of hospitalization, we predicted discharge to PAC using the demographic and clinical characteristics and most recent mobility data within a random forest (RF) for survival, longitudinal, and multivariate (RF-SLAM) data. A regression tree for the daily predicted probabilities of discharge to PAC was constructed to represent a global summary of the RF. RESULTS: There were 23,090 total patients and compared to PAC, those discharged home were younger (64 vs 71), had shorter length of stay (5 vs 8 days), higher AM-PAC at admission (43 vs 32), and average AM-PAC throughout hospitalization (45 vs 35). AM-PAC was the most important predictor, followed by age, and whether the patient lives alone. The area under the hospital day-specific receiver operating characteristic curve ranged from 0.76 to 0.79 during the first 5 days. The global summary tree explained 75% of the variation in predicted probabilities for PAC from the RF. Sensitivity (75%), specificity (70%), and accuracy (72%) were maximized at a PAC probability threshold of 40%. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Daily assessment of patient mobility should be part of routine practice to help inform care planning by hospital teams. Our prediction model could be used as a valuable tool by multidisciplinary teams in the discharge planning process.

Instrument adaptation and preliminary validation study of the Laryngeal Hypersensitivity Questionnaire used for assessment of laryngeal symptoms in patients with artificial airways.

BACKGROUND: The Newcastle Laryngeal Hypersensitivity Questionnaire (LHQ) was developed to measure abnormal laryngeal sensation and was originally validated in a patient sample from otolaryngologic and respiratory outpatient clinics. Modification is needed for patients who are mechanically ventilated via an endotracheal tube or a tracheostomy tube. OBJECTIVES: We sought to adapt and preliminarily validate a modified version of the LHQ appropriate for nurses and other clinicians to administer in acute hospital settings called the LHQ-Acute (LHQ-A). METHODS: Internal consistency and construct validity analyses using secondary data from patients at a tertiary teaching hospital who presented with symptoms of laryngeal irritability/hypersensitivity between September 2012 and October 2013 were performed. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients, most complaining of coughing and dysphonia, with a median age of 58 (interquartile range: 48, 66) years and 29 healthy participants with a median age of 62 (interquartile range: 50, 66) years were analysed. The original LHQ was reduced from 14 questions with responses on a 7-point scale to the LHQ-A containing 13 questions with responses on a 4-point scale. Correlations between items of the LHQ and LHQ-A were similar, and internal consistency was excellent and highly comparable, with Cronbach's alpha = 0.906 and 0.902, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The LHQ-A, which has been adapted for nurses and other clinicians to administer to a critically ill patient population, demonstrated comparable reliability and validity to the original LHQ. Validation of the LHQ-A in independent patient populations from acute settings is necessary to better understand norms and changes during recovery from acute illness.

Activities of Daily Living Assessment Early in Hospitalization Is Associated With Key Outcomes.

IMPORTANCE: Assessing patients' activities of daily living (ADLs) function early in hospitalization may help identify patients at risk for poor outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between patients' ADL function at hospital admission and length of stay, inpatient falls, hospital-acquired pressure injuries, and discharge disposition. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using scores collected on the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care Inpatient Activity Short Form (AM-PAC IASF) in routine care at admission. SETTING: Two inpatient units at the Johns Hopkins Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized patients with various diagnoses, including neurosurgical, stroke, and general neurology (N = 1,899). RESULTS: People with lower AM-PAC scores (every 10-point difference) had increased odds (odds ratio [OR] = 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4-1.8) of being in the highest length-of-stay quartile (≥8 days), having an injurious fall (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.3-2.2), acquiring a pressure injury (OR = 2.7; 95% CI = 1.5-5.3), and being discharged to a postacute care facility (OR = 3.02; 95% CI = 2.1-2.7). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Greater functional impairments in ADLs, measured with the AM-PACS IASF, were significantly associated with worse outcomes. AM-PAC IASF scores may be useful in identifying patients with ADL deficits and targeting occupational therapy services for patients who are at higher risk for negative outcomes. What This Article Adds: Early assessment of ADL function in routine care of hospitalized patients may aid in treatment and care plan decisions, particularly for inpatients who may be at higher risk for adverse outcomes.

Identifying Cognitive Impairment in the Acute Care Hospital Setting: Finding an Appropriate Screening Tool.

IMPORTANCE: Identifying cognitive impairment in adults in acute care is essential so that providers can address functional deficits and plan for safe discharge. Occupational therapy practitioners play an essential role in screening for, evaluating, and treating cognitive impairment. OBJECTIVE: To test and compare the psychometrics and feasibility of three cognitive screens and select the ideal screen for use in acute care. DESIGN: Prospective mixed methods. SETTING: Acute care hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty adults. OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We examined the interrater reliability, administration time, and usability of the Brief Cognitive Assessment Tool Short Form (BCAT-SF), the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care "6-Clicks" Applied Cognitive Inpatient Short Form (AM-PAC ACISF), and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). We compared the construct validity, sensitivity, and specificity of the BCAT-SF and AM-PAC ACISF with those of the MoCA. RESULTS: Interrater reliability was good to excellent; ICCs were .98 for the MoCA, .97 for the BCAT-SF, and .86 for the AM-PAC ACISF. The BCAT-SF and the AM-PAC ACISF both had 100% sensitivity, and specificity was 74% for the BCAT-SF and 98% for the AM-PAC ACISF. The optimal cutoff score for cognitive impairment on the AM-PAC ACISF was <22. Administration time of the AM-PAC ACISF (1.0 min) was significantly less than that of the BCAT-SF (5.0 min) and the MoCA (13.3 min; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Each screen demonstrated acceptable reliability and construct validity. The AM-PAC ACISF had the optimum mix of performance and feasibility for the fast-paced acute care setting. What This Article Adds: Early identification of cognitive impairment using the AM-PAC ACISF can allow for timely occupational therapy intervention in acute care settings.

Revealing the tension: The relationship between high fall risk categorization and low patient mobility.

BACKGROUND: Using an inpatient fall risk assessment tool helps categorize patients into risk groups which can then be targeted with fall prevention strategies. While potentially important in preventing patient injury, fall risk assessment may unintentionally lead to reduced mobility among hospitalized patients. Here we examined the relationship between fall risk assessment and ambulatory status among hospitalized patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutively admitted adult patients (n = 48,271) to a quaternary urban hospital that provides care for patients of broad socioeconomic and demographic backgrounds. Non-ambulatory status, the primary outcome, was defined as a median Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility <6 (i.e., patient walks less than 10 steps) throughout hospitalization. The primary exposure variable was the Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JHFRAT) category (Low, Moderate, High). The capacity to ambulate was assessed using the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC). Multivariable regression analysis controlled for clinical demographics, JHFRAT items, AM-PAC, comorbidity count, and length of stay. RESULTS: 8% of patients at low risk for falls were non-ambulatory, compared to 25% and 54% of patients at moderate and high risk for falls, respectively. Patients categorized as high risk and moderate risk for falls were 4.6 (95% CI: 3.9-5.5) and 2.6 (95% CI: 2.4-2.9) times more likely to be non-ambulatory compared to patients categorized as low risk, respectively. For patients with high ambulatory potential (AM-PAC 18-24), those categorized as high risk for falls were 4.3 (95% CI: 3.5-5.3) times more likely to be non-ambulatory compared to patients categorized as low risk. CONCLUSIONS: Patients categorized into higher fall risk groups had decreased mobility throughout their hospitalization, even when they had the functional capacity to ambulate.

Perceived barriers to early goal-directed mobility in the intensive care unit: Results of a quality improvement evaluation.

BACKGROUND: A multicentre randomised trial demonstrated improved outcomes for intensive care unit (ICU) patients using early, goal-directed mobility implemented by nurses. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate barriers to nursing mobility, using a validated survey, during an ongoing quality improvement (QI) project (2019) in a medical ICU and determine changes from the pre-QI (2017) baseline. METHODS: Nurses, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and clinical technicians completed the 26-item Patient Mobilization Attitudes and Beliefs Survey for the ICU (PMABS-ICU). An overall score and three subscale scores (knowledge, attitudes, behaviour), each ranging from 0 to 100, were calculated; higher scores indicated greater barriers. RESULTS: Seventy-five (93% response rate) nurses, eight (100%) nurse practitioners and physician assistants, and 11 (100%) clinical technicians completed the PMABS-ICU. For all respondents (N = 94), the mean (standard deviation) overall PMABS-ICU score was 32 (8) and the knowledge, attitudes and behaviour subscale scores were 22 (11), 33 (11), and 34 (8), respectively. Among all respondents completing the survey in both 2017 and 2019 (N = 46), there was improvement in the mean (95% confidence interval) overall score [-3.1 (-5.8, -0.5); p = .022] and in the knowledge [-5.1 (-8.9, -1.3); p = .010] and attitudes [-3.9 (-7.3, -0.6); p = .023] subscale scores. Among all respondents (N = 48) taking the PMABS-ICU for the first time in 2019 compared with those taking the survey before the QI project in 2017 (N = 99), there was improvement in the mean (95% confidence interval) overall score [-3.8 (-6.5, -1.1); p = .007] and in the knowledge [-6.9 (-11.0, -2.7); p = .001] and attitude [-4.3 (-8.1, -0.5); p = .027] subscale scores. CONCLUSIONS: Using a validated survey administered to ICU nurses and other staff, before and during a structured QI project, there was a decrease in perceived barriers to mobility. Reduced barriers among those taking the survey for the first time during the QI project compared with those taking the survey before the QI project suggests a positive culture change supporting early, goal-directed mobility implemented by nurses.

Six-Minute Walk Distance After Critical Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Impaired physical functioning is common and long lasting after an intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The 6-minute walk test (6MWT) is a validated and widely used test of functional capacity. This systematic review synthesizes existing data in order to: (1) evaluate 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) in meters over longitudinal follow-up after critical illness, (2) compare 6MWD between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) versus non-ARDS survivors, and (3) evaluate patient- and ICU-related factors associated with 6MWD. DATA SOURCES: Five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsychINFO, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry) were searched to identify studies reporting 6MWT after hospital discharge in survivors from general (ie, nonspeciality) ICUs. The last search was run on February 14, 2018. Databases were accessed via Johns Hopkins University Library. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Pooled mean 6MWD were reported, with separate linear random effects models used to evaluate associations of 6MWD with ARDS status, and patient- and ICU-related variables. Twenty-six eligible articles on 16 unique participant groups were included. The pooled mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) 6MWD results at 3- and 12-months post discharge were 361 (321-401) and 436 (391-481) meters, respectively. There was a significant increase in 6MWD at 12 months compared to 3 months (P = .017). In ARDS versus non-ARDS survivors, the mean (95% CI) 6MWD difference over 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up was 73 [13-133] meters lower. Female sex and preexisting comorbidity also were significantly associated with lower 6MWD, with ICU-related variables having no consistent associations. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to initial assessment at 3 months, significant improvement in 6MWD was reported at 12 months. Female sex, preexisting comorbidity, and ARDS (vs non-ARDS) were associated with lower 6MWT results. Such factors warrant consideration in the design of clinical research studies and in the interpretation of patient status using the 6MWT.

Inter-rater reliability of the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility Scale (JH-HLM) in the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: The Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility (JH-HLM) scale is used to document the observed mobility of hospitalized patients, including those patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the inter-rater reliability of the JH-HLM, completed by physical therapists, across medical, surgical, and neurological adult ICUs at a single large academic hospital. METHODS: The JH-HLM is an ordinal scale for documenting a patient's highest observed level of activity, ranging from lying in bed (score = 1) to ambulating >250 feet (score = 8). Eighty-one rehabilitation sessions were conducted by eight physical therapists, with 1 of 2 reference physical therapist rater simultaneously observing the session and independently scoring the JH-HLM. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to determine the inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: A total of 77 (95%) of 81 assessments had perfect agreement. The overall intraclass correlation coefficient for inter-rater reliability was 0.98 (95% confidence interval: 0.96, 0.99), with similar scores in the medical, surgical, and neurological ICUs. A Bland-Altman plot revealed a mean difference in JH-HLM scoring of 0 (limits of agreement: -0.54 to 0.61). CONCLUSION: The JH-HLM has excellent inter-rater reliability as part of routine physical therapy practice, across different types of adult ICUs.

Participant retention in trauma intensive care unit (ICU) follow-up studies: a post-hoc analysis of a previous scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The study aimed to synthesize participant retention-related data for longitudinal follow-up studies of survivors from trauma intensive care units (ICUs). METHODS: Within a published scoping review evaluating ICU patient outcomes after hospital discharge, two screeners independently searched for trauma ICU survivorship studies. RESULTS: There were 11 trauma ICU follow-up studies, all of which were cohort studies. Twelve months (range: 1-60 months) was the most frequent follow-up time point for assessment (63% of studies). Retention rates ranged from 54% to 94% across time points and could not be calculated for two studies (18%). Pooled retention rates at 3, 6, and 12 months were 75%, 81%, and 81%, respectively. Mean patient age (OR 0.85 per 1-year increase, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99, p=0.036), percent of men (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.10, p=0.002), and publication year (OR 0.89 per 1-year increase, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.95, p=0.007) were associated with retention rates. Early (3-month) versus later (6-month, 12-month) follow-up time point was not associated with retention rates. DISCUSSION: Pooled retention rates were >75%, at 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month time points, with wide variability across studies and time points. There was little consistency with reporting participant retention methodology and related data. More detailed reporting guidelines, with better author adherence, will help improve reporting of participant retention data. Utilization of existing research resources may help improve participant retention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III: meta-analyses (post-hoc analyses) of a prior scoping review.

Factors Associated With Home Visits in a 5-Year Study of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Survivors.

BACKGROUND: Participant retention is vital for longitudinal studies. Home visits may increase retention, but little is known about the subset of patients they benefit. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient-related variables associated with home visits. METHODS: In a 5-year, longitudinal, multisite, prospective study of 195 survivors of acute respiratory distress syndrome, in-person assessments were conducted at a research clinic. Home visits were offered to participants who could not attend the clinic. Associations between having a home visit, prior follow-up visit status, and baseline and in-hospital patient variables were evaluated with multivariable, random-intercept logistic regression models. The association between home visits and patients' posthospital clinical status was evaluated with a subsequent regression model adjusted for these variables. RESULTS: Participants had a median age of 49 years and were 56% male and 58% White. The following had independent associations with home visits (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI]): age (per year: 1.03 [1.00-1.05]) and immediately preceding visit incomplete (2.46 [1.44-4.19]) or at home (8.24 [4.57-14.86]). After adjustment for prior-visit status and baseline and hospitalization variables, these posthospital patient outcome variables were associated with a subsequent home visit: instrumental activities of daily living (≥ 2 vs < 2 dependencies: 2.32 [1.29-4.17]), EQ-5D utility score (per 0.1-point decrease: 1.15 [1.02-1.30]), and 6-minute walk test (per 10-percentage-point decrease in percent-predicted distance: 1.50 [1.26-1.79]). CONCLUSIONS: Home visits were important for retaining older and more physically impaired study participants, helping reduce selection bias caused by excluding them.

Participant Retention in Follow-Up Studies of Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors.

BACKGROUND: With an increasing number of follow-up studies of acute respiratory failure survivors, there is need for a better understanding of participant retention and its reporting in this field of research. Hence, our objective was to synthesize participant retention data and associated reporting for this field. METHODS: Two screeners independently searched for acute respiratory failure survivorship studies within a published scoping review to evaluate subject outcomes after hospital discharge in critical illness survivors. RESULTS: There were 21 acute respiratory failure studies (n = 4,342 survivors) over 47 follow-up time points. Six-month follow-up (range: 2-60 months) was the most frequently reported time point, in 81% of studies. Only 1 study (5%) reported accounting for loss to follow-up in sample-size calculation. Retention rates could not be calculated for 5 (24%) studies. In 16 studies reporting on retention across all time points, retention ranged from 32% to 100%. Pooled retention rates at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months were 85%, 89%, 82%, and 88%, respectively. Retention rates did not significantly differ by publication year, participant mean age, or when comparing earlier (3 months) versus each later follow-up time point (6, 12, or 24 months). CONCLUSIONS: Participant retention was generally high but varied greatly across individual studies and time points, with 24% of studies reporting inadequate data to calculate retention rate. High participant retention is possible, but resources for optimizing retention may help studies retain participants. Improved reporting guidelines with greater adherence would be beneficial.

Perceived Barriers to Mobility in a Medical ICU: The Patient Mobilization Attitudes & Beliefs Survey for the ICU.

PURPOSE: Early mobilization in the intensive care unit (ICU) can improve patient outcomes but has perceived barriers to implementation. As part of an ongoing structured quality improvement project to increase mobilization of medical ICU patients by nurses and clinical technicians, we adapted the existing, validated Patient Mobilization Attitudes & Beliefs Survey (PMABS) for the ICU setting and evaluated its performance characteristics and results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 26-item PMABS adapted for the ICU (PMABS-ICU) was administered as an online survey to 163 nurses, clinical technicians, respiratory therapists, attending and fellow physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants in one medical ICU. We evaluated the overall and subscale (knowledge, attitude, and behavior) scores and compared these scores by respondent characteristics (clinical role and years of work experience). RESULTS: The survey response rate was 96% (155/163). The survey demonstrated acceptable discriminant validity and acceptable internal consistency for the overall scale (Cronbach α: 0.82, 95% confidence interval: 0.76-0.85), with weaker internal consistency for all subscales (Cronbach α: 0.62-0.69). Across all respondent groups, the overall barrier score (range: 1-100) was relatively low, with attending physicians perceiving the lowest barriers (median [interquartile range]: 30 [28-34]) and nurses perceiving the highest (37 [31-40]). Within the first 10 years of work experience, greater experience was associated with a lower overall barrier score (-0.8 for each additional year; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In our medical ICU, across 6 different clinical roles, there were relatively low perceived barriers to patient mobility, with greater work experience over the first 10 years being associated with lower perceived barriers. As part of a structured quality improvement project, the PMABS-ICU may be valuable in assisting to identify specific perceived barriers for consideration in designing mobility interventions for the ICU setting.

Prediction of Disposition Within 48 Hours of Hospital Admission Using Patient Mobility Scores.

Delayed hospital discharges for patients needing rehabilitation in a postacute setting can exacerbate hospital-acquired mobility loss, prolong functional recovery, and increase costs. Systematic measurement of patient mobility by nurses early during hospitalization has the potential to help identify which patients are likely to be discharged to a postacute care facility versus home. To test the predictive ability of this approach, a machine learning classification tree method was applied retrospectively to a diverse sample of hospitalized patients (N = 761) using training and validation sets. Compared with patients discharged to home, patients discharged to a postacute facility were older (median, 64 vs 56 years old) and had lower mobility scores at hospital admission (median, 32 vs 41). The final decision tree accurately classified the discharge location for 73% (95% CI, 67%-78%) of patients. This study emphasizes the value of systematically measuring mobility in the hospital and provides a simple decision tree to facilitate early discharge planning.

Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors' Physical, Cognitive, and Mental Health Outcomes: Quantitative Measures versus Semistructured Interviews.

Rationale: Increasingly, patients are surviving acute respiratory failure (ARF), prompting the need to better understand standardized outcome measures commonly used during ARF follow-up studies. Objectives: Investigate standardized outcome measures (patient-reported physical and mental health measures, and cognitive testing) compared with findings from semistructured, qualitative interviews. Methods: As part of two ARF multicenter follow-up studies, standardized outcome measures were obtained, followed by qualitative evaluation via an in-depth, semistructured interview conducted and coded by two independent researchers. Qualitative interviews revealed the following post-ARF survivorship themes: physical impairment; anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms; and cognitive impairment. Scores from standardized measures related to these themes were compared for ARF survivors reporting versus not reporting these themes in their qualitative interviews. Results: Of 59 invited ARF survivors, 48 (81%) completed both standardized outcome measures and qualitative interviews. Participants' median (interquartile range) age was 53 (43-64) years; 54% were female, and 88% were living independently before hospitalization. The two independent reviewers classifying the presence or absence of themes from the qualitative interviews had excellent agreement (κ = 0.80). There were significantly worse scores on standardized outcome measures for survivors reporting (vs. not reporting) physical and mental health impairments in their qualitative interviews. However, standardized cognitive test scores did not differ between patients reporting versus not reporting cognitive impairments in their qualitative interviews. Conclusions: These findings support the use of recommended, commonly used standardized outcome measures for physical and mental health impairments in ARF survivorship research. However, caution is needed in interpreting self-reported cognitive function compared with standardized cognitive testing.

A survey of Delphi panelists after core outcome set development revealed positive feedback and methods to facilitate panel member participation.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to elicit feedback on consensus methodology used for core outcome set (COS) development. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: An online survey of international Delphi panelists participating in a recent COS for clinical research studies evaluating acute respiratory failure (ARF) survivors was conducted. Panelists represented 14 countries (56% outside the United States). RESULTS: Seventy (92%) panelists completed the survey, including 32 researchers, 19 professional association representatives, 4 research funding representatives, and 15 ARF survivors/caregiver members. Among respondents, 91% reported that the time required to participate was appropriate and 96% were not bothered by reminders for timely response. Attributes of measurement instruments and voting results from previous rounds were evaluated differently across stakeholder groups. When measurement properties were explained in the stem of the survey question, 59 (84%) panelists (including 73% of survivors/families) correctly interpreted information about an instrument's reliability. Without a reminder in the stem, only 20 (29%) panelists (including 38% of researchers) correctly identified properties of a COS. CONCLUSION: This international Delphi panel, including >20% patients/caregivers, favorably reported on feasibility of the methodology. Providing all panelists pertinent information/reminders about the project's objective at each voting round is important to informed decision making across all stakeholder groups.

Perspectives of survivors, families and researchers on key outcomes for research in acute respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: There is heterogeneity among the outcomes evaluated in studies of survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF). AIM: To evaluate the importance of specific outcome domains to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) survivors, their family members and clinical researchers. METHODS: Nineteen outcome domains were identified from the National Institutes of Health's Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System; WHO's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health; Society of Critical Care Medicine's Post-Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS); as well as patient, clinician and researcher input. We surveyed ARDS survivors, family members and critical care researchers, 279 respondents in total, using a 5-point scale (strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree) to rate the importance of measuring each domain in studies of ARF survivors' postdischarge outcomes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: At least 80% of patients and family members supported (ie, rated 'agree' or 'strongly agree') that 15 of the 19 domains should be measured in all future studies. Among researchers, 6 of 19 domains were supported, with researchers less supportive for all domains, except survival (95% vs 72% support). Overall, four domains were supported by all groups: physical function, cognitive function, return to work or prior activities and mental health. CONCLUSION: Patient, family and researcher groups supported inclusion of outcome domains that fit within the PICS framework. Patients and family members also supported many additional domains, emphasising the importance of including patients/family, along with researchers, in consensus processes to select core outcome domains for future research studies.

Psychiatric symptoms after acute respiratory distress syndrome: a 5-year longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: We aimed to characterize anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms over 5-year follow-up after acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and determine risk factors for prolonged psychiatric morbidity. METHODS: This prospective cohort study enrolled patients from 13 medical and surgical intensive care units in four hospitals, with follow-up at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months post-ARDS. Trained research staff administered the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (scores ≥ 8 on anxiety and depression subscales indicating substantial symptoms) and the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R, scores ≥ 1.6 indicating substantial PTSD symptoms) at each follow-up visit. RESULTS: Of 196 consenting survivors, 186 (95%) completed HADS and IES-R assessments; 96 (52%) had any continuous or recurring (prolonged) symptoms, and 71 (38%), 59 (32%), and 43 (23%) had prolonged anxiety, depression, and PTSD symptoms, respectively (median total durations 33-39 months, 71-100% of observed follow-up time). Prolonged psychiatric symptoms tended to co-occur across domains; the most common morbidity pattern involved substantial symptoms in all three domains. Worse pre-ARDS mental health, including prior depression and psychological distress in the period immediately preceding ARDS, was strongly associated with prolonged post-ARDS psychiatric morbidity across symptom domains. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically significant and long-lasting symptoms of anxiety, depression, and PTSD are common in the first 5 years after ARDS. In-hospital screening of psychiatric history, including recent anxiety and depression symptoms, may be useful for long-term mental health treatment planning after ARDS.