SARS-CoV-2 reservoir in post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC).

Millions of people are suffering from Long COVID or post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC). Several biological factors have emerged as potential drivers of PASC pathology. Some individuals with PASC may not fully clear the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 after acute infection. Instead, replicating virus and/or viral RNA-potentially capable of being translated to produce viral proteins-persist in tissue as a 'reservoir'. This reservoir could modulate host immune responses or release viral proteins into the circulation. Here we review studies that have identified SARS-CoV-2 RNA/protein or immune responses indicative of a SARS-CoV-2 reservoir in PASC samples. Mechanisms by which a SARS-CoV-2 reservoir may contribute to PASC pathology, including coagulation, microbiome and neuroimmune abnormalities, are delineated. We identify research priorities to guide the further study of a SARS-CoV-2 reservoir in PASC, with the goal that clinical trials of antivirals or other therapeutics with potential to clear a SARS-CoV-2 reservoir are accelerated.

Oxygen-Saturation Targets and Cognitive and Functional Outcomes in Mechanically Ventilated Adults.

Rationale: Among mechanically ventilated critically ill adults, the PILOT (Pragmatic Investigation of Optimal Oxygen Targets) trial demonstrated no difference in ventilator-free days among lower, intermediate, and higher oxygen-saturation targets. The effects on long-term cognition and related outcomes are unknown.Objectives: To compare the effects of lower (90% [range, 88-92%]), intermediate (94% [range, 92-96%]), and higher (98% [range, 96-100%]) oxygen-saturation targets on long-term outcomes.Methods: Twelve months after enrollment in the PILOT trial, blinded neuropsychological raters conducted assessments of cognition, disability, employment status, and quality of life. The primary outcome was global cognition as measured using the Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment. In a subset of patients, an expanded neuropsychological battery measured executive function, attention, immediate and delayed memory, verbal fluency, and abstraction.Measurements and Main Results: A total of 501 patients completed follow-up, including 142 in the lower, 186 in the intermediate, and 173 in the higher oxygen target groups. Median (interquartile range) peripheral oxygen saturation values in the lower, intermediate, and higher target groups were 94% (91-96%), 95% (93-97%), and 97% (95-99%), respectively. Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment score did not differ between lower and intermediate (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.36 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.92-2.00]), intermediate and higher (adjusted OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.62-1.29]), or higher and lower (adjusted OR, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.83-1.79]) target groups. There was also no difference in individual cognitive domains, disability, employment, or quality of life.Conclusions: Among mechanically ventilated critically ill adults who completed follow-up at 12 months, oxygen-saturation targets were not associated with cognition or related outcomes.

Dexmedetomidine or Propofol for Sedation in Mechanically Ventilated Adults with Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines currently recommend targeting light sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol for adults receiving mechanical ventilation. Differences exist between these sedatives in arousability, immunity, and inflammation. Whether they affect outcomes differentially in mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis undergoing light sedation is unknown. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis to receive dexmedetomidine (0.2 to 1.5 µg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or propofol (5 to 50 µg per kilogram per minute), with doses adjusted by bedside nurses to achieve target sedation goals set by clinicians according to the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS, on which scores range from -5 [unresponsive] to +4 [combative]). The primary end point was days alive without delirium or coma during the 14-day intervention period. Secondary end points were ventilator-free days at 28 days, death at 90 days, and age-adjusted total score on the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status questionnaire (TICS-T; scores range from 0 to 100, with a mean of 50±10 and lower scores indicating worse cognition) at 6 months. RESULTS: Of 432 patients who underwent randomization, 422 were assigned to receive a trial drug and were included in the analyses - 214 patients received dexmedetomidine at a median dose of 0.27 µg per kilogram per hour, and 208 received propofol at a median dose of 10.21 µg per kilogram per minute. The median duration of receipt of the trial drugs was 3.0 days (interquartile range, 2.0 to 6.0), and the median RASS score was -2.0 (interquartile range, -3.0 to -1.0). We found no difference between dexmedetomidine and propofol in the number of days alive without delirium or coma (adjusted median, 10.7 vs. 10.8 days; odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.26), ventilator-free days (adjusted median, 23.7 vs. 24.0 days; odds ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.51), death at 90 days (38% vs. 39%; hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.52), or TICS-T score at 6 months (adjusted median score, 40.9 vs. 41.4; odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.33). Safety end points were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among mechanically ventilated adults with sepsis who were being treated with recommended light-sedation approaches, outcomes in patients who received dexmedetomidine did not differ from outcomes in those who received propofol. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01739933.).

Validating the Fluctuating Mental Status Evaluation in Neurocritically Ill Patients With Acute Stroke.

OBJECTIVES: Neurocritically ill patients are at high risk for developing delirium, which can worsen the long-term outcomes of this vulnerable population. However, existing delirium assessment tools do not account for neurologic deficits that often interfere with conventional testing and are therefore unreliable in neurocritically ill patients. We aimed to determine the accuracy and predictive validity of the Fluctuating Mental Status Evaluation (FMSE), a novel delirium screening tool developed specifically for neurocritically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective validation study. SETTING: Neurocritical care unit at an academic medical center. PATIENTS: One hundred thirty-nine neurocritically ill stroke patients (mean age, 63.9 [sd, 15.9], median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 11 [interquartile range, 2-17]). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Expert raters performed daily Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition-based delirium assessments, while paired FMSE assessments were performed by trained clinicians. We analyzed 717 total noncomatose days of paired assessments, of which 52% (n = 373) were rated by experts as days with delirium; 53% of subjects were delirious during one or more days. Compared with expert ratings, the overall accuracy of the FMSE was high (area under the curve [AUC], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.82-0.87). FMSE scores greater than or equal to 1 had 86% sensitivity and 74% specificity on a per-assessment basis, while scores greater than or equal to 2 had 70% sensitivity and 88% specificity. Accuracy remained high in patients with aphasia (FMSE ≥ 1: 82% sensitivity, 64% specificity; FMSE ≥ 2: 64% sensitivity, 84% specificity) and those with decreased arousal (FMSE ≥ 1: 87% sensitivity, 77% specificity; FMSE ≥ 2: 71% sensitivity, 90% specificity). Positive FMSE assessments also had excellent accuracy when predicting functional outcomes at discharge (AUC, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.93]) and 3 months (AUC, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.78-0.92]). CONCLUSIONS: In this validation study, we found that the FMSE was an accurate delirium screening tool in neurocritically ill stroke patients. FMSE scores greater than or equal to 1 indicate "possible" delirium and should be used when prioritizing sensitivity, whereas scores greater than or equal to 2 indicate "probable" delirium and should be used when prioritizing specificity.

One-Year Recovery Among Survivors of Prolonged Severe COVID-19: A National Multicenter Cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Understanding the long-term effects of severe COVID-19 illness on survivors is essential for effective pandemic recovery planning. Therefore, we investigated impairments among hospitalized adults discharged to long-term acute care hospitals (LTACHs) for prolonged severe COVID-19 illness who survived 1 year. DESIGN: The Recovery After Transfer to an LTACH for COVID-19 (RAFT COVID) study was a national, multicenter, prospective longitudinal cohort study. SETTING AND PATIENTS: We included hospitalized English-speaking adults transferred to one of nine LTACHs in the United States between March 2020 and February 2021 and completed a survey. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Validated instruments for impairments and free response questions about recovering. Among 282 potentially eligible participants who provided permission to be contacted, 156 (55.3%) participated (median age, 65; 38.5% female; 61.3% in good prior health; median length of stay of 57 d; 77% mechanically ventilated for a median of 26 d; 42% had a tracheostomy). Approximately two-thirds (64%) had a persistent impairment, including physical (57%), respiratory (49%; 19% on supplemental oxygen), psychiatric (24%), and cognitive impairments (15%). Nearly half (47%) had two or more impairment types. Participants also experienced persistent debility from hospital-acquired complications, including mononeuropathies and pressure ulcers. Participants described protracted recovery, attributing improvements to exercise/rehabilitation, support, and time. While considered life-altering with 78.7% not returning to their usual health, participants expressed gratitude for recovering; 99% returned home and 60% of previously employed individuals returned to work. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly two-thirds of survivors of among the most prolonged severe COVID-19 illness had persistent impairments at 1 year that resembled post-intensive care syndrome after critical illness plus debility from hospital-acquired complications.

Role of Blood-Brain Barrier Dysfunction in Delirium following Non-cardiac Surgery in Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: Although animal models suggest a role for blood-brain barrier dysfunction in postoperative delirium-like behavior, its role in postoperative delirium and postoperative recovery in humans is unclear. Thus, we evaluated the role of blood-brain barrier dysfunction in postoperative delirium and hospital length of stay among older surgery patients. METHODS: Cognitive testing, delirium assessment, and cerebrospinal fluid and blood sampling were prospectively performed before and after non-cardiac, non-neurologic surgery. Blood-brain barrier dysfunction was assessed using the cerebrospinal fluid-to-plasma albumin ratio (CPAR). RESULTS: Of 207 patients (median age = 68 years, 45% female) with complete CPAR and delirium data, 26 (12.6%) developed postoperative delirium. Overall, CPAR increased from before to 24 hours after surgery (median change = 0.28, interquartile range [IQR] = -0.48 to 1.24, Wilcoxon p = 0.001). Preoperative to 24 hours postoperative change in CPAR was greater among patients who developed delirium versus those who did not (median [IQR] = 1.31 [0.004 to 2.34] vs 0.19 [-0.55 to 1.08], p = 0.003). In a multivariable model adjusting for age, baseline cognition, and surgery type, preoperative to 24 hours postoperative change in CPAR was independently associated with delirium occurrence (per CPAR increase of 1, odds ratio = 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-1.63, p = 0.026) and increased hospital length of stay (incidence rate ratio = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.09-1.22, p < 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Postoperative increases in blood-brain barrier permeability are independently associated with increased delirium rates and postoperative hospital length of stay. Although these findings do not establish causality, studies are warranted to determine whether interventions to reduce postoperative blood-brain barrier dysfunction would reduce postoperative delirium rates and hospital length of stay. ANN NEUROL 2023;94:1024-1035.

Extremes of baseline cognitive function determine the severity of delirium: a population study.

Although delirium is a significant clinical and public health problem, little is understood about how specific vulnerabilities underlie the severity of its presentation. Our objective was to quantify the relationship between baseline cognition and subsequent delirium severity. We prospectively investigated a population-representative sample of 1510 individuals aged ≥70 years, of whom 209 (13.6%) were hospitalized across 371 episodes (1999 person-days assessment). Baseline cognitive function was assessed using the modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status, supplemented by verbal fluency measures. We estimated the relationship between baseline cognition and delirium severity [Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS)] and abnormal arousal (Observational Scale of Level of Arousal), adjusted by age, sex, frailty and illness severity. We conducted further analyses examining presentations to specific hospital settings and common precipitating aetiologies. The median time from baseline cognitive assessment to admission was 289 days (interquartile range 130 to 47 days). In admitted patients, delirium was present on at least 1 day in 45% of admission episodes. The average number of days with delirium (consecutively positive assessments) was 3.9 days. Elective admissions accounted for 88 bed days (4.4%). In emergency (but not elective) admissions, we found a non-linear U-shaped relationship between baseline global cognition and delirium severity using restricted cubic splines. Participants with baseline cognition 2 standard deviations below average (z-score = -2) had a mean MDAS score of 14 points (95% CI 10 to 19). Similarly, those with baseline cognition z-score = + 2 had a mean MDAS score of 7.9 points (95% CI 4.9 to 11). Individuals with average baseline cognition had the lowest MDAS scores. The association between baseline cognition and abnormal arousal followed a comparable pattern. C-reactive protein ≥20 mg/l and serum sodium <125 mM/l were associated with more severe delirium. Baseline cognition is a critical determinant of the severity of delirium and associated changes in arousal. Emergency admissions with lowest and highest baseline cognition who develop delirium should receive enhanced clinical attention.

How are Long-Covid, Post-Sepsis-Syndrome and Post-Intensive-Care-Syndrome related? A conceptional approach based on the current research literature.

Long-Covid (LC), Post-Sepsis-Syndrome (PSS) and Post-Intensive-Care-Syndrome (PICS) show remarkable overlaps in their clinical presentation. Nevertheless, it is unclear if they are distinct syndromes, which may co-occur in the same patient, or if they are three different labels to describe similar symptoms, assigned on the basis on patient history and professional perspective of the treating physician. Therefore, we reviewed the current literature on the relation between LC, PSS and PICS. To date, the three syndromes cannot reliably be distinguished due similarities in clinical presentation as they share the cognitive, psychological and physical impairments with only different probabilities of occurrence and a heterogeneity in individual expression. The diagnosis is furthermore hindered by a lack of specific diagnostic tools. It can be concluded that survivors after COVID-19 sepsis likely have more frequent and more severe consequences than patients with milder COVID-19 courses, and that are some COVID-19-specific sequelae, e.g. an increased risk for venous thromboembolism in the 30 days after the acute disease, which occur less often after sepsis of other causes. Patients may profit from leveraging synergies from PICS, PSS and LC treatment as well as from experiences gained from infection-associated chronic conditions in general. Disentangling molecular pathomechanisms may enable future targeted therapies that go beyond symptomatic treatment.

Correlation of the Critical Care Pain Observation Tool and Numeric Rating Scale in Intensive Care Unit Patients.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine the correlation between the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) to determine whether clinical factors modified the relationship between NRS and CPOT assessments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included nonventilated adults admitted to the MICU or SICU who could self-report pain and had at least 3 paired NRS and CPOT assessments. We performed Spearman correlation to assess overall correlation and performed proportional odds logistic regression to evaluate whether the relationship between NRS and CPOT assessments was modified by clinical factors. RESULTS: Nursing staff performed NRS and CPOT assessments every 4 h in 1302 patients, leading to 61,142 matched assessments. We found that the NRS and CPOT have a Spearman correlation coefficient of 0.56 and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.32 in intensive care unit patients. Factors that modified the relationship between the NRS and CPOT included the presence of delirium (P < .001) and lower mean daily Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The correlation coefficient between the NRS and the CPOT was found to be 0.56. The presence of delirium, decreased level of arousal, modified the relationship between the NRS and CPOT. Self-reported and behavioral pain assessments cannot be used interchangeably in critically ill adults.

Comparative Safety Analysis of Oral Antipsychotics for In-Hospital Adverse Clinical Events in Older Adults After Major Surgery : A Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotics are commonly used to manage postoperative delirium. Recent studies reported that haloperidol use has declined, and atypical antipsychotic use has increased over time. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk for in-hospital adverse events associated with oral haloperidol, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone in older patients after major surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: U.S. hospitals in the Premier Healthcare Database. PATIENTS: 17 115 patients aged 65 years and older without psychiatric disorders who were prescribed an oral antipsychotic drug after major surgery from 2009 to 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Haloperidol (≤4 mg on the day of initiation), olanzapine (≤10 mg), quetiapine (≤150 mg), and risperidone (≤4 mg). MEASUREMENTS: The risk ratios (RRs) for in-hospital death, cardiac arrhythmia events, pneumonia, and stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) were estimated after propensity score overlap weighting. RESULTS: The weighted population had a mean age of 79.6 years, was 60.5% female, and had in-hospital death of 3.1%. Among the 4 antipsychotics, quetiapine was the most prescribed (53.0% of total exposure). There was no statistically significant difference in the risk for in-hospital death among patients treated with haloperidol (3.7%, reference group), olanzapine (2.8%; RR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.42 to 1.27]), quetiapine (2.6%; RR, 0.70 [CI, 0.47 to 1.04]), and risperidone (3.3%; RR, 0.90 [CI, 0.53 to 1.41]). The risk for nonfatal clinical events ranged from 2.0% to 2.6% for a cardiac arrhythmia event, 4.2% to 4.6% for pneumonia, and 0.6% to 1.2% for stroke or TIA, with no statistically significant differences by treatment group. LIMITATION: Residual confounding by delirium severity; lack of untreated group; restriction to oral low-to-moderate dose treatment. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that atypical antipsychotics and haloperidol have similar rates of in-hospital adverse clinical events in older patients with postoperative delirium who receive an oral low-to-moderate dose antipsychotic drug. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.

Patient Perspectives on Perioperative Supportive Care Needs Surrounding Major Abdominal Operations for Cancer.

PURPOSE: The development of supportive care interventions delivered by surgeons for their patients is a major research priority. Designing such interventions requires understanding patients' supportive care needs for major operations. This qualitative analysis aimed to determine the supportive care needs of patients undergoing major abdominal operations for cancer. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with a subset of participants in a randomized, controlled trial of a specialist palliative care intervention for patients undergoing abdominal resections for cancer (NCT03436290). Sampling was designed to balance the population by sex, age (older vs. younger than 65 years), and treatment group assignment (intervention vs. control). The interview guide was developed to elicit patient perceptions of their supportive care needs from diagnosis to the time of interview, about 1 month after their operation. Two coders used an iterative, inductive method to identify recurring themes in the interviews. RESULTS: Analysis of interview transcripts revealed five primary themes: preoperative preparation, postoperative recovery, expectation setting, coordination of care, and provider characteristics. Cutting across these themes were patients' focus on time, timeliness, and timelines, as well as their desires for information both from their surgeons and other sources. Surgeons inspired trust through the quality of their communication and their responsiveness to questions. Patients were sensitive to perceived deviations from their expectations and spoke of the need to develop patience and to expect the unexpected. CONCLUSIONS: Patients expressed several needs for supportive care that surgical teams can potentially address to improve the experience of major cancer surgery.

Comparison of SAT and SBT Conduct During the ABC Trial and PILOT Trial.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of the "B" element-both spontaneous awakening trials (SATs) and spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs)-of the ABCDEF bundle improves the outcomes for mechanically ventilated patients. In 2021, the Pragmatic Investigation of optimal Oxygen Targets (PILOT) trial investigating optimal oxygenation targets in patients on mechanical ventilation was completed. OBJECTIVES: To compare SAT and SBT conduct between a randomized controlled trial and current clinical care. METHODS: The 2008 Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) Trial (2003-2006) randomized mechanically ventilated patients to paired SATs and SBTs versus sedation per usual care plus SBTs. The PILOT trial (2018-2021) enrolled patients years later where SAT + SBT conduct was observed. We compared SAT and SBT conduct in ABC's interventional group (SAT + SBT; n = 167, 1140 patient days) to that in PILOT (n = 2083, 8355 patient days). RESULTS: Spontaneous awakening trial safety screens were done in all 1140 ABC patient-days on sedation and/or analgesia and in 3889 of 4228 (92%) in PILOT. Spontaneous awakening trial safety screens were passed in 939 of 1140 (82%) instances in ABC versus only 1897 of 3889 (49%) in PILOT. Interestingly, SAT was performed in ≥95% of passed SAT safety screens in both trials and was passed in 837 of 895 (94%) in ABC versus 1145 of 1867 (61%) in PILOT. SBT safety screens were performed in all 983 ABC instances and 8031 of 8370 (96%) in PILOT. SBT safety screens were passed in 647 of 983 (66%) in ABC versus 4475 of 8031 (56%) in PILOT. Spontaneous breathing trial was performed in ≥93% of passed SBT safety screens in both trials and was passed in 319 of 603 (53%) in ABC versus 3337 of 4454 (75%) in PILOT. CONCLUSION: This study compared SAT/SBT conduction in an ideal setting to real-world practice, 13 years later. Performance of SAT/SBT safety screens, SATs, and SBTs between a definitive clinical trial (ABC) as compared to current clinical care (PILOT) remained high.

A Pilot Study of the Fluctuating Mental Status Evaluation: A Novel Delirium Screening Tool for Neurocritical Care Patients.

BACKGROUND: Delirium occurs frequently in patients with stroke and neurocritical illness but is often underrecognized. We developed a novel delirium screening tool designed specifically for neurocritical care patients called the fluctuating mental status evaluation (FMSE) and aimed to test its usability and accuracy in a representative cohort of patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). METHODS: We performed a single-center prospective study in a pilot cohort of patients with ICH who had daily delirium assessments throughout their admission. Reference-standard expert ratings were performed each afternoon using criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, and were derived from bedside assessments and clinical data from the preceding 24 h. Paired FMSE assessments were performed by patients' clinical nurses after receiving brief one-on-one training from research staff. Nursing assessments were aggregated over 24-h periods (including day and night shifts), and accuracy of the FMSE was analyzed in patients who were not comatose to determine optimal scoring thresholds. RESULTS: We enrolled 40 patients with ICH (mean age 71.1 ± 12.2, 55% male, median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score 16.5 [interquartile range 12-20]), of whom 85% (n = 34) experienced delirium during their hospitalization. Of 308 total coma-free days with paired assessments, 208 (68%) were rated by experts as days with delirium. Compared with expert ratings, FMSE scores ≥ 1 had 86% sensitivity and 73% specificity on a per-day basis, whereas FMSE scores ≥ 2 had 68% sensitivity and 82% specificity. Accuracy remained high in patients with aphasia (FMSE scores ≥ 1: 83% sensitivity, 77% specificity; FMSE scores ≥ 2: 68% sensitivity, 85% specificity) and decreased arousal (FMSE scores ≥ 1: 80% sensitivity, 100% specificity; FMSE scores ≥ 2: 73% sensitivity, 100% specificity). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, the FMSE achieved a high sensitivity and specificity in detecting delirium. Follow-up validation studies in a larger more diverse cohort of neurocritical care patients will use score cutoffs of ≥ 1 as "possible" delirium and ≥ 2 as "probable" delirium.

Multicenter International Cohort Validation of a Modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score Using the Richmond Agitation-sedation Scale.

OBJECTIVE: In a multicenter, international cohort, we aimed to validate a modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA) using the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, hypothesized as comparable to the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS)-based Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The SOFA score, whose neurologic component is based on the GCS, can predict intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. But, GCS is often missing in lieu of other assessments, such as the also reliable and validated Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS). Single-center data suggested an RASS-based SOFA (mSOFA) predicted ICU mortality. METHODS: Our nested cohort within the prospective 2016 Fourth International Study of Mechanical Ventilation contains 4120 ventilated patients with daily RASS and GCS assessments (20,023 patient-days, 32 countries). We estimated GCS from RASS via a proportional odds model without adjustment. ICU mortality logistic regression models and c-statistics were constructed using SOFA (measured GCS) and mSOFA (measured RASS-estimated GCS), adjusted for age, sex, body-mass index, region (Europe, USA-Canada, Latin America, Africa, Asia, Australia-New Zealand), and postoperative status (medical/surgical). RESULTS: Cohort-wide, the mean SOFA=9.4+/-2.8 and mean mSOFA = 10.0+/-2.3, with ICU mortality = 31%. Mean SOFA and mSOFA similarly predicted ICU mortality (SOFA: AUC = 0.784, 95% CI = 0.769-0.799; mSOFA: AUC = 0.778, 95% CI = 0.763-0.793, P = 0.139). Across models, other predictors of mortality included higher age, female sex, medical patient, and African region (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We present the first SOFA modification with RASS in a "real-world" international cohort. Estimating GCS from RASS preserves predictive validity of SOFA to predict ICU mortality. Alternative neurologic measurements like RASS can be viably integrated into severity of illness scoring systems like SOFA.

In-Hospital Depressed Level of Consciousness and Long-Term Functional Outcomes in ICU Survivors.

OBJECTIVES: Among critically ill patients, acutely depressed level of consciousness is associated with mortality, but its relationship to long-term outcomes such as disability and physical function is unknown. We investigated the relationship of level of consciousness during hospitalization with long-term disability and physical function in ICU survivors. DESIGN: Multi-center observational cohort study. SETTING: Medical or surgical ICUs at five U.S. centers. PATIENTS: Adult survivors of respiratory failure or shock. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Depressed level of consciousness during hospitalization was defined using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) score (including all negative scores) by calculating the area under the curve using linear interpolation. Sedative-associated level of consciousness was similarly defined for all hospital days that sedation was received. We measured disability in basic activities of daily living (BADLs), instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), discharge destination, and self-reported physical function. In separate models, we evaluated associations between these measures of level of consciousness and outcomes using multivariable regression, adjusted for age, sex, race, body mass index, education level, comorbidities, baseline frailty, baseline IADLs and BADLs, hospital type (civilian vs veteran), modified mean daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, duration of severe sepsis, duration of mechanical ventilation, and hospital length of stay. Of the 1,040 patients enrolled in the ICU, 781 survived to hospital discharge. We assessed outcomes in 624 patients at 3 months and 527 patients at 12 months. After adjusting for covariates, there was no association between depressed level of consciousness (total or sedation-associated) with BADLs or IADLs at either 3- or 12-month follow-up. There was also no association with self-reported physical function at 3 or 12 months or with discharge destination. CONCLUSIONS: Depressed level of consciousness, as defined by the RASS, was not associated with disability or self-reported physical function. Future studies should investigate additional modifiable in-hospital risk factors for disability and poor physical function following critical illness.

Acute kidney injury-associated delirium: a review of clinical and pathophysiological mechanisms.

Acute kidney injury is a known clinical risk factor for delirium, an acute cognitive dysfunction that is commonly encountered in the critically ill population. In this comprehensive review of clinical and basic research studies, we detail the epidemiology, clinical implications, pathogenesis, and management strategies of patients with acute kidney injury-associated delirium. Specifically addressed are the pathological roles of endogenous toxin or drug accumulation, acute kidney injury-mediated neuroinflammation, and acute kidney injury-associated volume overload as discrete potential biological mechanisms of the condition. The optimization of clinical contributors and normalization of renal function are reviewed as pragmatic management strategies in addition to potential and emerging therapeutic approaches.

The future of intensive care: delirium should no longer be an issue.

In the ideal intensive care unit (ICU) of the future, all patients are free from delirium, a syndrome of brain dysfunction frequently observed in critical illness and associated with worse ICU-related outcomes and long-term cognitive impairment. Although screening for delirium requires limited time and effort, this devastating disorder remains underestimated during routine ICU care. The COVID-19 pandemic brought a catastrophic reduction in delirium monitoring, prevention, and patient care due to organizational issues, lack of personnel, increased use of benzodiazepines and restricted family visitation. These limitations led to increases in delirium incidence, a situation that should never be repeated. Good sedation practices should be complemented by novel ICU design and connectivity, which will facilitate non-pharmacological sedation, anxiolysis and comfort that can be supplemented by balanced pharmacological interventions when necessary. Improvements in the ICU sound, light control, floor planning, and room arrangement can facilitate a healing environment that minimizes stressors and aids delirium prevention and management. The fundamental prerequisite to realize the delirium-free ICU, is an awake non-sedated, pain-free comfortable patient whose management follows the A to F (A-F) bundle. Moreover, the bundle should be expanded with three additional letters, incorporating humanitarian care: gaining (G) insight into patient needs, delivering holistic care with a 'home-like' (H) environment, and redefining ICU architectural design (I). Above all, the delirium-free world relies upon people, with personal challenges for critical care teams to optimize design, environmental factors, management, time spent with the patient and family and to humanize ICU care.