Association Between Unmet Nonmedication Needs After Hospital Discharge and Readmission or Death Among Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize early unmet nonmedication discharge needs (UDNs), classified as durable medical equipment (DME), home health services (HHS), and follow-up medical appointments (FUAs) and explore their association with 90-day readmission and mortality among survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF) who were discharged home. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Six academic medical centers across United States. PARTICIPANTS: Adult survivors of ARF who required an ICU stay and were discharged home from hospital. INTERVENTIONS: None. Exposure of interest was the proportion of UDN for the following categories: DME, HHS, and FUA ascertained within 7-28 days after hospital discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Two hundred eligible patients were recruited between January 2019 and August 2020. One-hundred ninety-five patients were included in the analytic cohort: 118 were prescribed DME, 134 were prescribed HHS, and 189 needed at least one FUA according to discharge plans. 98.4% (192/195) had at least one identified nonmedication need at hospital discharge. Median (interquartile range) proportion of unmet needs across three categories were 0 (0-15%) for DME, 0 (0-50%) for HHS, and 0 (0-25%) for FUA, and overall was 0 (0-20%). Fifty-six patients (29%) had 90-day death or readmission. After adjusting for prespecified covariates, having greater than the median level of unmet needs was not associated with an increased risk of readmission or death within 90 days of discharge (risk ratio, 0.89; 0.51-1.57; p = 0.690). Age, hospital length of stay, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II severity of illness score, and Multidimensional Scale Perceived Social Support score were associated with UDN. CONCLUSIONS: UDN were common among survivors of ARF but not significantly associated a composite outcome of 90-day readmission or death. Our results highlight the substantial magnitude of UDN and identifies areas especially vulnerable to lapses in healthcare coordination.

Agitation is a Common Barrier to Recovery of ICU Patients.

Importance: Agitation is common in mechanically ventilated ICU patients, but little is known about physician attitudes regarding agitation in this setting. Objectives: To characterize physician attitudes regarding agitation in mechanically ventilated ICU patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: We surveyed critical care physicians within a multicenter health system in Western Pennsylvania, assessing attitudes regarding agitation during mechanical ventilation and use of and confidence in agitation management options. We used quantitative clinical vignettes to determine whether agitation influences confidence regarding readiness for extubation. We sent our survey to 332 critical care physicians, of whom 80 (24%) responded and 69 were eligible (had cared for a mechanically ventilated patient in the preceding three months). Main Outcomes and Measures: Respondent confidence in patient readiness for extubation (0-100%, continuous) and frequency of use and confidence in management options (1-5, Likert). Results: Of 69 eligible responders, 61 (88%) agreed agitation is common and 49 (71%) agreed agitation is a barrier to extubation, but only 27 (39%) agreed their approach to agitation is evidence-based. Attitudes regarding agitation did not differ much by practice setting or physician demographics, though respondents working in medical ICUs were more likely (P = .04) and respondents trained in surgery or emergency medicine were less likely (P = .03) than others to indicate that agitation is an extubation barrier. Fifty-three (77%) respondents reported they frequently use non-pharmacologic measures to treat agitation, and 42 (70%) of those who reported they used non-pharmacologic measures during the prior 3 months indicated confidence in their effectiveness. In responses to clinical vignettes, confidence in patient's readiness for extubation was significantly lower if the patient was agitated (P < .001) or tachypneic (P < .001), but the presence of both agitation and tachypnea did not reduce confidence compared with tachypnea alone (P = .24). Conclusions and Relevance: Most critical care physicians consider agitation during mechanical ventilation a common problem and agreed that agitation is a barrier to extubation. Treatment practice varies widely.

Palliative Care Early in the Care Continuum among Patients with Serious Respiratory Illness: An Official ATS/AAHPM/HPNA/SWHPN Policy Statement.

Background: Patients with serious respiratory illness and their caregivers suffer considerable burdens, and palliative care is a fundamental right for anyone who needs it. However, the overwhelming majority of patients do not receive timely palliative care before the end of life, despite robust evidence for improved outcomes. Goals: This policy statement by the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and partnering societies advocates for improved integration of high-quality palliative care early in the care continuum for patients with serious respiratory illness and their caregivers and provides clinicians and policymakers with a framework to accomplish this. Methods: An international and interprofessional expert committee, including patients and caregivers, achieved consensus across a diverse working group representing pulmonary-critical care, palliative care, bioethics, health law and policy, geriatrics, nursing, physiotherapy, social work, pharmacy, patient advocacy, psychology, and sociology. Results: The committee developed fundamental values, principles, and policy recommendations for integrating palliative care in serious respiratory illness care across seven domains: 1) delivery models, 2) comprehensive symptom assessment and management, 3) advance care planning and goals of care discussions, 4) caregiver support, 5) health disparities, 6) mass casualty events and emergency preparedness, and 7) research priorities. The recommendations encourage timely integration of palliative care, promote innovative primary and secondary or specialist palliative care delivery models, and advocate for research and policy initiatives to improve the availability and quality of palliative care for patients and their caregivers. Conclusions: This multisociety policy statement establishes a framework for early palliative care in serious respiratory illness and provides guidance for pulmonary-critical care clinicians and policymakers for its proactive integration.

Association between unmet medication needs after hospital discharge and readmission or death among acute respiratory failure survivors: the addressing post-intensive care syndrome (APICS-01) multicenter prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF) commonly experience long-lasting physical, cognitive, and/or mental health impairments. Unmet medication needs occurring immediately after hospital discharge may have an important effect on subsequent recovery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, we enrolled ARF survivors who were discharged directly home from their acute care hospitalization. The primary exposure was unmet medication needs. The primary outcome was hospital readmission or death within 3 months after discharge. We performed a propensity score analysis, using inverse probability weighting for the primary exposure, to evaluate the exposure-outcome association, with an a priori sample size of 200 ARF survivors. RESULTS: We enrolled 200 ARF survivors, of whom 107 (53%) were female and 77 (39%) were people of color. Median (IQR) age was 55 (43-66) years, APACHE II score 20 (15-26) points, and hospital length of stay 14 (9-21) days. Of the 200 participants, 195 (98%) were in the analytic cohort. One hundred fourteen (57%) patients had at least one unmet medication need; the proportion of medication needs that were unmet was 6% (0-15%). Fifty-six (29%) patients were readmitted or died by 3 months; 10 (5%) died within 3 months. Unmet needs were not associated (risk ratio 1.25; 95% CI 0.75-2.1) with hospital readmission or death, although a higher proportion of unmet needs may have been associated with increased hospital readmission (risk ratio 1.7; 95% CI 0.96-3.1) and decreased mortality (risk ratio 0.13; 95% CI 0.02-0.99). DISCUSSION: Unmet medication needs are common among survivors of acute respiratory failure shortly after discharge home. The association of unmet medication needs with 3-month readmission and mortality is complex and requires additional investigation to inform clinical trials of interventions to reduce unmet medication needs. Study registration number: NCT03738774 . The study was prospectively registered before enrollment of the first patient.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Policy Restricting Family Presence May Have Delayed End-of-Life Decisions for Critically Ill Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if a restrictive visitor policy inadvertently lengthened the decision-making process for dying inpatients without coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Regression discontinuity and time-to-event analysis. SETTING: Two large academic hospitals in a unified health system. PATIENTS OR SUBJECTS: Adult decedents who received greater than or equal to 1 day of ICU care during their terminal admission over a 12-month period. INTERVENTIONS: Implementation of a visit restriction policy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified 940 adult decedents without coronavirus disease 2019 during the study period. For these patients, ICU length of stay was 0.8 days longer following policy implementation, although this effect was not statistically significant (95% CI, -2.3 to 3.8; p = 0.63). After excluding patients admitted before the policy but who died after implementation, we observed that ICU length of stay was 2.9 days longer post-policy (95% CI, 0.27-5.6; p = 0.03). A time-to-event analysis revealed that admission after policy implementation was associated with a significantly longer time to first do not resuscitate/do not intubate/comfort care order (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.6-3.1; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Policies restricting family presence may lead to longer ICU stays and delay decisions to limit treatment prior to death. Further policy evaluation and programs enabling access to family-centered care and palliative care during the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic are imperative.

Effect of Documenting Prognosis on the Information Provided to ICU Proxies: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The Critical Care Choosing Wisely Task Force recommends that intensivists offer patients at high risk for death or severe functional impairment the option of pursuing care focused on comfort. We tested the a priori hypothesis that intensivists who are prompted to document patient prognosis are more likely to disclose prognosis and offer comfort-focused care. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02721810). SETTING: High-fidelity Simulation Center in Baltimore, MD. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixteen intensivists from 17 states. INTERVENTION: All intensivists reviewed a paper-based medical record for a hypothetical patient on ICU day 3 and answered four survey questions about the patient's medical management. Intensivists randomized to the intervention group answered three additional questions about patient prognosis. Thereafter, each intensivist participated in a standardized, video-recorded, simulated family meeting with an actor performing a standardized portrayal of the patient's daughter. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Two blinded intensivists reviewed deidentified written transcripts of all simulated family meetings. The primary outcome was the blinded reviewers' assessment that the intensivist had presented the option of care focused entirely on comfort. Secondary outcomes included disclosing risk of death. All outcomes were planned prior to data collection. Among the 63 intensivists randomized to the intervention, 50 (79%) expected the patient to die during the hospitalization and 58 (92%) expected the patient to have new functional impairments preventing independent living. Intensivists in the intervention versus control group were no more likely to offer the option of care focused on comfort (13% vs 13%; 95% CI, -13% to 12%; p = 1.0) but were more likely to inform the daughter that her father was sick enough to die (68% vs 43%; 95% CI, 5-44%; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Documenting prognosis may help intensivists disclose prognosis to ICU proxies, but in isolation, it is unlikely to change the treatment options offered during initial family meetings.

What matters most to sepsis survivors: a qualitative analysis to identify specific health-related quality of life domains.

PURPOSE: It is unknown how sepsis survivors conceptualize health-related quality of life (HRQL). We aimed to identify important HRQL domains for this population. METHODS: A literature search was performed to inform an interview guide. Open-ended interviews were held with 15 purposefully sampled sepsis survivors. Interview transcripts were analyzed by interpretative phenomenological analysis to allow themes to develop organically. Resulting codes were reviewed by an independent expert. The preliminary list of domains was rated in a two-round Delphi consensus procedure with therapists and survivors. RESULTS: Eleven domains emerged as critically important: Psychological impairment, Fatigue, Physical impairment, Coping with daily life, Return to normal living, Ability to walk, Cognitive impairment, Self-perception, Control over one's life, Family support, and Delivery of health care. Sepsis survivors want a "normal life," to walk again, and to regain control without cognitive impairment. Family support is essential to overcome sepsis aftermaths. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors described many HRQL domains which are not captured by the QoL instruments that have traditionally been used to study ICU survivorship (i.e., SF-36 and EQ-5D). Future studies of QoL in ICU survivors should consider using both a traditional instrument so that results are comparable to previous research, as well as a more holistic QoL measurement instrument like the WHOQOL-BREF.

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.

Core Outcome Measures for Clinical Research in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors. An International Modified Delphi Consensus Study.

RATIONALE: Research evaluating acute respiratory failure (ARF) survivors' outcomes after hospital discharge has substantial heterogeneity in terms of the measurement instruments used, creating barriers to synthesizing study data. OBJECTIVES: To identify a minimum set of core outcome measures that are essential to include in all clinical research studies evaluating ARF survivors after discharge. METHODS: We conducted a three-round modified Delphi consensus process with 77 participants (47% female, 55% outside the United States), including clinical researchers from more than 16 countries across six continents, patients/caregivers, clinicians, and research funders. Participants reviewed standardized information on measure instruments for seven consensus-derived outcomes plus one recommended outcome. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Response rates were 91 to 97% across the three rounds. Among 75 measurement instruments evaluated, the following met a priori consensus criteria: EQ-5D and 36-item Short Form Health Survey version 2 (optional) for the "satisfaction with life and personal enjoyment" and "pain" outcomes, and both the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Impact of Events Scale-Revised for the "mental health" outcome. No measures reached consensus for the following outcomes: cognition, muscle and/or nerve function, physical function, and pulmonary function. All measures considered for pulmonary function met consensus criteria for exclusion. The following measures did not reach the threshold for consensus but achieved the highest scores for their respective outcomes: the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (cognition), manual muscle testing and handgrip dynamometry (muscle and/or nerve function), and 6-minute-walk test (physical function). CONCLUSIONS: This Core Outcome Measurement Set is recommended for use in all clinical research evaluating ARF survivors after hospital discharge. In the future, researchers should evaluate measures for outcomes not reaching consensus.

Core Domains for Clinical Research in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors: An International Modified Delphi Consensus Study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the "core domains" (i.e., patient outcomes, health-related conditions, or aspects of health) that relevant stakeholders agree are essential to assess in all clinical research studies evaluating the outcomes of acute respiratory failure survivors after hospital discharge. DESIGN: A two-round consensus process, using a modified Delphi methodology, with participants from 16 countries, including patient and caregiver representatives. Prior to voting, participants were asked to review 1) results from surveys of clinical researchers, acute respiratory failure survivors, and caregivers that rated the importance of 19 preliminary outcome domains and 2) results from a qualitative study of acute respiratory failure survivors' outcomes after hospital discharge, as related to the 19 preliminary outcome domains. Participants also were asked to suggest any additional potential domains for evaluation in the first Delphi survey. SETTING: Web-based surveys of participants representing four stakeholder groups relevant to clinical research evaluating postdischarge outcomes of acute respiratory failure survivors: clinical researchers, clinicians, patients and caregivers, and U.S. federal research funding organizations. SUBJECTS: None. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Survey response rates were 97% and 99% in round 1 and round 2, respectively. There were seven domains that met the a priori consensus criteria to be designated as core domains: physical function, cognition, mental health, survival, pulmonary function, pain, and muscle and/or nerve function. CONCLUSIONS: This study generated a consensus-based list of core domains that should be assessed in all clinical research studies evaluating acute respiratory failure survivors after hospital discharge. Identifying appropriate measurement instruments to assess these core domains is an important next step toward developing a set of core outcome measures for this field of research.

ICU Attending Handoff Practices: Results From a National Survey of Academic Intensivists.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize intensivist handoff practices and expectations and to explore perceptions of the patient safety implications of attending handoffs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional electronic survey administered in 2014. SETTING: One hundred sixty-nine U.S. hospitals with critical care training programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. SUBJECTS: Academic intensivists were recruited via e-mail invitation from a database of 1,712 eligible academic intensivists. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Six hundred sixty-one intensivists completed the survey (completion rate, 38.6%). Responses were received from at least one individual at 147 of 169 unique hospitals (87.0%) represented in the study database. Five hundred seventy-three (87%) respondents reported participating in handoffs at the end of each ICU rotation. A variety of communication methods were used for end-of-rotation handoffs, including in-person discussion (92.9%), telephone calls (83.9%), e-mail messages (69.0%), computer-generated documents (64.6%), and text messages (23.6%). Mean satisfaction with current handoff process was rated as 68.4 on a scale from 0 to 100 (SD, 22.6). Respondents (55.4%) said that attending handoffs should be standardized, but only 13.3% (76/572) of those participating in end-of-rotation handoffs reported using a standardized process. Specific handoff topics, including active clinical issues and resuscitation status, were reportedly discussed less frequently than would be ideal (p < 0.001 for the difference between reported frequency and ideal frequency). In free-text comments, 76 respondents (11.5%) expressed skepticism that attending handoffs were necessary given the presence of residents and fellows and given a lack of agreement about necessary content. Two hundred respondents (30.8%) reported knowing of an adverse event (inappropriate treatment, cardiac arrest, and death) attributable to inadequate attending handoffs. CONCLUSIONS: ICU attending handoffs in the United States exhibit marked heterogeneity, and intensivists do not agree about the value of attending handoffs. In addition, some intensivists perceive a link between suboptimal attending handoffs, inappropriate treatment, and serious adverse events that warrants further study.

Depressive Symptoms After Critical Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To synthesize data on prevalence, natural history, risk factors, and post-ICU interventions for depressive symptoms in ICU survivors. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry (1970-2015). STUDY SELECTION: Studies measuring depression after hospital discharge using a validated instrument in more than 20 adults from non-specialty ICUs. DATA EXTRACTION: Duplicate independent review and data abstraction. DATA SYNTHESIS: The search identified 27,334 titles, with 42 eligible articles on 38 unique studies (n = 4,113). The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression subscale was used most commonly (58%). The pooled Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression subscale prevalence (95% CI) of depressive symptoms at a threshold score greater than or equal to 8 was 29% (22-36%) at 2-3 months (12 studies; n = 1,078), 34% (24-43%) at 6 months (seven studies; n = 760), and 29% (23-34%) at 12-14 months (six studies; n = 1,041). The prevalence of suprathreshold depressive symptoms (compatible with Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression subscale, ≥ 8) across all studies, using all instruments, was between 29% and 30% at all three time points. The pooled change in prevalence (95% CI) from 2-3 to 6 months (four studies; n = 387) was 5% (-1% to +12%), and from 6 to 12 months (three studies; n = 412) was 1% (-6% to +7%). Risk factors included pre-ICU psychologic morbidity and presence of in-ICU psychologic distress symptoms. We did not identify any post-ICU intervention with strong evidence of improvement in depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically important depressive symptoms occurred in approximately one-third of ICU survivors and were persistent through 12-month follow-up. Greater research into treatment is needed for this common and persistent post-ICU morbidity.

Outcome Measurement in ICU Survivorship Research From 1970 to 2013: A Scoping Review of 425 Publications.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the study designs and measurement instruments used to assess physical, cognitive, mental health, and quality of life outcomes of survivors of critical illness over more than 40 years old as a first step toward developing a core outcome set of measures for future trials to improve outcomes in ICU survivors. DESIGN: Scoping review. SETTING: Published articles that included greater than or equal to one postdischarge measure of a physical, cognitive, mental health, or quality of life outcome in more than or equal to 20 survivors of critical illness published between 1970 and 2013. Instruments were classified using the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health framework. SUBJECTS: ICU survivors. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We reviewed 15,464 abstracts, and identified 425 eligible articles, including 31 randomized trials (7%), 116 cross-sectional studies (27%), and 278 cohort studies (65%). Cohort studies had a median (interquartile range) sample size of 96 survivors (52-209), with 38% not fully reporting loss to follow-up. A total of 250 different measurement instruments were used in these 425 articles. Among eligible articles, 25 measured physical activity limitations (6%), 40 measured cognitive activity limitations (9%), 114 measured mental health impairment (27%), 196 measured participation restriction (46%), and 276 measured quality of life (65%). CONCLUSIONS: Peer-reviewed publications reporting patient outcomes after hospital discharge for ICU survivors have grown from 3 in the 1970s to more than 300 since 2000. Although there is evidence of consolidation in the instruments used for measuring participation restriction and quality of life, the ability to compare results across studies remains impaired by the 250 different instruments used. Most articles described cohort studies of modest size with a single follow-up assessment using patient-reported measures of participation restriction and quality of life. Development of a core outcome set of valid, reliable, and feasible measures is essential to improving the outcomes of critical illness survivors.

Allowing Physicians to Choose the Value of Compensation for Participation in a Web-Based Survey: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Survey response rates among physicians are declining, and determining an appropriate level of compensation to motivate participation poses a major challenge. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of permitting intensive care physicians to select their preferred level of compensation for completing a short Web-based survey on physician (1) response rate, (2) survey completion rate, (3) time to response, and (4) time spent completing the survey. METHODS: A total of 1850 US intensivists from an existing database were randomized to receive a survey invitation email with or without an Amazon.com incentive available to the first 100 respondents. The incentive could be instantly redeemed for an amount chosen by the respondent, up to a maximum of US $50. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 35.90% (630/1755). Among the 35.4% (111/314) of eligible participants choosing the incentive, 80.2% (89/111) selected the maximum value. Among intensivists offered an incentive, the response was 6.0% higher (95% CI 1.5-10.5, P=.01), survey completion was marginally greater (807/859, 94.0% vs 892/991, 90.0%; P=.06), and the median number of days to survey response was shorter (0.8, interquartile range [IQR] 0.2-14.4 vs 6.6, IQR 0.3-22.3; P=.001), with no difference in time spent completing the survey. CONCLUSIONS: Permitting intensive care physicians to determine compensation level for completing a short Web-based survey modestly increased response rate and substantially decreased response time without decreasing the time spent on survey completion.

A scenario-based, randomized trial of patient values and functional prognosis on intensivist intent to discuss withdrawing life support.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of 1) patient values as expressed by family members and 2) a requirement to document patients' functional prognosis on intensivists' intention to discuss withdrawal of life support in a hypothetical family meeting. DESIGN: A three-armed, randomized trial. SETTING: One hundred seventy-nine U.S. hospitals with training programs in critical care accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. SUBJECTS: Six hundred thirty intensivists recruited via e-mail invitation from a database of 1,850 eligible academic intensivists. INTERVENTIONS: Each intensivist was randomized to review 10, online, clinical scenarios with a range of illness severities involving a hypothetical patient (Mrs. X). In control-group scenarios, the patient did not want continued life support without a reasonable chance of independent living. In the first experimental arm, the patient wanted life support regardless of functional outcome. In the second experimental arm, patient values were identical to the control group, but intensivists were required to record the patient's estimated 3-month functional prognosis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Response to the question: "Would you bring up the possibility of withdrawing life support with Mrs. X's family?" answered using a five-point Likert scale. There was no effect of patient values on whether intensivists intended to discuss withdrawal of life support (p = 0.81), but intensivists randomized to record functional prognosis were 49% more likely (95% CI, 20-85%) to discuss withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: In this national, scenario-based, randomized trial, patient values had no effect on intensivists' decisions to discuss withdrawal of life support with family. However, requiring intensivists to record patients' estimated 3-month functional outcome substantially increased their intention to discuss withdrawal.

Timing of limitations in life support in acute lung injury patients: a multisite study*.

OBJECTIVE: Substantial variability exists in the timing of limitations in life support for critically ill patients. Our objective was to investigate how the timing of limitations in life support varies with changes in organ failure status and time since acute lung injury onset. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: This evaluation was performed as part of a prospective cohort study evaluating 490 consecutive acute lung injury patients recruited from 11 ICUs at three teaching hospitals in Baltimore, MD. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: The primary exposure was proportion of days without improvement in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, evaluated as a daily time-varying exposure. The outcome of interest was a documented limitation in life support defined as any of the following: 1) no cardiopulmonary resuscitation, 2) do not reintubate, 3) no vasopressors, 4) no hemodialysis, 5) do not escalate care, or 6) other limitations (e.g., "comfort care only"). MAIN RESULTS: For medical ICU patients without improvement in daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, the rate of limitation in life support tripled in the first 3 days after acute lung injury onset, increased again after day 5, and peaked at day 19. Compared with medical ICU patients, surgical ICU patients had a rate of limitations that was significantly lower during the first 5 days after acute lung injury onset. In all patients, more days without improvement in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores was associated with limitations in life support, independent of the absolute magnitude of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. CONCLUSIONS: Persistent organ failure is associated with an increase in the rate of limitations in life support independent of the absolute magnitude of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, and this association strengthens during the first weeks of treatment. During the first 5 days after acute lung injury onset, limitations were significantly more common in medical ICUs than surgical ICUs.

Age and decisions to limit life support for patients with acute lung injury: a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The proportion of elderly Americans admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) in the last month of life is rising. Hence, challenging decisions regarding the appropriate use of life support are increasingly common. The objective of this study was to estimate the association between patient age and the rate of new limitations in the use of life support, independent of daily organ dysfunction status, following acute lung injury (ALI) onset. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of 490 consecutive patients without any limitations in life support at the onset of ALI. Patients were recruited from 11 ICUs at three teaching hospitals in Baltimore, Maryland, USA, and monitored for the incidence of six pre-defined limitations in life support, with adjustment for baseline comorbidity and functional status, duration of hospitalization before ALI onset, ICU severity of illness, and daily ICU organ dysfunction score. RESULTS: The median patient age was 52 (range: 18 to 96), with 192 (39%) having a new limitation in life support in the ICU. Of patients with a new limitation, 113 (59%) had life support withdrawn and died, 53 (28%) died without resuscitation, and 26 (14%) survived to ICU discharge. Each ten-year increase in patient age was independently associated with a 24% increase in the rate of limitations in life support (Relative Hazard 1.24; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.40) after adjusting for daily ICU organ dysfunction score and all other covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Older critically ill patients are more likely to have new limitations in life support independent of their baseline status, ICU-related severity of illness, and daily organ dysfunction status. Future studies are required to determine whether this association is a result of differences in patient preferences by age, or differences in the treatment options discussed with the families of older versus younger patients.

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.

Defining the Time-limited Trial for Patients with Critical Illness: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report.

In critical care, the specific, structured approach to patient care known as a "time-limited trial" has been promoted in the literature to help patients, surrogate decision makers, and clinicians navigate consequential decisions about life-sustaining therapy in the face of uncertainty. Despite promotion of the time-limited trial approach, a lack of consensus about its definition and essential elements prevents optimal clinical use and rigorous evaluation of its impact. The objectives of this American Thoracic Society Workshop Committee were to establish a consensus definition of a time-limited trial in critical care, identify the essential elements for conducting a time-limited trial, and prioritize directions for future work. We achieved these objectives through a structured search of the literature, a modified Delphi process with 100 interdisciplinary and interprofessional stakeholders, and iterative committee discussions. We conclude that a time-limited trial for patients with critical illness is a collaborative plan among clinicians and a patient and/or their surrogate decision makers to use life-sustaining therapy for a defined duration, after which the patient's response to therapy informs the decision to continue care directed toward recovery, transition to care focused exclusively on comfort, or extend the trial's duration. The plan's 16 essential elements follow four sequential phases: consider, plan, support, and reassess. We acknowledge considerable gaps in evidence about the impact of time-limited trials and highlight a concern that if inadequately implemented, time-limited trials may perpetuate unintended harm. Future work is needed to better implement this defined, specific approach to care in practice through a person-centered equity lens and to evaluate its impact on patients, surrogates, and clinicians.