Diabetes mellitus, glycaemic control, and severe COVID-19 in the Australian critical care setting: A nested cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, diabetes mellitus is recognised as a risk factor for severe COVID-19. The relationship between diabetes mellitus and severe COVID-19 has not been reported in the Australian population. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of and outcomes for patients with diabetes admitted to Australian intensive care units (ICUs) with COVID-19. METHODS: This is a nested cohort study of four ICUs in Melbourne participating in the Short Period Incidence Study of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SPRINT-SARI) Australia project. All adult patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 from 20 February 2020 to 27 February 2021 were included. Blood glucose and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) data were retrospectively collected. Diabetes was diagnosed from medical history or an HbA1c ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol). Hospital mortality was assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 136 patients with median age 58 years [48-68] and median Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score of 14 [11-19]. Fifty-eight patients had diabetes (43%), 46 patients had stress-induced hyperglycaemia (34%), and 32 patients had normoglycaemia (23%). Patients with diabetes were older, were with higher APACHE II scores, had greater glycaemic variability than patients with normoglycaemia, and had longer hospital length of stay. Overall hospital mortality was 16% (22/136), including nine patients with diabetes, nine patients with stress-induced hyperglycaemia, and two patients with normoglycaemia. CONCLUSION: Diabetes is prevalent in patients admitted to Australian ICUs with severe COVID-19, highlighting the need for prevention strategies in this vulnerable population.

Communication with bereaved family members after death in the ICU: the CATHARTIC randomised clinical trial.

Objective: It is uncertain whether psychological distress in the family members of patients who die during an intensive care unit (ICU) admission may be improved by bereavement interventions. In this trial, relatives' symptoms of anxiety and depression after 6 months were measured when allocated to three commonly used bereavement follow-up strategies. Design: Single-centre, randomised, three parallel-group trial. Setting: A tertiary ICU in Australia. Participants: Relatives of patients who died in the ICU. Interventions: Relatives received bereavement follow-up 4 weeks after the death using a condolence letter, short telephone call or no contact. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the total Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-T) score. Secondary outcomes estimated anxiety, depression, complicated grief, post-traumatic stress, and satisfaction with ICU care. Results: Seventy-one relatives participated (24 had no contact, 19 were contacted by letter and 28 by telephone 4 weeks after the death). The mean HADS-T score for no contact was 16.1 (95% CI, 12.4-19.8). Receipt of a letter was associated with a mean HADS-T increase of 1.4 (4.0 decrease to 6.8 increase), and a condolence call was accompanied by a mean decrease of 1.6 (6.6 decrease to 3.4 increase; P > 0.5). Non-significant differences were observed for all secondary outcomes. Conclusions: Anxiety and depression at 6 months in the relatives of patients who died in the ICU was not meaningfully alleviated by receipt of either a condolence letter or telephone call. Trial registration: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619000917134).

The impact of bereavement support on psychological distress in family members: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Persistent psychological distress occurs frequently in family members of patients who die in an intensive care unit (ICU). Objective: To determine the effectiveness of bereavement interventions in reducing persisting psychological distress in bereaved family members after death in an adult ICU. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that assessed the effect of bereavement interventions on persisting psychological distress in bereaved family members of ICU patients. Data sources: MEDLINE and APA PsycInfo databases were searched until April 2020. Review methods: Two of us independently screened titles and abstracts of identified studies, and then completed full text evaluation of selected studies. We assessed risk of bias using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, which is designed to assess the quality of non-randomised studies in meta-analyses. We also used random effects meta-analysis to assess the effect of various interventions on total Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores. Results: From 664 citations, five studies were included - three multicentre randomised clinical trials and two single centre observational studies. Three studies tested the intervention of written bereavement support materials and two studies used narration of family members' experiences in the ICU. All studies reported HADS scores. Scores for Impact of Event Scale, Impact of Event Scale-Revised and Inventory of Complicated Grief were measured in some but not all studies. There was no effect of an intervention on HADS scores (weighted mean difference, -0.79 [95% confidence interval, -3.81 to 2.23]; I2 = 65.8%). Conclusions: Owing to limited data, and clinical and statistical heterogeneity, there is considerable uncertainty regarding whether bereavement support strategies reduce, increase or have no effect on psychological distress in bereaved family members.