RESUMEN
Background: Intensive-care-acquired weakness resulting in functional impairment is common in critical care survivors. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of a combined early functional training with endurance and resistance training and its effect on the functional outcome. Methods: It is a pilot study performed in a 39-bed Medical and Surgical Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Patients who were premorbidly independent and were mechanically ventilated for ≥24 h were recruited to receive functional mobilisation (sit out of bed, ambulation), endurance (bed cycling), and resistance training (selected upper and lower limb muscle training using weights). The primary outcomes were feasibility of training, muscle strength, handgrip strength, quadricep strength, and Functional Status Score-Intensive Care Unit (FSS-ICU) collected at the first assessment in the ICU, at the ICU discharge, and at hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes were functional capacity (6-Minute Walk Distance) and quality of life measures, EQ-5D, at hospital discharge and at 3 months. Results: Out of the 11 patients, 6 (54.54%) patients achieved level 2 functional mobilisation, 2 (18.18%) patients achieved level 2 resistance training, and 1 (9.09%) patient achieved level 2 endurance training. There were no significant differences in the medical research council (MRC) score, quadricep strength, and handgrip strength between the first assessment in the ICU, at the ICU discharge, and at hospital discharge. However, there was a significant difference in FSS_ICU (p < 0.008) from the first assessment in the ICU up to hospital discharge. EQ-5D visual analogue scale also showed a change of 8.5% at 3-month follow-up. 6MWD showed significant difference (p < 0.043) at 3-month follow-up compared to that at hospital discharge. Conclusions: The study found low compliance to resistance and endurance training in patients with mechanical ventilation. However, functional mobilisation in terms of sit out of bed was possible in more than half of the recruited patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines on limitation of life-sustaining treatments (LST) in the intensive care unit (ICU), in the form of withholding or withdrawal of LST, state that there is no ethical difference between the two. Such statements are not uniformly accepted worldwide, and there are few studies on LST limitation in Asia. This study aimed to evaluate the predictors and outcomes of withholding and withdrawal of LST in Singapore, focusing on the similarities and differences between the two approaches. METHODS: This was a multicentre observational study of patients admitted to 21 adult ICUs across 9 public hospitals in Singapore over an average of three months per year from 2014 to 2019. The primary outcome measures were withholding and withdrawal of LST (cardiopulmonary resuscitation, invasive mechanical ventilation, and vasopressors/inotropes). The secondary outcome measure was hospital mortality. Multivariable generalised mixed model analysis was used to identify independent predictors for withdrawal and withholding of LST and if LST limitation predicts hospital mortality. RESULTS: There were 8907 patients and 9723 admissions. Of the former, 80.8% had no limitation of LST, 13.0% had LST withheld, and 6.2% had LST withdrawn. Common independent predictors for withholding and withdrawal were increasing age, absence of chronic kidney dialysis, greater dependence in activities of daily living, cardiopulmonary resuscitation before ICU admission, higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, and higher level of care in the first 24 h of ICU admission. Additional predictors for withholding included being of Chinese race, the religions of Hinduism and Islam, malignancy, and chronic liver failure. The additional predictor for withdrawal was lower hospital paying class (with greater government subsidy for hospital bills). Hospital mortality in patients without LST limitation, with LST withholding, and with LST withdrawal was 10.6%, 82.1%, and 91.8%, respectively (p < 0.001). Withholding (odds ratio 13.822, 95% confidence interval 9.987-19.132) and withdrawal (odds ratio 38.319, 95% confidence interval 24.351-60.298) were both found to be independent predictors of hospital mortality on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the independent predictors of withholding and withdrawal of LST exist. Even after accounting for baseline characteristics, both withholding and withdrawal of LST independently predict hospital mortality. Later mortality in patients who had LST withdrawn compared to withholding suggests that the decision to withdraw may be at the point when medical futility is recognised.