Standardized approach for extubation during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Extubation during extracorporeal oxygenation (ECMO) in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) has not been well studied. Despite the potential benefits of this strategy, weaning from ECMO before liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation remains the most frequent approach. Our aim was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a standardized approach for extubation during ECMO in patients with severe ARDS. RESULTS: We conducted a prospective observational study to assess the safety and feasibility of a standardized approach for extubation during ECMO in severe ARDS among 254 adult patients across 4 intensive care units (ICU) from 2 tertiary ECMO centers over 6 years. This consisted of a daily assessment of clinical and gas exchange criteria based on an Extracorporeal Life Support Organization guideline, with extubation during ECMO after validation by a dedicated intensive care medicine specialist. Fifty-four (21%) patients were extubated during ECMO, 167 (66%) did not reach the clinical criteria, and in 33 (13%) patients, gas exchange precluded extubation during ECMO. At ECMO initiation, there were fewer extrapulmonary organ dysfunctions (lower SOFA score [OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.98; P = .02] with similar PaO2/FiO2) when compared with patients not extubated during ECMO. Extubation during ECMO associated with shorter duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (7 (4-18) vs. 32 (18-54) days; P < .01) and of ECMO (12 (7-25) vs. 19 (10-41) days; P = .01). This was accompanied by a lower incidence of hemorrhagic shock (2 vs. 11%; P = .05), but more cannula-associated deep vein thrombosis (49 vs. 31%; P = .02) and failed extubation (20 vs. 6%; P < .01). There were no increased major adverse events. Extubation during ECMO is associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, independently of measured confounding (adjusted logistic regression OR 0.23; 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.69, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: A standardized approach was safe and feasible allowing extubation during ECMO in 21% of patients with severe ARDS, selecting patients who will have a shorter duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, ECMO course, and ICU stay, as well as fewer infectious complications, and high hospital survival.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of the FOCUS ADHD App in monitoring adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

BACKGROUND: The current investigation assessed a) the performance of the FOCUS ADHD mobile health application (App) in increasing pharmacological treatment adherence and improving patients' knowledge of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and b) the impact of implementing a financial incentive for using the App (i.e., a discount on medication). METHODS: In a randomized, blind, parallel-group clinical trial, 73 adults diagnosed with ADHD were allocated into three groups for 3 months: a) Pharmacological treatment as usual (TAU); b) TAU and the App (App Group); and c) TAU and the App + a commercial discount on the purchase of medication prescribed for ADHD treatment (App + Discount Group). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in mean treatment adherence between groups, assessed as a medication possession ratio (MPR). However, the App + Discount Group exhibited greater medication intake registrations compared with the App Group during the initial phase of the trial. The financial discount also produced a 100% App adoption rate. App use did not increase ADHD knowledge, though knowledge scores were high at baseline. The usability and quality of the App were rated favorably. CONCLUSIONS: The FOCUS ADHD App achieved a high adoption rate and positive evaluations by users. Use of the App did not increase adherence to treatment as measured by MPR, but, for App users, the addition of a financial incentive to use the App produced an increase in treatment adherence in terms of medication intake registrations. The present results offer encouraging data for combining incentives with mobile digital health solutions to positively impact treatment adherence in ADHD.

Sedation, analgesia, and delirium management in Portugal: a survey and point prevalence study. / Abordagem da sedação, da analgesia e do delirium em Portugal: inquérito nacional e estudo de prevalência.

OBJECTIVE: To establish current Portuguese critical care practices regarding analgesia, sedation, and delirium based on a comparison between the activities reported and daily clinical practice. METHODS: A national survey was conducted among physicians invited to report their practice toward analgesia, sedation, and delirium in intensive care units. A point prevalence study was performed to analyze daily practices. RESULTS: A total of 117 physicians answered the survey, and 192 patients were included in the point prevalence study. Survey and point prevalence studies reflect a high sedation assessment (92%; 88.5%), with the Richmond Agitated Sedation Scale being the most reported and used scale (41.7%; 58.2%) and propofol being the most reported and used medication (91.4%; 58.6%). Midazolam prescribing was reported by 68.4% of responders, but a point prevalence study revealed a use of 27.6%.Although 46.4% of responders reported oversedation, this was actually documented in 32% of the patients. The survey reports the daily assessment of pain (92%) using standardized scales (71%). The same was identified in the point prevalence study, with 91.1% of analgesia assessment mainly with the Behavioral Pain Scale. In the survey, opioids were reported as the first analgesic. In clinical practice, acetaminophen was the first option (34.6%), followed by opioids. Delirium assessment was reported by 70% of physicians but was performed in less than 10% of the patients. CONCLUSION: The results from the survey did not accurately reflect the common practices in Portuguese intensive care units, as reported in the point prevalence study. Efforts should be made specifically to avoid oversedation and to promote delirium assessment.

OBJETIVO: Determinar as práticas atuais de cuidados intensivos em Portugal quanto à analgesia, à sedação e ao delirium, com base em uma comparação entre as atividades relatadas e a prática clínica diária. MÉTODOS: Inquérito nacional em que os médicos foram convidados a relatar sua prática em relação à analgesia, à sedação e ao delirium em unidades de terapia intensiva. Para analisar a prática diária, realizou-se um estudo de prevalência pontual. RESULTADOS: Responderam ao inquérito 117 médicos, e 192 pacientes foram incluídos no estudo de prevalência pontual. O inquérito e o estudo de prevalência mostraram uma avaliação generalizada do nível de sedação (92%; 88,5%). A Escala de Agitação e Sedação de Richmond foi a mais reportada e utilizada (41,7%; 58,2%), e o propofol foi o medicamento mais reportado e utilizado (91,4%; 58,6%). A prescrição de midazolam foi relatada por 68,4% dos respondentes, mas o estudo de prevalência pontual revelou a sua utilização em 27,6%.Embora 46,4% dos respondentes tenham relatado excesso de sedação, na realidade foi documentado em 32% dos pacientes. O inquérito relatou avaliação diária de dor (92%) com uso de escalas padronizadas (71%). Identificou-se resultado semelhante no estudo de prevalência pontual, com 91,1% de avaliação da analgesia feita principalmente com a Escala Comportamental de Dor. No inquérito, os opioides foram relatados como analgésicos de primeira linha. Na prática clínica, o paracetamol foi a primeira opção (34,6%), seguido de opioides. A avaliação do delirium foi relatada por 70% dos médicos, embora tenha sido realizada em menos de 10% dos pacientes. CONCLUSÃO: Os resultados do inquérito não refletiram com precisão as práticas habituais nas unidades de terapia intensiva portuguesas, tal como relatado no estudo de prevalência pontual. Devem ser feitos esforços principalmente para evitar o excesso de sedação e promover a avaliação do delirium.

Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms in Severe COVID-19 Survivors: A Prospective Cohort Study.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread worldwide, leading to increased concerns about long-term patients' neuropsychiatric consequences. This study aims to describe the presence of depressive and anxiety symptoms in severe COVID-19 survivors and to identify associated baseline, in-hospital and post-discharge factors. This study is part of the MAPA longitudinal project conducted with severe COVID-19 patients admitted in Intensive Care Medicine Department (ICMD) of a University Hospital (CHUSJ) in Porto, Portugal. Patients with ICMD length of stay ≤ 24 h, terminal illness, major auditory loss or inability to communicate at follow-up assessment were excluded. All participants were assessed by telephone post-discharge (median = 101 days), with a comprehensive protocol assessing depressive and anxiety symptoms, cognition, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) memories recall and health-related quality of life. Out of a sample of 56 survivors (median age = 65; 68% males), 29% and 23% had depressive and anxiety symptoms, respectively. Depressive and anxiety symptoms were significantly more prevalent among younger survivors and were associated with cognitive complaints, emotional and delusions ICU memories and fear of having COVID-19 sequelae, sleep problems and pain after discharge (all p < 0.05). An important proportion of these survivors suffers from depression and anxiety symptoms post-discharge, namely younger ones and those who reported more cognitive complaints, ICU memories, fear of having COVID-19 sequelae, sleep problems and pain. These findings highlight the importance of psychological consequences assessment and planning of appropriate and multidisciplinary follow-up care after hospitalization due to COVID-19.

The impact of severe COVID-19 on health-related quality of life and disability: an early follow-up perspective. / Impacto da COVID-19 grave na qualidade de vida relacionada com a saúde e a incapacidade: uma perspectiva de follow-up a curto-prazo.

OBJECTIVE: To assess early postdischarge health-related quality of life and disability of all survivors of critical COVID-19 admitted for more than 24 hours to na intensive care unit.. METHODS: Study carried out at the Intensive Care Medicine Department of Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João from 8th October 2020 to 16th February 2021. Approximately 1 month after hospital discharge, an intensive care-trained nurse performed a telephone consultation with 99 survivors already at home applying the EuroQol Five-Dimensional Five-Level questionnaire and the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. RESULTS: The mean age of the population studied was 63 ± 12 years, and 32.5% were submitted to invasive mechanical ventilation. Their mean Simplified Acute Physiologic Score was 35 ± 14, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index was 3 ± 2. Intensive care medicine and hospital lengths of stay were 13 ± 22 and 22 ± 25 days, respectively. The mean EuroQol Visual Analog Scale was 65% (± 21), and only 35.3% had no or slight problems performing their usual activities, most having some degree of pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 showed marked impairments in terms of reassuring usual work or community activities and mobility. The use of both tools suggested that their health status was worse than their perception of it. CONCLUSION: This early identification of sequelae may help define flows and priorities for rehabilitation and reinsertion after critical COVID-19.

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a qualidade de vida relacionada com a saúde e a incapacidade no primeiro mês após a alta para domicílio de todos os sobreviventes de COVID-19 grave internados por mais de 24 horas no Serviço de Medicina Intensiva. METÓDOS: Estudo realizado no Serviço de Medicina Intensiva do Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João, entre 8 de outubro de 2020 e 16 de fevereiro de 2021. Aproximadamente 1 mês após a alta para domicílio, uma enfermeira com experiência em medicina intensiva realizou uma consulta telefônica a 99 sobreviventes, aplicando os questionários EuroQol Five-Dimensional Five-Level e World Health Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 - 12 itens. RESULTADOS: A média de idade da população estudada foi de 63 ± 12 anos, e 32,5% foram submetidos à ventilação mecânica invasiva. O Simplified Acute Physiology Score médio foi de 35 ± 14, e o Índice de Comorbilidades de Charlson foi de 3 ± 2. O tempo de internamento em medicina intensiva e no hospital foi de 13 ± 22 e 22 ± 25 dias, respectivamente. A média da Escala Visual Analógica da EuroQol foi de 65% (± 21), sendo que apenas 35,3% dos sobreviventes não apresentaram ou tiveram problemas ligeiros para realizar suas atividades habituais, a maioria com algum grau de dor/desconforto e ansiedade/depressão. O World Health Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 - 12 itens, mostrou incapacidade marcada em retomar o trabalho habitual ou atividades comunitárias e na mobilidade. O uso de ambas as ferramentas sugeriu que o estado de saúde dos sobreviventes seria pior do que a sua percepção. CONCLUSÃO: A identificação precoce de sequelas pode ajudar a definir fluxos e prioridades para a reabilitação e reinserção após a COVID-19 grave.

Abordagem da sedação, da analgesia e do delirium em Portugal: inquérito nacional e estudo de prevalência / Sedation, analgesia, and delirium management in Portugal: a survey and point prevalence study

RESUMO Objetivo: Determinar as práticas atuais de cuidados intensivos em Portugal quanto à analgesia, à sedação e ao delirium, com base em uma comparação entre as atividades relatadas e a prática clínica diária. Métodos: Inquérito nacional em que os médicos foram convidados a relatar sua prática em relação à analgesia, à sedação e ao delirium em unidades de terapia intensiva. Para analisar a prática diária, realizou-se um estudo de prevalência pontual. Resultados: Responderam ao inquérito 117 médicos, e 192 pacientes foram incluídos no estudo de prevalência pontual. O inquérito e o estudo de prevalência mostraram uma avaliação generalizada do nível de sedação (92%; 88,5%). A Escala de Agitação e Sedação de Richmond foi a mais reportada e utilizada (41,7%; 58,2%), e o propofol foi o medicamento mais reportado e utilizado (91,4%; 58,6%). A prescrição de midazolam foi relatada por 68,4% dos respondentes, mas o estudo de prevalência pontual revelou a sua utilização em 27,6%. Embora 46,4% dos respondentes tenham relatado excesso de sedação, na realidade foi documentado em 32% dos pacientes. O inquérito relatou avaliação diária de dor (92%) com uso de escalas padronizadas (71%). Identificou-se resultado semelhante no estudo de prevalência pontual, com 91,1% de avaliação da analgesia feita principalmente com a Escala Comportamental de Dor. No inquérito, os opioides foram relatados como analgésicos de primeira linha. Na prática clínica, o paracetamol foi a primeira opção (34,6%), seguido de opioides. A avaliação do delirium foi relatada por 70% dos médicos, embora tenha sido realizada em menos de 10% dos pacientes. Conclusão: Os resultados do inquérito não refletiram com precisão as práticas habituais nas unidades de terapia intensiva portuguesas, tal como relatado no estudo de prevalência pontual. Devem ser feitos esforços principalmente para evitar o excesso de sedação e promover a avaliação do delirium.

ABSTRACT Objective: To establish current Portuguese critical care practices regarding analgesia, sedation, and delirium based on a comparison between the activities reported and daily clinical practice. Methods: A national survey was conducted among physicians invited to report their practice toward analgesia, sedation, and delirium in intensive care units. A point prevalence study was performed to analyze daily practices. Results: A total of 117 physicians answered the survey, and 192 patients were included in the point prevalence study. Survey and point prevalence studies reflect a high sedation assessment (92%; 88.5%), with the Richmond Agitated Sedation Scale being the most reported and used scale (41.7%; 58.2%) and propofol being the most reported and used medication (91.4%; 58.6%). Midazolam prescribing was reported by 68.4% of responders, but a point prevalence study revealed a use of 27.6%. Although 46.4% of responders reported oversedation, this was actually documented in 32% of the patients. The survey reports the daily assessment of pain (92%) using standardized scales (71%). The same was identified in the point prevalence study, with 91.1% of analgesia assessment mainly with the Behavioral Pain Scale. In the survey, opioids were reported as the first analgesic. In clinical practice, acetaminophen was the first option (34.6%), followed by opioids. Delirium assessment was reported by 70% of physicians but was performed in less than 10% of the patients. Conclusion: The results from the survey did not accurately reflect the common practices in Portuguese intensive care units, as reported in the point prevalence study. Efforts should be made specifically to avoid oversedation and to promote delirium assessment.

Impacto da COVID-19 grave na qualidade de vida relacionada com a saúde e a incapacidade: uma perspectiva de follow-up a curto-prazo / The impact of severe COVID-19 on health-related quality of life and disability: an early follow-up perspective

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar a qualidade de vida relacionada com a saúde e a incapacidade no primeiro mês após a alta para domicílio de todos os sobreviventes de COVID-19 grave internados por mais de 24 horas no Serviço de Medicina Intensiva. Metódos: Estudo realizado no Serviço de Medicina Intensiva do Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João, entre 8 de outubro de 2020 e 16 de fevereiro de 2021. Aproximadamente 1 mês após a alta para domicílio, uma enfermeira com experiência em medicina intensiva realizou uma consulta telefônica a 99 sobreviventes, aplicando os questionários EuroQol Five-Dimensional Five-Level e World Health Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 - 12 itens. Resultados: A média de idade da população estudada foi de 63 ± 12 anos, e 32,5% foram submetidos à ventilação mecânica invasiva. O Simplified Acute Physiology Score médio foi de 35 ± 14, e o Índice de Comorbilidades de Charlson foi de 3 ± 2. O tempo de internamento em medicina intensiva e no hospital foi de 13 ± 22 e 22 ± 25 dias, respectivamente. A média da Escala Visual Analógica da EuroQol foi de 65% (± 21), sendo que apenas 35,3% dos sobreviventes não apresentaram ou tiveram problemas ligeiros para realizar suas atividades habituais, a maioria com algum grau de dor/desconforto e ansiedade/depressão. O World Health Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 - 12 itens, mostrou incapacidade marcada em retomar o trabalho habitual ou atividades comunitárias e na mobilidade. O uso de ambas as ferramentas sugeriu que o estado de saúde dos sobreviventes seria pior do que a sua percepção. Conclusão: A identificação precoce de sequelas pode ajudar a definir fluxos e prioridades para a reabilitação e reinserção após a COVID-19 grave.

ABSTRACT Objective: To assess early postdischarge health-related quality of life and disability of all survivors of critical COVID-19 admitted for more than 24 hours to na intensive care unit.. Methods: Study carried out at the Intensive Care Medicine Department of Centro Hospitalar Universitário São João from 8th October 2020 to 16th February 2021. Approximately 1 month after hospital discharge, an intensive care-trained nurse performed a telephone consultation with 99 survivors already at home applying the EuroQol Five-Dimensional Five-Level questionnaire and the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Results: The mean age of the population studied was 63 ± 12 years, and 32.5% were submitted to invasive mechanical ventilation. Their mean Simplified Acute Physiologic Score was 35 ± 14, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index was 3 ± 2. Intensive care medicine and hospital lengths of stay were 13 ± 22 and 22 ± 25 days, respectively. The mean EuroQol Visual Analog Scale was 65% (± 21), and only 35.3% had no or slight problems performing their usual activities, most having some degree of pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 showed marked impairments in terms of reassuring usual work or community activities and mobility. The use of both tools suggested that their health status was worse than their perception of it. Conclusion: This early identification of sequelae may help define flows and priorities for rehabilitation and reinsertion after critical COVID-19.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Survivors of Severe COVID-19 of a University Hospital in Northern Portugal.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term health impairments are often experienced among survivors of critical illness, which may have a negative impact on their quality of life. The aim of this study was to characterize COVID-19 survivors of critical illness and to evaluate health-related quality of life and disability following hospital discharge. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective case-series study that included COVID-19 survivors admitted to the Intensive Care Medicine Department of a University Hospital. Follow-up evaluation was performed between the 30th and the 90th day after discharge. Quality of life was explored using the five-level version of the EQ-5D instrument (EQ-5D-5L) and functionality using the 12-question World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). RESULTS: Forty-five survivors were enrolled, 28 (62.2%) men, median age 63.0 years. The EQ-5D-5L questionnaire showed moderate to extreme problems in some dimension in 29 patients (64.4%): mobility in six (13.3%), self-care in seven (13.3%), usual activities in 23 (51.1%), pain/discomfort in 14 (31.1%) and anxiety/depression in 17 (37.8%). When using the 12-question WHODAS 2.0 questionnaire, moderate to extreme disability was reported in some question in 37 patients (82.2%): 19 (42.2%) in standing for long periods, 18 (40.0%) in long-distance walking; 14 (31.1%) on taking care of household responsibilities and 17 (37.8%) in their day-to-day work; 23 (51.1%) felt emotionally affected by their health problems. DISCUSSION: Based on COVID-19 survivors-reported outcomes after critical illness, mobility, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression were the main problems that persisted one to three months after hospital discharge. CONCLUSION: An organized follow-up structure is crucial to improve health-related quality of life in critical COVID-19 survivors.

Introdução: Os sobreviventes de doença crítica apresentam frequentemente sequelas a longo prazo. O objetivo deste estudo foi caracterizar os sobreviventes da COVID-19 grave e avaliar a qualidade de vida após a alta hospitalar. Material e Métodos: Série de casos que inclui sobreviventes COVID-19 admitidos no Serviço de Medicina Intensiva de um Hospital Universitário. A consulta de seguimento foi realizada entre o 30º e o 90º dia após alta hospitalar. A qualidade de vida foi avaliada através do questionário EQ-5D com cinco níveis (EQ-5D-5L) e a funcionalidade através do instrumento World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) de 12 questões. Resultados: Foram incluídos 45 sobreviventes, 28 homens (62,2%), idade mediana de 63,0 anos. No questionário EQ-5D-5L 29 sobreviventes (64,4%) mostraram problemas moderados a extremos em alguma dimensão: seis (13,3%) na mobilidade, sete (13,3%) nos cuidados pessoais, 23 (51,1%) nas atividades habituais, 14 (31,1%) na dor/desconforto e 17 (37,8%) na ansiedade/depressão. No WHODAS 2.0 37 sobreviventes (82,2%) revelaram alterações funcionais moderadas a extremas em alguma questão: 19 (42,2%) em permanecer de pé por longos períodos, 18 (40,0%) em percorrer longas distâncias, 14 (31,1%) em cuidar das responsabilidades domésticas e 17 (37,8%) no dia-a-dia no trabalho; 23 (51,1%) mostraram-se emocionalmente afetados pelos seus problemas de saúde. Discussão: A avaliação dos sobreviventes COVID-19 após a doença crítica demonstra que a mobilidade, a dor/desconforto e a ansiedade/depressão são os principais problemas que persistem um a três meses após a alta hospitalar. Conclusão: O acompanhamento estruturado após alta poderá ter impacto significativo na qualidade de vida destes doentes.