Effect of a Standardized Family Participation Program in the ICU: A Multicenter Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of a standardized program for family participation in essential care activities in the ICU on symptoms of anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress and satisfaction among relatives, and perceptions and experiences of ICU healthcare providers (HCPs). DESIGN: Multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Seven adult ICUs, one university, and six general teaching hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred six relatives and 235 ICU HCPs. INTERVENTIONS: A standardized program to facilitate family participation inpatient communication, amusement/distraction, comfort, personal care, breathing, mobilization, and nutrition. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data were collected through surveys among relatives and ICU HCPs. There were no significant differences in symptoms of anxiety in relatives in the intervention period compared with the control period (median Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS] 5 [interquartile range (IQR) 2-10] vs 6 [IQR 3-9]; median ratio [MR] 0.72; 95% CI, 0.46-1.13; p = 0.15), depression (median HADS 4 [IQR 2-6] vs 3 [IQR 1-6]; MR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.55-1.32; p = 0.47) or posttraumatic stress (median Impact of Event Scale-Revised score 0.45 [IQR 0.27-0.82] vs 0.41 [IQR 0.14-1]; MR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.14; p = 0.54). Reported satisfaction was slightly lower in the intervention period (mean 8.90 [ sd 1.10] vs mean 9.06 [ sd 1.10], difference -0.60; 95% CI, -1.07 to -0.12; p = 0.01). ICU HCPs perceived that more relatives knew how to participate: 47% in the intervention period versus 22% in the control period (odds ratio [OR] 3.15; 95% CI, 1.64-6.05; p < 0.01). They also reported relatives having sufficient knowledge (41% vs 16%; OR 3.56; 95% CI, 1.75-7.25; p < 0.01) and skills (44% vs 25%; OR 2.38; 95% CI, 1.22-4.63; p = 0.01) to apply family participation. CONCLUSIONS: Application of a standardized program to facilitate family participation did not change mental health symptoms in relatives of ICU patients 3 months after discharge. ICU HCPs reported increased clarity, knowledge, and skills among relatives and ICU HCPs.

Prediction of Long-Term Physical, Mental, and Cognitive Problems Following Critical Illness: Development and External Validation of the PROSPECT Prediction Model.

OBJECTIVES: ICU survivors often suffer from long-lasting physical, mental, and cognitive health problems after hospital discharge. As several interventions that treat or prevent these problems already start during ICU stay, patients at high risk should be identified early. This study aimed to develop a model for early prediction of post-ICU health problems within 48 hours after ICU admission. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study in seven Dutch ICUs. SETTING/PATIENTS: ICU patients older than 16 years and admitted for greater than or equal to 12 hours between July 2016 and March 2020. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcomes were physical problems (fatigue or ≥ 3 new physical symptoms), mental problems (anxiety, depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder), and cognitive impairment. Patient record data and questionnaire data were collected at ICU admission, and after 3 and 12 months, of 2,476 patients. Several models predicting physical, mental, or cognitive problems and a composite score at 3 and 12 months were developed using variables collected within 48 hours after ICU admission. Based on performance and clinical feasibility, a model, PROSPECT, predicting post-ICU health problems at 3 months was chosen, including the predictors of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, admission type, expected length of ICU stay greater than or equal to 2 days, and preadmission anxiety and fatigue. Internal validation using bootstrapping on data of the largest hospital ( n = 1,244) yielded a C -statistic of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70-0.76). External validation was performed on data ( n = 864) from the other six hospitals with a C -statistic of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73-0.80). CONCLUSIONS: The developed and externally validated PROSPECT model can be used within 48 hours after ICU admission for identifying patients with an increased risk of post-ICU problems 3 months after ICU admission. Timely preventive interventions starting during ICU admission and follow-up care can prevent or mitigate post-ICU problems in these high-risk patients.

A joint frailty model for recurrent and competing terminal events: Application to delirium in the ICU.

Joint models linking longitudinal biomarkers or recurrent event processes with a terminal event, for example, mortality, have been studied extensively. Motivated by studies of recurrent delirium events in patients receiving care in an intensive care unit (ICU), we devise a joint model for a recurrent event process and multiple terminal events. Being discharged alive from the ICU or experiencing mortality may be associated with a patient's hazard of delirium, violating the assumption of independent censoring. Moreover, the direction of the association between the hazards of delirium and mortality may be opposite of the direction of association between the hazards of delirium and ICU discharge. Hence treating either terminal event as independent censoring may bias inferences. We propose a competing joint model that uses a latent frailty to link a patient's recurrent and competing terminal event processes. We fit our model to data from a completed placebo-controlled clinical trial, which studied whether Haloperidol could prevent death and delirium among ICU patients. The clinical trial served as a foundation for a simulation study, in which we evaluate the properties, for example, bias and confidence interval coverage, of the competing joint model. As part of the simulation study, we demonstrate the shortcomings of using a joint model with a recurrent delirium process and a single terminal event to study delirium in the ICU. Lastly, we discuss limitations and possible extensions for the competing joint model. The competing joint model has been added to frailtypack, an R package for fitting an assortment of joint models.

Acute encephalopathy in the ICU: a practical approach.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute encephalopathy (AE) - which frequently develops in critically ill patients with and without primary brain injury - is defined as an acute process that evolves rapidly and leads to changes in baseline cognitive status, ranging from delirium to coma. The diagnosis, monitoring, and management of AE is challenging. Here, we discuss advances in definitions, diagnostic approaches, therapeutic options, and implications to outcomes of the clinical spectrum of AE in ICU patients without primary brain injury. RECENT FINDINGS: Understanding and definitions of delirium and coma have evolved. Delirium is a neurocognitive disorder involving impairment of attention and cognition, usually fluctuating, and developing over hours to days. Coma is a state of unresponsiveness, with absence of command following, intelligible speech, or visual pursuit, with no imaging or neurophysiological evidence of cognitive motor dissociation. The CAM-ICU(-7) and the ICDSC are validated, guideline-recommended tools for clinical delirium assessment, with identification of clinical subtypes and stratification of severity. In comatose patients, the roles of continuous EEG monitoring and neuroimaging have grown for the early detection of secondary brain injury and treatment of reversible causes. SUMMARY: Evidence-based pharmacologic treatments for delirium are limited. Dexmedetomidine is effective for mechanically ventilated patients with delirium, while haloperidol has minimal effect of delirium but may have other benefits. Specific treatments for coma in nonprimary brain injury are still lacking.

A world-wide study on delirium assessments and presence of protocols.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is a common complication of older people in hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. OBJECTIVE: To assess the worldwide use of validated delirium assessment tools and the presence of delirium management protocols. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day point prevalence study on World Delirium Awareness Day, 15 March 2023. SETTING: Cross-sectional online survey including hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. METHODS: Participating clinicians reported data on delirium, the presence of protocols, delirium assessments, delirium-awareness interventions, non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions, and ward/unit-specific barriers. RESULTS: Data from 44 countries, 1664 wards/units and 36 048 patients were analysed. Validated delirium assessments were used in 66.7% (n = 1110) of wards/units, 18.6% (n = 310) used personal judgement or no assessment, and 10% (n = 166) used other assessment methods. A delirium management protocol was reported in 66.8% (n = 1094) of wards/units. The presence of protocols for delirium management varied across continents, ranging from 21.6% (on 21/97 wards/units) in Africa to 90.4% (235/260) in Australia, similar to the use of validated delirium assessments with 29.6% (29/98) in Africa to 93.5% (116/124) in North America. Wards/units with a delirium management protocol [n = 1094/1664, 66.8%] were more likely to use a validated delirium test than those without a protocol [odds ratio 6.97 (95% confidence interval 5.289-9.185)]. The presence of a delirium protocol increased the chances for valid delirium assessment and, likely, evidence-based interventions. CONCLUSION: Wards/units that reported the presence of delirium management protocols had a higher probability of using validated delirium assessments tools to assess for delirium.

Inter-rater agreement between patient- and proxy-reported cognitive functioning in intensive care unit patients: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Health status, including cognitive functioning before critical illness, is associated with long-term outcomes in intensive care unit survivors. Premorbid data are therefore of importance in longitudinal studies. Few patients can self-report at intensive care admission. Consequently, proxy assessments of patients' health status are used. However, it remains unclear how accurately proxies can report on an intensive care patient's cognitive status. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the agreement between patient- and proxy-reporting of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire and to compare the agreement between proxy reports using the latter questionnaire and the Informant Questionnaire of Cognitive Decline in the Elderly as a reference. METHODS: The present cohort study is part of a longitudinal multicentre study collecting both patient and proxy data using questionnaires and clinical data from medical records during intensive care unit stays. Agreement on patient and proxy pairs was examined using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Spearman's correlation, percentage agreement, and Gwet's AC1 statistics. Agreement between the proxy-reported questionnaires was examined using percentage agreement and Gwet's AC1 statistics. RESULTS: In total, we collected 99 pairs of patient-proxy assessments and 158 proxy-proxy assessments. The ICC for the sum scores revealed moderate agreement (n = 99; ICC = 0.59; 99% confidence interval [CI]: [0.30-0.76]) between patient and proxy. Agreement on items was poor (AC1 = 0.13; 99% CI: [0.01-0.24]) to moderate (AC1 = 0.55; 99% CI: [0.43-0.68]). Agreement using cut-off scores (>43) to indicate cognitive impairment was very good (89.9%, AC1 = 0.87; 99% CI: [0.79-0.95]). Agreement between the proxy-reported Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (>43) and the reference questionnaire (≥3.5) was also very good (n = 158; 85%, AC1 = 0.82; 99% CI: [0.74-0.90]). CONCLUSIONS: Proxy assessments of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (>43) may be used to indicate cognitive impairment if patients are unable to self-report. Agreement was high between the two questionnaires determined by proxies, showing that these can be used interchangeably to assess cognitive functioning if proxy reporting is needed.

Development and External Validation of a Prediction Model for Quality of Life of ICU Survivors: A Subanalysis of the MONITOR-IC Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and externally validate a prediction model for ICU survivors' change in quality of life 1 year after ICU admission that can support ICU physicians in preparing patients for life after ICU and managing their expectations. DESIGN: Data from a prospective multicenter cohort study (MONITOR-IC) were used. SETTING: Seven hospitals in the Netherlands. PATIENTS: ICU survivors greater than or equal to 16 years old. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcome was defined as change in quality of life, measured using the EuroQol 5D questionnaire. The developed model was based on data from an academic hospital, using multivariable linear regression analysis. To assist usability, variables were selected using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method. External validation was executed using data of six nonacademic hospitals. Of 1,804 patients included in analysis, 1,057 patients (58.6%) were admitted to the academic hospital, and 747 patients (41.4%) were admitted to a nonacademic hospital. Forty-nine variables were entered into a linear regression model, resulting in an explained variance ( R2 ) of 56.6%. Only three variables, baseline quality of life, admission type, and Glasgow Coma Scale, were selected for the final model ( R2 = 52.5%). External validation showed good predictive power ( R2 = 53.2%). CONCLUSIONS: This study developed and externally validated a prediction model for change in quality of life 1 year after ICU admission. Due to the small number of predictors, the model is appealing for use in clinical practice, where it can be implemented to prepare patients for life after ICU. The next step is to evaluate the impact of this prediction model on outcomes and experiences of patients.

DeltaScan for the Assessment of Acute Encephalopathy and Delirium in ICU and non-ICU Patients, a Prospective Cross-Sectional Multicenter Validation Study.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the diagnostic accuracy of DeltaScan: a portable real-time brain state monitor for identifying delirium, a manifestation of acute encephalopathy (AE) detectable by polymorphic delta activity (PDA) in single-channel electroencephalograms (EEGs). DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional study. SETTING: Six Intensive Care Units (ICU's) and 17 non-ICU departments, including a psychiatric department across 10 Dutch hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 494 patients, median age 75 (IQR:64-87), 53% male, 46% in ICUs, 29% delirious. MEASUREMENTS: DeltaScan recorded 4-minute EEGs, using an algorithm to select the first 96 seconds of artifact-free data for PDA detection. This algorithm was trained and calibrated on two independent datasets. METHODS: Initial validation of the algorithm for AE involved comparing its output with an expert EEG panel's visual inspection. The primary objective was to assess DeltaScan's accuracy in identifying delirium against a delirium expert panel's consensus. RESULTS: DeltaScan had a 99% success rate, rejecting 6 of the 494 EEG's due to artifacts. Performance showed and an Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC) of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.90) for AE (sensitivity: 0.75, 95%CI=0.68-0.81, specificity: 0.87 95%CI=0.83-0.91. The AUC was 0.71 for delirium (95%CI=0.66-0.75, sensitivity: 0.61 95%CI=0.52-0.69, specificity: 72, 95%CI=0.67-0.77). Our validation aim was an NPV for delirium above 0.80 which proved to be 0.82 (95%CI: 0.77-0.86). Among 84 non-delirious psychiatric patients, DeltaScan differentiated delirium from other disorders with a 94% (95%CI: 87-98%) specificity. CONCLUSIONS: DeltaScan can diagnose AE at bedside and shows a clear relationship with clinical delirium. Further research is required to explore its role in predicting delirium-related outcomes.

Efficacy of haloperidol to decrease the burden of delirium in adult critically ill patients: the EuRIDICE randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of haloperidol as treatment for ICU delirium and related symptoms remains controversial despite two recent large controlled trials evaluating its efficacy and safety. We sought to determine whether haloperidol when compared to placebo in critically ill adults with delirium reduces days with delirium and coma and improves delirium-related sequelae. METHODS: This multi-center double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial at eight mixed medical-surgical Dutch ICUs included critically ill adults with delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ≥ 4 or a positive Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU) admitted between February 2018 and January 2020. Patients were randomized to intravenous haloperidol 2.5 mg or placebo every 8 h, titrated up to 5 mg every 8 h if delirium persisted until ICU discharge or up to 14 days. The primary outcome was ICU delirium- and coma-free days (DCFDs) within 14 days after randomization. Predefined secondary outcomes included the protocolized use of sedatives for agitation and related behaviors, patient-initiated extubation and invasive device removal, adverse drug associated events, mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, 28-day mortality, and long-term outcomes up to 1-year after randomization. RESULTS: The trial was terminated prematurely for primary endpoint futility on DSMB advice after enrolment of 132 (65 haloperidol; 67 placebo) patients [mean age 64 (15) years, APACHE IV score 73.1 (33.9), male 68%]. Haloperidol did not increase DCFDs (adjusted RR 0.98 [95% CI 0.73-1.31], p = 0.87). Patients treated with haloperidol (vs. placebo) were less likely to receive benzodiazepines (adjusted OR 0.41 [95% CI 0.18-0.89], p = 0.02). Effect measures of other secondary outcomes related to agitation (use of open label haloperidol [OR 0.43 (95% CI 0.12-1.56)] and other antipsychotics [OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.29-1.32)], self-extubation or invasive device removal [OR 0.70 (95% CI 0.22-2.18)]) appeared consistently more favorable with haloperidol, but the confidence interval also included harm. Adverse drug events were not different. Long-term secondary outcomes (e.g., ICU recall and quality of life) warrant further study. CONCLUSIONS: Haloperidol does not reduce delirium in critically ill delirious adults. However, it may reduce rescue medication requirements and agitation-related events in delirious ICU patients warranting further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT03628391), October 9, 2017.

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.

Optimizing an existing prediction model for quality of life one-year post-intensive care unit: An exploratory analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to improve the PREPARE model, an existing linear regression prediction model for long-term quality of life (QoL) of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors by incorporating additional ICU data from patients' electronic health record (EHR) and bedside monitors. METHODS: The 1308 adult ICU patients, aged ≥16, admitted between July 2016 and January 2019 were included. Several regression-based machine learning models were fitted on a combination of patient-reported data and expert-selected EHR variables and bedside monitor data to predict change in QoL 1 year after ICU admission. Predictive performance was compared to a five-feature linear regression prediction model using only 24-hour data (R2  = 0.54, mean square error (MSE) = 0.031, mean absolute error (MAE) = 0.128). RESULTS: The 67.9% of the included ICU survivors was male and the median age was 65.0 [IQR: 57.0-71.0]. Median length of stay (LOS) was 1 day [IQR 1.0-2.0]. The incorporation of the additional data pertaining to the entire ICU stay did not improve the predictive performance of the original linear regression model. The best performing machine learning model used seven features (R2  = 0.52, MSE = 0.032, MAE = 0.125). Pre-ICU QoL, the presence of a cerebro vascular accident (CVA) upon admission and the highest temperature measured during the ICU stay were the most important contributors to predictive performance. Pre-ICU QoL's contribution to predictive performance far exceeded that of the other predictors. CONCLUSION: Pre-ICU QoL was by far the most important predictor for change in QoL 1 year after ICU admission. The incorporation of the numerous additional features pertaining to the entire ICU stay did not improve predictive performance although the patients' LOS was relatively short.

New Physical, Mental, and Cognitive Problems 1 Year after ICU Admission: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

Rationale: Comprehensive studies addressing the incidence of physical, mental, and cognitive problems after ICU admission are lacking. With an increasing number of ICU survivors, an improved understanding of post-ICU problems is necessary. Objectives: To determine the occurrence and cooccurrence of new physical, mental, and cognitive problems among ICU survivors 1 year after ICU admission, their impact on daily functioning, and risk factors associated with 1-year outcomes. Methods: Prospective multicenter cohort study, including ICU patients ⩾16 years of age, admitted for ⩾12 hours between July 2016 and June 2019. Patients, or proxies, rated their health status before and 1 year after ICU admission using questionnaires. Measurements and Main Results: Validated questionnaires were used to measure frailty, fatigue, new physical symptoms, anxiety and depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, cognitive impairment, and quality of life. Of the 4,793 patients included, 2,345 completed the questionnaires both before and 1 year after ICU admission. New physical, mental, and/or cognitive problems 1 year after ICU admission were experienced by 58% of the medical patients, 64% of the urgent surgical patients, and 43% of the elective surgical patients. Urgent surgical patients experienced a significant deterioration in their physical and mental functioning, whereas elective surgical patients experienced a significant improvement. Medical patients experienced an increase in symptoms of depression. A significant decline in cognitive functioning was experienced by all types of patients. Pre-ICU health status was strongly associated with post-ICU health problems. Conclusions: Overall, 50% of ICU survivors suffer from new physical, mental, and/or cognitive problems. An improved insight into the specific health problems of ICU survivors would enable more personalized post-ICU care.

The Impact of Nursing Delirium Preventive Interventions in the ICU: A Multicenter Cluster-randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Delirium is common in critically ill patients and is associated with deleterious outcomes. Nonpharmacological interventions are recommended in current delirium guidelines, but their effects have not been unequivocally established. Objectives: To determine the effects of a multicomponent nursing intervention program on delirium in the ICU. Methods: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted in ICUs of 10 centers. Adult critically ill surgical, medical, or trauma patients at high risk of developing delirium were included. A multicomponent nursing intervention program focusing on modifiable risk factors was implemented as standard of care. The primary outcome was the number of delirium-free and coma-free days alive in 28 days after ICU admission. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 1,749 patients were included. Time spent on interventions per 8-hour shift was median (interquartile range) 38 (14-116) minutes in the intervention period and median 32 (13-73) minutes in the control period (P = 0.44). Patients in the intervention period had a median of 23 (4-27) delirium-free and coma-free days alive compared with a median of 23 (5-27) days for patients in the control group (mean difference, -1.21 days; 95% confidence interval, -2.84 to 0.42 d; P = 0.15). In addition, the number of delirium days was similar: median 2 (1-4) days (ratio of medians, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.09; P = 0.27). Conclusions: In this large randomized controlled trial in adult ICU patients, a limited increase in the use of nursing interventions was achieved, and no change in the number of delirium-free and coma-free days alive in 28 days could be determined. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03002701).

Longing for homelikeness: A hermeneutic phenomenological analysis of patients' lived experiences in recovery from COVID-19-associated intensive care unit acquired weakness.

AIMS: To explore lived experiences of patients recovering from COVID-19-associated intensive care unit acquired weakness and to provide phenomenological descriptions of their recovery. DESIGN: A qualitative study following hermeneutic phenomenology. METHODS: Through purposeful sampling, 13 participants with COVID-19-associated intensive care unit acquired weakness were recruited with diversity in age, sex, duration of hospitalization and severity of muscle weakness. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted from 4 to 8 months after hospital discharge, between July 2020 and January 2021. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using hermeneutic phenomenological analysis. RESULTS: The analysis yielded five themes: 'waking up in alienation', 'valuing human contact in isolation', 'making progress by being challenged', 'coming home but still recovering' and 'finding a new balance'. The phenomenological descriptions reflect a recovery process that does not follow a linear build-up, but comes with moments of success, setbacks, trying new steps and breakthrough moments of achieving mobilizing milestones. CONCLUSION: Recovery from COVID-19-associated intensive care unit acquired weakness starts from a situation of alienation. Patients long for familiarity, for security and for recognition. Patients want to return to the familiar situation, back to the old, balanced, bodily self. It seems possible for patients to feel homelike again, not only by changing their outer circumstances but also by changing the understanding of themselves and finding a new balance in the altered situation. IMPACT: Muscle weakness impacts many different aspects of ICU recovery in critically ill patients with COVID-19-associated intensive care unit acquired weakness. Their narratives can help nurses and other healthcare professionals, both inside and outside of the intensive care unit, to empathize with patient experiences. When healthcare professionals connect to the lifeworld of patients, they will start to act and communicate differently. These insights could lead to optimized care delivery and meeting patients' needs in this pandemic or a possible next.

Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With 1-Year Survival Following Intensive Care Unit Treatment for COVID-19.

IMPORTANCE: One-year outcomes in patients who have had COVID-19 and who received treatment in the intensive care unit (ICU) are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the occurrence of physical, mental, and cognitive symptoms among patients with COVID-19 at 1 year after ICU treatment. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An exploratory prospective multicenter cohort study conducted in ICUs of 11 Dutch hospitals. Patients (N = 452) with COVID-19, aged 16 years and older, and alive after hospital discharge following admission to 1 of the 11 ICUs during the first COVID-19 surge (March 1, 2020, until July 1, 2020) were eligible for inclusion. Patients were followed up for 1 year, and the date of final follow-up was June 16, 2021. EXPOSURES: Patients with COVID-19 who received ICU treatment and survived 1 year after ICU admission. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcomes were self-reported occurrence of physical symptoms (frailty [Clinical Frailty Scale score ≥5], fatigue [Checklist Individual Strength-fatigue subscale score ≥27], physical problems), mental symptoms (anxiety [Hospital Anxiety and Depression {HADS} subscale score ≥8], depression [HADS subscale score ≥8], posttraumatic stress disorder [mean Impact of Event Scale score ≥1.75]), and cognitive symptoms (Cognitive Failure Questionnaire-14 score ≥43) 1 year after ICU treatment and measured with validated questionnaires. RESULTS: Of the 452 eligible patients, 301 (66.8%) patients could be included, and 246 (81.5%) patients (mean [SD] age, 61.2 [9.3] years; 176 men [71.5%]; median ICU stay, 18 days [IQR, 11 to 32]) completed the 1-year follow-up questionnaires. At 1 year after ICU treatment for COVID-19, physical symptoms were reported by 182 of 245 patients (74.3% [95% CI, 68.3% to 79.6%]), mental symptoms were reported by 64 of 244 patients (26.2% [95% CI, 20.8% to 32.2%]), and cognitive symptoms were reported by 39 of 241 patients (16.2% [95% CI, 11.8% to 21.5%]). The most frequently reported new physical problems were weakened condition (95/244 patients [38.9%]), joint stiffness (64/243 patients [26.3%]) joint pain (62/243 patients [25.5%]), muscle weakness (60/242 patients [24.8%]) and myalgia (52/244 patients [21.3%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this exploratory study of patients in 11 Dutch hospitals who survived 1 year following ICU treatment for COVID-19, physical, mental, or cognitive symptoms were frequently reported.

Comprehensive Health Assessment 3 Months After Recovery From Acute Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).

BACKGROUND: Long-term health sequelae of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be multiple but have thus far not been systematically studied. METHODS: All patients discharged after COVID-19 from the Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, were consecutively invited to a multidisciplinary outpatient facility. Also, nonadmitted patients with mild disease but with symptoms persisting >6 weeks could be referred by general practitioners. Patients underwent a standardized assessment including measurements of lung function, chest computed tomography (CT)/X-ray, 6-minute walking test, body composition, and questionnaires on mental, cognitive, health status, and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: 124 patients (59 ±â€…14 years, 60% male) were included: 27 with mild, 51 with moderate, 26 with severe, and 20 with critical disease. Lung diffusion capacity was below the lower limit of normal in 42% of discharged patients. 99% of discharged patients had reduced ground-glass opacification on repeat CT imaging, and normal chest X-rays were found in 93% of patients with mild disease. Residual pulmonary parenchymal abnormalities were present in 91% of discharged patients and correlated with reduced lung diffusion capacity. Twenty-two percent had low exercise capacity, 19% low fat-free mass index, and problems in mental and/or cognitive function were found in 36% of patients. Health status was generally poor, particularly in the domains functional impairment (64%), fatigue (69%), and QoL (72%). CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive health assessment revealed severe problems in several health domains in a substantial number of ex-COVID-19 patients. Longer follow-up studies are warranted to elucidate natural trajectories and to find predictors of complicated long-term trajectories of recovery.

Association Between Incident Delirium Treatment With Haloperidol and Mortality in Critically Ill Adults.

OBJECTIVES: Haloperidol is commonly administered in the ICU to reduce the burden of delirium and its related symptoms despite no clear evidence showing haloperidol helps to resolve delirium or improve survival. We evaluated the association between haloperidol, when used to treat incident ICU delirium and its symptoms, and mortality. DESIGN: Post hoc cohort analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, delirium prevention trial. SETTING: Fourteen Dutch ICUs between July 2013 and December 2016. PATIENTS: One-thousand four-hundred ninety-five critically ill adults free from delirium at ICU admission having an expected ICU stay greater than or equal to 2 days. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received preventive haloperidol or placebo for up to 28 days until delirium occurrence, death, or ICU discharge. If delirium occurred, treatment with open-label IV haloperidol 2 mg tid (up to 5 mg tid per delirium symptoms) was administered at clinician discretion. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were evaluated tid for delirium and coma for 28 days. Time-varying Cox hazards models were constructed for 28-day and 90-day mortality, controlling for study-arm, delirium and coma days, age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II score, sepsis, mechanical ventilation, and ICU length of stay. Among the 1,495 patients, 542 (36%) developed delirium within 28 days (median [interquartile range] with delirium 4 d [2-7 d]). A total of 477 of 542 (88%) received treatment haloperidol (2.1 mg [1.0-3.8 mg] daily) for 6 days (3-11 d). Each milligram of treatment haloperidol administered daily was associated with decreased mortality at 28 days (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.91-0.95) and 90 days (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96-0.98). Treatment haloperidol administered later in the ICU course was less protective of death. Results were stable by prevention study-arm, predelirium haloperidol exposure, and haloperidol treatment protocol adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of incident delirium and its symptoms with haloperidol may be associated with a dose-dependent improvement in survival. Future randomized trials need to confirm these results.

Physical, Mental, and Cognitive Health Status of ICU Survivors Before ICU Admission: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Although patient's health status before ICU admission is the most important predictor for long-term outcomes, it is often not taken into account, potentially overestimating the attributable effects of critical illness. Studies that did assess the pre-ICU health status often included specific patient groups or assessed one specific health domain. Our aim was to explore patient's physical, mental, and cognitive functioning, as well as their quality of life before ICU admission. DESIGN: Baseline data were used from the longitudinal prospective MONITOR-IC cohort study. SETTING: ICUs of four Dutch hospitals. PATIENTS: Adult ICU survivors (n = 2,467) admitted between July 2016 and December 2018. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients, or their proxy, rated their level of frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale), fatigue (Checklist Individual Strength-8), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), cognitive functioning (Cognitive Failure Questionnaire-14), and quality of life (Short Form-36) before ICU admission. Unplanned patients rated their pre-ICU health status retrospectively after ICU admission. Before ICU admission, 13% of all patients was frail, 65% suffered from fatigue, 28% and 26% from symptoms of anxiety and depression, respectively, and 6% from cognitive problems. Unplanned patients were significantly more frail and depressed. Patients with a poor pre-ICU health status were more often likely to be female, older, lower educated, divorced or widowed, living in a healthcare facility, and suffering from a chronic condition. CONCLUSIONS: In an era with increasing attention for health problems after ICU admission, the results of this study indicate that a part of the ICU survivors already experience serious impairments in their physical, mental, and cognitive functioning before ICU admission. Substantial differences were seen between patient subgroups. These findings underline the importance of accounting for pre-ICU health status when studying long-term outcomes.

Association between incident delirium and 28- and 90-day mortality in critically ill adults: a secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: While delirium prevalence and duration are each associated with increased 30-day, 6-month, and 1-year mortality, the association between incident ICU delirium and mortality remains unclear. We evaluated the association between both incident ICU delirium and days spent with delirium in the 28 days after ICU admission and mortality within 28 and 90 days. METHODS: Secondary cohort analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted among 1495 delirium-free, critically ill adults in 14 Dutch ICUs with an expected ICU stay ≥2 days where all delirium assessments were completed. In the 28 days after ICU admission, patients were evaluated for delirium and coma 3x daily; each day was coded as a delirium day [≥1 positive Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU)], a coma day [no delirium and ≥ 1 Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) score ≤ - 4], or neither. Four Cox-regression models were constructed for 28-day mortality and 90-day mortality; each accounted for potential confounders (i.e., age, APACHE-II score, sepsis, use of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, and haloperidol dose) and: 1) delirium occurrence, 2) days spent with delirium, 3) days spent in coma, and 4) days spent with delirium and/or coma. RESULTS: Among the 1495 patients, 28 day mortality was 17% and 90 day mortality was 21%. Neither incident delirium (28 day mortality hazard ratio [HR] = 1.02, 95%CI = 0.75-1.39; 90 day mortality HR = 1.05, 95%CI = 0.79-1.38) nor days spent with delirium (28 day mortality HR = 1.00, 95%CI = 0.95-1.05; 90 day mortality HR = 1.02, 95%CI = 0.98-1.07) were significantly associated with mortality. However, both days spent with coma (28 day mortality HR = 1.05, 95%CI = 1.02-1.08; 90 day mortality HR = 1.05, 95%CI = 1.02-1.08) and days spent with delirium or coma (28 day mortality HR = 1.03, 95%CI = 1.00-1.05; 90 day mortality HR = 1.03, 95%CI = 1.01-1.06) were significantly associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests neither incident delirium nor days spent with delirium are associated with short-term mortality after ICU admission. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier NCT01785290 Registered 7 February 2013.

ICU discharge screening for prediction of new-onset physical disability-A multinational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Methods to identify patients at risk for incomplete physical recovery after intensive care unit (ICU) stay are lacking. Our aim was to develop a method for prediction of new-onset physical disability at ICU discharge. METHODS: Multinational prospective cohort study in 10 general ICUs in Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands. Adult patients with an ICU stay ≥12 hours were eligible for inclusion. Sixteen candidate predictors were analyzed with logistic regression for associations with the primary outcome; new-onset physical disability 3 months post-ICU, defined as a ≥10 score reduction in the Barthel Index (BI) compared to baseline. RESULTS: Of the 572 included patients, follow-up data are available on 78% of patients alive at follow-up. The incidence of new-onset physical disability was 19%. Univariable and multivariable modeling rendered one sole predictor for the outcome: physical status at ICU discharge, assessed with the five first items of the Chelsea critical care physical assessment tool (CPAx) (odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-0.93), a higher score indicating a lower risk, with an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.68 (95% CI 0.61-0.76). Negative predictive value for a low-risk group (CPAx score >18) was 0.88, and positive predictive value for a high-risk group (CPAx score ≤18) was 0.32. CONCLUSION: The ICU discharge assessment described in this study had a moderate AUC but may be useful to rule out patients unlikely to need physical interventions post-ICU. For high-risk patients, research to determine post-ICU risk factors for an incomplete rehabilitation is mandated.