prognosis Archives - Critical Care Science (CCS)
, , Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2024;36:e20240090en
DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240090-en
, , To evaluate whether the perfusion index response to semiorthostatic stress can be used to monitor the sympathetic-vascular response in sepsis patients.
Three groups were studied: Group A (30 healthy patients), Group B (30 critically ill patients without sepsis), and Group C (92 septic patients). The patients underwent a semiorthostatic stress test (head elevation from 0 to 60 degrees), and hemodynamics, perfusion index values and cardiac ultrasound data were evaluated. SOFA scores were also evaluated in septic patients, comparing those with increased and decreased perfusion indices after the test.
After the test, Group A presented significant reductions in stroke volume (p < 0.01) and the cardiac index (p < 0.05), with increases in heart rate (p < 0.05) and mean arterial pressure (p < 0.001). These responses were not observed in Groups B and C. In the individual analysis of Group A, there was a decrease in the perfusion index (p < 0,001), whereas in Groups B and C, the response was heterogeneous. Additionally, septic patients who had a reduced perfusion index after the test had a significant decrease in the SOFA score at 72 hours compared with the group with an increased perfusion index (p < 0.05). However, the delta-SOFA score did not differ between the groups.
The perfusion index response to semiorthostatic stress in sepsis patients is a simple and inexpensive method that can be used to detect the sympathetic-microvascular response at the bedside and appears to have prognostic value.
Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2024;36:e20240090en
DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240090-en
, , To evaluate whether the perfusion index response to semiorthostatic stress can be used to monitor the sympathetic-vascular response in sepsis patients.
Three groups were studied: Group A (30 healthy patients), Group B (30 critically ill patients without sepsis), and Group C (92 septic patients). The patients underwent a semiorthostatic stress test (head elevation from 0 to 60 degrees), and hemodynamics, perfusion index values and cardiac ultrasound data were evaluated. SOFA scores were also evaluated in septic patients, comparing those with increased and decreased perfusion indices after the test.
After the test, Group A presented significant reductions in stroke volume (p < 0.01) and the cardiac index (p < 0.05), with increases in heart rate (p < 0.05) and mean arterial pressure (p < 0.001). These responses were not observed in Groups B and C. In the individual analysis of Group A, there was a decrease in the perfusion index (p < 0,001), whereas in Groups B and C, the response was heterogeneous. Additionally, septic patients who had a reduced perfusion index after the test had a significant decrease in the SOFA score at 72 hours compared with the group with an increased perfusion index (p < 0.05). However, the delta-SOFA score did not differ between the groups.
The perfusion index response to semiorthostatic stress in sepsis patients is a simple and inexpensive method that can be used to detect the sympathetic-microvascular response at the bedside and appears to have prognostic value.
, , , Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2024;36:e20240149en
DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240149-en
, , , To identify the relative importance of several clinical variables present at intensive care unit admission on the short- and long-term mortality of critically ill patients with cancer after unplanned intensive care unit admission.
This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer with unplanned intensive care unit admission from January 2017 to December 2018. We developed models to analyze the relative importance of well-known predictors of mortality in patients with cancer admitted to the intensive care unit compared with mortality at 28, 90, and 360 days after intensive care unit admission, both in the full cohort and stratified by the type of cancer when the patient was admitted to the intensive care unit.
Among 3,592 patients, 3,136 (87.3%) had solid tumors, and metastatic disease was observed in 60.8% of those patients. A total of 1,196 (33.3%), 1,738 (48.4%), and 2,435 patients (67.8%) died at 28, 90, and 360 days, respectively. An impaired functional status was the greatest contribution to mortality in the short term for all patients and in the short and long term for the subgroups of patients with solid tumors. For patients with hematologic malignancies, the use of mechanical ventilation was the most important variable associated with mortality in all study periods. The SOFA score at admission was important for mortality prediction only for patients with solid metastatic tumors and hematological malignancies. The use of vasopressors and renal replacement therapy had a small importance in predicting mortality at every time point analyzed after the SOFA score was accounted for.
Healthcare providers must consider performance status, the use of mechanical ventilation, and the severity of illness when discussing prognosis, preferences for care, and end-of-life care planning with patients or their families during intensive care unit stays.
Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2024;36:e20240149en
DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240149-en
, , , To identify the relative importance of several clinical variables present at intensive care unit admission on the short- and long-term mortality of critically ill patients with cancer after unplanned intensive care unit admission.
This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer with unplanned intensive care unit admission from January 2017 to December 2018. We developed models to analyze the relative importance of well-known predictors of mortality in patients with cancer admitted to the intensive care unit compared with mortality at 28, 90, and 360 days after intensive care unit admission, both in the full cohort and stratified by the type of cancer when the patient was admitted to the intensive care unit.
Among 3,592 patients, 3,136 (87.3%) had solid tumors, and metastatic disease was observed in 60.8% of those patients. A total of 1,196 (33.3%), 1,738 (48.4%), and 2,435 patients (67.8%) died at 28, 90, and 360 days, respectively. An impaired functional status was the greatest contribution to mortality in the short term for all patients and in the short and long term for the subgroups of patients with solid tumors. For patients with hematologic malignancies, the use of mechanical ventilation was the most important variable associated with mortality in all study periods. The SOFA score at admission was important for mortality prediction only for patients with solid metastatic tumors and hematological malignancies. The use of vasopressors and renal replacement therapy had a small importance in predicting mortality at every time point analyzed after the SOFA score was accounted for.
Healthcare providers must consider performance status, the use of mechanical ventilation, and the severity of illness when discussing prognosis, preferences for care, and end-of-life care planning with patients or their families during intensive care unit stays.
, , , , , Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2024;36:e20240020en
DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240020-en
, , , , , , , , To analyze in-hospital and 1-year morbidity and mortality associated with acute gastrointestinal dysfunction in critically ill patients with COVID-19 via a prespecified scoring system.
Between March and July 2020, consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from a single institution were retrospectively analyzed by medical chart review. Only those who remained in the intensive care unit for more than 24 hours were included. Gastrointestinal dysfunction was assessed according to a predefined 5-point progressive gastrointestinal injury scoring system, considering the first 7 days of hospitalization. Laboratory data, comorbidities, the need for mechanical ventilation, the duration of intensive care unit stay, and subsequent in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates were also recorded.
Among 230 patients who were screened, 215 were included in the analysis. The median age was 68 years (54 - 82), and 57.7% were male. The total gastrointestinal dysfunction scores were 0 (79.1%), I (15.3%), II (4.7%), III (0.9%), and IV (0%). Any manifestation of gastrointestinal dysfunction was present in 20.9% of all patients and was associated with longer lengths of stay (20 days [11 - 33] versus 7 days [4 – 16]; p < 0.001] and higher C-reactive protein levels on admission (12.8mg/mL [6.4 - 18.4] versus 5.7mg/mL [3.2 - 13.4]; p < 0.001). The gastrointestinal dysfunction score was significantly associated with mortality (OR 2.8; 95%CI 1.7 - 4.8; p < 0.001) and the need for mechanical ventilation (OR 2.8; 95%CI 1.7 - 4.6; p < 0.001). Both in-hospital and 1-year death rates progressively increased as gastrointestinal dysfunction scores increased.
In the current series of intensive care unit patients with COVID-19, gastrointestinal dysfunction severity, as defined by a prespecified scoring system, was predictive of adverse in-hospital and 1-year outcomes.
Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2024;36:e20240020en
DOI 10.62675/2965-2774.20240020-en
, , , , , , , , To analyze in-hospital and 1-year morbidity and mortality associated with acute gastrointestinal dysfunction in critically ill patients with COVID-19 via a prespecified scoring system.
Between March and July 2020, consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from a single institution were retrospectively analyzed by medical chart review. Only those who remained in the intensive care unit for more than 24 hours were included. Gastrointestinal dysfunction was assessed according to a predefined 5-point progressive gastrointestinal injury scoring system, considering the first 7 days of hospitalization. Laboratory data, comorbidities, the need for mechanical ventilation, the duration of intensive care unit stay, and subsequent in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates were also recorded.
Among 230 patients who were screened, 215 were included in the analysis. The median age was 68 years (54 - 82), and 57.7% were male. The total gastrointestinal dysfunction scores were 0 (79.1%), I (15.3%), II (4.7%), III (0.9%), and IV (0%). Any manifestation of gastrointestinal dysfunction was present in 20.9% of all patients and was associated with longer lengths of stay (20 days [11 - 33] versus 7 days [4 – 16]; p < 0.001] and higher C-reactive protein levels on admission (12.8mg/mL [6.4 - 18.4] versus 5.7mg/mL [3.2 - 13.4]; p < 0.001). The gastrointestinal dysfunction score was significantly associated with mortality (OR 2.8; 95%CI 1.7 - 4.8; p < 0.001) and the need for mechanical ventilation (OR 2.8; 95%CI 1.7 - 4.6; p < 0.001). Both in-hospital and 1-year death rates progressively increased as gastrointestinal dysfunction scores increased.
In the current series of intensive care unit patients with COVID-19, gastrointestinal dysfunction severity, as defined by a prespecified scoring system, was predictive of adverse in-hospital and 1-year outcomes.
, , , , , Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(4):394-401
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230170-en
, , , , , To investigate the impact of delirium severity in critically ill COVID-19 patients and its association with outcomes.
This prospective cohort study was performed in two tertiary intensive care units in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. COVID-19 patients were evaluated daily during the first 7 days of intensive care unit stay using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and Confusion Method Assessment for Intensive Care Unit-7 (CAM-ICU-7). Delirium severity was correlated with outcomes and one-year mortality.
Among the 277 COVID-19 patients included, delirium occurred in 101 (36.5%) during the first 7 days of intensive care unit stay, and it was associated with a higher length of intensive care unit stay in days (IQR 13 [7 - 25] versus 6 [4 - 12]; p < 0.001), higher hospital mortality (25.74% versus 5.11%; p < 0.001) and additional higher one-year mortality (5.3% versus 0.6%, p < 0.001). Delirium was classified by CAM-ICU-7 in terms of severity, and higher scores were associated with higher in-hospital mortality (17.86% versus 34.38% versus 38.46%, 95%CI, p value < 0.001). Severe delirium was associated with a higher risk of progression to coma (OR 7.1; 95%CI 1.9 - 31.0; p = 0.005) and to mechanical ventilation (OR 11.09; 95%CI 2.8 - 58.5; p = 0.002) in the multivariate analysis, adjusted by severity and frailty.
In patients admitted with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit, delirium was an independent risk factor for the worst prognosis, including mortality. The delirium severity assessed by the CAM-ICU-7 during the first week in the intensive care unit was associated with poor outcomes, including progression to coma and to mechanical ventilation.
Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(4):394-401
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230170-en
, , , , , To investigate the impact of delirium severity in critically ill COVID-19 patients and its association with outcomes.
This prospective cohort study was performed in two tertiary intensive care units in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. COVID-19 patients were evaluated daily during the first 7 days of intensive care unit stay using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale, Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and Confusion Method Assessment for Intensive Care Unit-7 (CAM-ICU-7). Delirium severity was correlated with outcomes and one-year mortality.
Among the 277 COVID-19 patients included, delirium occurred in 101 (36.5%) during the first 7 days of intensive care unit stay, and it was associated with a higher length of intensive care unit stay in days (IQR 13 [7 - 25] versus 6 [4 - 12]; p < 0.001), higher hospital mortality (25.74% versus 5.11%; p < 0.001) and additional higher one-year mortality (5.3% versus 0.6%, p < 0.001). Delirium was classified by CAM-ICU-7 in terms of severity, and higher scores were associated with higher in-hospital mortality (17.86% versus 34.38% versus 38.46%, 95%CI, p value < 0.001). Severe delirium was associated with a higher risk of progression to coma (OR 7.1; 95%CI 1.9 - 31.0; p = 0.005) and to mechanical ventilation (OR 11.09; 95%CI 2.8 - 58.5; p = 0.002) in the multivariate analysis, adjusted by severity and frailty.
In patients admitted with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit, delirium was an independent risk factor for the worst prognosis, including mortality. The delirium severity assessed by the CAM-ICU-7 during the first week in the intensive care unit was associated with poor outcomes, including progression to coma and to mechanical ventilation.
, , , , , Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(3):302-310
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230141-en
, , , , , To evaluate the accuracy of the persistent AKI risk index (PARI) in predicting acute kidney injury within 72 hours after admission to the intensive care unit, persistent acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, and death within 7 days in patients hospitalized due to acute respiratory failure.
This study was done in a cohort of diagnoses of consecutive adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit of eight hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between March and September 2020 due to acute respiratory failure secondary to suspected COVID-19. The COVID-19 diagnosis was confirmed or refuted by RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. The ability of PARI to predict acute kidney injury at 72 hours, persistent acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, and death within 7 days was analyzed by ROC curves in comparison to delta creatinine, SOFA, and APACHE II.
Of the 1,001 patients in the cohort, 538 were included in the analysis. The mean age was 62 ± 17 years, 54.8% were men, and the median APACHE II score was 12. At admission, the median SOFA score was 3, and 83.3% had no renal dysfunction. After admission to the intensive care unit, 17.1% had acute kidney injury within 72 hours, and through 7 days, 19.5% had persistent acute kidney injury, 5% underwent renal replacement therapy, and 17.1% died. The PARI had an area under the ROC curve of 0.75 (0.696 - 0.807) for the prediction of acute kidney injury at 72 hours, 0.71 (0.613 - 0.807) for renal replacement therapy, and 0.64 (0.565 - 0.710) for death.
The PARI has acceptable accuracy in predicting acute kidney injury within 72 hours and renal replacement therapy within 7 days of admission to the intensive care unit, but it is not significantly better than the other scores.
Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(3):302-310
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230141-en
, , , , , To evaluate the accuracy of the persistent AKI risk index (PARI) in predicting acute kidney injury within 72 hours after admission to the intensive care unit, persistent acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, and death within 7 days in patients hospitalized due to acute respiratory failure.
This study was done in a cohort of diagnoses of consecutive adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit of eight hospitals in Curitiba, Brazil, between March and September 2020 due to acute respiratory failure secondary to suspected COVID-19. The COVID-19 diagnosis was confirmed or refuted by RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. The ability of PARI to predict acute kidney injury at 72 hours, persistent acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, and death within 7 days was analyzed by ROC curves in comparison to delta creatinine, SOFA, and APACHE II.
Of the 1,001 patients in the cohort, 538 were included in the analysis. The mean age was 62 ± 17 years, 54.8% were men, and the median APACHE II score was 12. At admission, the median SOFA score was 3, and 83.3% had no renal dysfunction. After admission to the intensive care unit, 17.1% had acute kidney injury within 72 hours, and through 7 days, 19.5% had persistent acute kidney injury, 5% underwent renal replacement therapy, and 17.1% died. The PARI had an area under the ROC curve of 0.75 (0.696 - 0.807) for the prediction of acute kidney injury at 72 hours, 0.71 (0.613 - 0.807) for renal replacement therapy, and 0.64 (0.565 - 0.710) for death.
The PARI has acceptable accuracy in predicting acute kidney injury within 72 hours and renal replacement therapy within 7 days of admission to the intensive care unit, but it is not significantly better than the other scores.
, , Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(2):196-202
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230036-en
, , , , , To evaluate the association between different intensive care units and levels of brain monitoring with outcomes in acute brain injury.
Patients with traumatic brain injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage admitted to intensive care units were included. Neurocritical care unit management was compared to general intensive care unit management. Patients managed with multimodal brain monitoring and optimal cerebral perfusion pressure were compared with general management patients. A good outcome was defined as a Glasgow outcome scale score of 4 or 5.
Among 389 patients, 237 were admitted to the neurocritical care unit, and 152 were admitted to the general intensive care unit. Neurocritical care unit management patients had a lower risk of poor outcome (OR = 0.228). A subgroup of 69 patients with multimodal brain monitoring (G1) was compared with the remaining patients (G2). In the G1 and G2 groups, 59% versus 23% of patients, respectively, had a good outcome at intensive care unit discharge; 64% versus 31% had a good outcome at 28 days; 76% versus 50% had a good outcome at 3 months (p < 0.001); and 77% versus 58% had a good outcome at 6 months (p = 0.005). When outcomes were adjusted by SAPS II severity score, using good outcome as the dependent variable, the results were as follows: for G1 compared to G2, the OR was 4.607 at intensive care unit discharge (p < 0.001), 4.22 at 28 days (p = 0.001), 3.250 at 3 months (p = 0.001) and 2.529 at 6 months (p = 0.006). Patients with optimal cerebral perfusion pressure management (n = 127) had a better outcome at all points of evaluation. Mortality for those patients was significantly lower at 28 days (p = 0.001), 3 months (p < 0.001) and 6 months (p = 0.001).
Multimodal brain monitoring with autoregulation and neurocritical care unit management were associated with better outcomes and should be considered after severe acute brain injury.
Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(2):196-202
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230036-en
, , , , , To evaluate the association between different intensive care units and levels of brain monitoring with outcomes in acute brain injury.
Patients with traumatic brain injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage admitted to intensive care units were included. Neurocritical care unit management was compared to general intensive care unit management. Patients managed with multimodal brain monitoring and optimal cerebral perfusion pressure were compared with general management patients. A good outcome was defined as a Glasgow outcome scale score of 4 or 5.
Among 389 patients, 237 were admitted to the neurocritical care unit, and 152 were admitted to the general intensive care unit. Neurocritical care unit management patients had a lower risk of poor outcome (OR = 0.228). A subgroup of 69 patients with multimodal brain monitoring (G1) was compared with the remaining patients (G2). In the G1 and G2 groups, 59% versus 23% of patients, respectively, had a good outcome at intensive care unit discharge; 64% versus 31% had a good outcome at 28 days; 76% versus 50% had a good outcome at 3 months (p < 0.001); and 77% versus 58% had a good outcome at 6 months (p = 0.005). When outcomes were adjusted by SAPS II severity score, using good outcome as the dependent variable, the results were as follows: for G1 compared to G2, the OR was 4.607 at intensive care unit discharge (p < 0.001), 4.22 at 28 days (p = 0.001), 3.250 at 3 months (p = 0.001) and 2.529 at 6 months (p = 0.006). Patients with optimal cerebral perfusion pressure management (n = 127) had a better outcome at all points of evaluation. Mortality for those patients was significantly lower at 28 days (p = 0.001), 3 months (p < 0.001) and 6 months (p = 0.001).
Multimodal brain monitoring with autoregulation and neurocritical care unit management were associated with better outcomes and should be considered after severe acute brain injury.
, , , , , Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(2):177-186
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230348-en
, , , , , , To measure the prognostic value of peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve in the context of persistent sepsis-induced hyperlactatemia and measure its influence on the temporal dynamics of lactate and the strength of association between these variables.
This post hoc analysis of the peripheral perfusion index/postocclusive reactive hyperemia trial, an observational cohort study that enrolled patients with sepsis who persisted with lactate levels ≥ 2mmol/L after fluid resuscitation (with or without shock). Peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve was evaluated using the association of the peripheral perfusion index and postocclusive reactive hyperemia techniques. The cutoff point of ∆ peripheral perfusion index peak values (%) defined the groups with low (≤ 62%) and high peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve (> 62%).
A total of 108 consecutive patients with persistent sepsis-induced hyperlactatemia were studied. The high peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve group showed higher 28-day mortality than the low peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve group (p < 0.01). The temporal dynamics of lactate within the first 48 hours showed a rapid decrease in lactate levels in the low peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve group (p < 0.01). However, this result was not reproduced in the linear mixed effects model. A weak correlation between peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve (%) and lactate level (mmol/L) was observed within the first 24 hours (r = 0.23; p < 0.05).
The prognostic value of high peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve was confirmed in the context of persistent sepsis-induced hyperlactatemia. Although there was a weak positive correlation between peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve value and lactate level within the first 24 hours of sepsis diagnosis, the low peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve group appeared to have a faster decrease in lactate over the 48 hours of follow-up.
Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(2):177-186
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230348-en
, , , , , , To measure the prognostic value of peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve in the context of persistent sepsis-induced hyperlactatemia and measure its influence on the temporal dynamics of lactate and the strength of association between these variables.
This post hoc analysis of the peripheral perfusion index/postocclusive reactive hyperemia trial, an observational cohort study that enrolled patients with sepsis who persisted with lactate levels ≥ 2mmol/L after fluid resuscitation (with or without shock). Peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve was evaluated using the association of the peripheral perfusion index and postocclusive reactive hyperemia techniques. The cutoff point of ∆ peripheral perfusion index peak values (%) defined the groups with low (≤ 62%) and high peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve (> 62%).
A total of 108 consecutive patients with persistent sepsis-induced hyperlactatemia were studied. The high peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve group showed higher 28-day mortality than the low peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve group (p < 0.01). The temporal dynamics of lactate within the first 48 hours showed a rapid decrease in lactate levels in the low peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve group (p < 0.01). However, this result was not reproduced in the linear mixed effects model. A weak correlation between peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve (%) and lactate level (mmol/L) was observed within the first 24 hours (r = 0.23; p < 0.05).
The prognostic value of high peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve was confirmed in the context of persistent sepsis-induced hyperlactatemia. Although there was a weak positive correlation between peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve value and lactate level within the first 24 hours of sepsis diagnosis, the low peripheral ischemic microvascular reserve group appeared to have a faster decrease in lactate over the 48 hours of follow-up.
Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2022;34(4):492-498
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20220169-en
To describe the rate and factors related to nonreturn to work in the third month after discharge from the intensive care unit and the impact of unemployment, loss of income and health care expenses for survivors.
This was a prospective multicenter cohort study that included survivors of severe acute illness who were hospitalized between 2015 and 2018, previously employed, and who stayed more than 72 hours in the intensive care unit. Outcomes were assessed by telephone interview in the third month after discharge.
Of the 316 patients included in the study who had previously worked, 193 (61.1%) did not return to work within 3 months after discharge from the intensive care unit. The following factors were associated with nonreturn to work: low educational level (prevalence ratio 1.39; 95%CI 1.10 - 1.74; p = 0.006), previous employment relationship (prevalence ratio 1.32; 95%CI 1 10 - 1.58; p = 0.003), need for mechanical ventilation (prevalence ratio 1.20; 95%CI 1.01 - 1.42; p = 0.04) and physical dependence in the third month after discharge (prevalence ratio 1.27; 95%CI 1.08 - 1.48; p = 0.003). Survivors who were unable to return to work more often had reduced family income (49.7% versus 33.3%; p = 0.008) and increased health expenditures (66.9% versus 48.3%; p = 0.002). compared to those who returned to work in the third month after discharge from the intensive care unit.
Intensive care unit survivors often do not return to work until the third month after discharge from the intensive care unit. Low educational level, formal job, need for ventilatory support and physical dependence in the third month after discharge were related to nonreturn to work. Failure to return to work was also associated with reduced family income and increased health care costs after discharge.
Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2022;34(4):492-498
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20220169-en
To describe the rate and factors related to nonreturn to work in the third month after discharge from the intensive care unit and the impact of unemployment, loss of income and health care expenses for survivors.
This was a prospective multicenter cohort study that included survivors of severe acute illness who were hospitalized between 2015 and 2018, previously employed, and who stayed more than 72 hours in the intensive care unit. Outcomes were assessed by telephone interview in the third month after discharge.
Of the 316 patients included in the study who had previously worked, 193 (61.1%) did not return to work within 3 months after discharge from the intensive care unit. The following factors were associated with nonreturn to work: low educational level (prevalence ratio 1.39; 95%CI 1.10 - 1.74; p = 0.006), previous employment relationship (prevalence ratio 1.32; 95%CI 1 10 - 1.58; p = 0.003), need for mechanical ventilation (prevalence ratio 1.20; 95%CI 1.01 - 1.42; p = 0.04) and physical dependence in the third month after discharge (prevalence ratio 1.27; 95%CI 1.08 - 1.48; p = 0.003). Survivors who were unable to return to work more often had reduced family income (49.7% versus 33.3%; p = 0.008) and increased health expenditures (66.9% versus 48.3%; p = 0.002). compared to those who returned to work in the third month after discharge from the intensive care unit.
Intensive care unit survivors often do not return to work until the third month after discharge from the intensive care unit. Low educational level, formal job, need for ventilatory support and physical dependence in the third month after discharge were related to nonreturn to work. Failure to return to work was also associated with reduced family income and increased health care costs after discharge.
