The Effects of Early Rehabilitation in the Intensive Care Unit for Patients with Severe COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Retrospective Cohort Study

This retrospective cohort study aimed to examine the rehabilitation effect of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the intensive care unit (ICU) under mechanical ventilation and included ICU patients from a university hospital who received rehabilitation under ventilator control until 31 May 2021. Seven patients were included, and three of them died; thus, the results of the four survivors were examined. The rehabilitation program comprised the extremity range-of-motion training and sitting on the bed’s edge. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (median (25–75th percentiles)) at admission was 7.5 (5.75–8.5), and the activities of daily living (ADLs) were bedridden, the lowest in the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and Barthel Index (BI) surveys. Data on the mean time to extubation, ICU length of stay, and ADLs improvement (FIM and BI) during ICU admission were obtained. Inferential analyses were not performed considering the small sample size. The mean time to extubation was 4.9 ± 1.1 days, and the ICU length of stay was 11.8 ± 5.0 days. ΔFIM was 36.5 (28.0–40.5), and the ΔBI was 22.5 (3.75–40.0). Moreover, no serious adverse events occurred in the patients during rehabilitation. Early mobilization of patients with COVID-19 may be useful in ADLs improvement during ICU stay.

Download Full-text

A Retrospective Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Intravenous Olanzapine Versus Intravenous Haloperidol for Agitation in Adult Intensive Care Unit Patients

Journal of Intensive Care Medicine ◽

10.1177/0885066620984450 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 088506662098445

Author(s):

Michelle Wang ◽

Tuyen T. Yankama ◽

George T. Abdallah ◽

Ijeoma Julie Eche ◽

Kristen N. Knoph ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Intensive Care Unit ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Length Of Stay ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Medical Center ◽

Academic Medical Center ◽

Icu Length Of Stay ◽

Haloperidol Group

Objective: Intravenous (IV) olanzapine could be an alternative to first-generation antipsychotics for the management of agitation in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. We compared the effectiveness and safety of IV olanzapine to IV haloperidol for agitation management in adult patients in the ICU at a tertiary academic medical center. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved a Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) score of < +1 within 4 hours of IV olanzapine or IV haloperidol administration. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of patients who required rescue medications for agitation within 4 hours of initial IV olanzapine or IV haloperidol administration, incidence of adverse events and ICU length of stay. Results: In the 192 patient analytic cohort, there was no difference in the proportion of patients who achieved a RASS score of < +1 within 4 hours of receiving IV olanzapine or IV haloperidol (49% vs. 42%, p = 0.31). Patients in the IV haloperidol group were more likely to receive rescue medications (28% vs 55%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in the incidence of respiratory events or hypotension between IV olanzapine and IV haloperidol. Patients in the IV olanzapine group experienced more bradycardia (11% vs. 3%, p = 0.04) and somnolence (9% vs. 1%, p = 0.02) compared to the IV haloperidol group. Patients in the IV olanzapine group had a longer median ICU length of stay (7.5 days vs. 5 days, p = 0.04). Conclusion: In this retrospective cohort study, there was no difference in the effectiveness of IV olanzapine compared to IV haloperidol for the management of agitation. IV olanzapine was associated with an increased incidence of bradycardia and somnolence.

Download Full-text

Using nursing notes to improve clinical outcome prediction in intensive care patients: A retrospective cohort study

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association ◽

10.1093/jamia/ocab051 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Kexin Huang ◽

Tamryn F Gray ◽

Santiago Romero-Brufau ◽

James A Tulsky ◽

Charlotta Lindvall

Keyword(s):

Cohort Study ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Length Of Stay ◽

Patient Outcomes ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Medical Center ◽

Gradient Boosting ◽

Short Term ◽

Icu Length Of Stay

Abstract Objective Electronic health record documentation by intensive care unit (ICU) clinicians may predict patient outcomes. However, it is unclear whether physician and nursing notes differ in their ability to predict short-term ICU prognosis. We aimed to investigate and compare the ability of physician and nursing notes, written in the first 48 hours of admission, to predict ICU length of stay and mortality using 3 analytical methods. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective cohort study with split sampling for model training and testing. We included patients ≥18 years of age admitted to the ICU at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts, from 2008 to 2012. Physician or nursing notes generated within the first 48 hours of admission were used with standard machine learning methods to predict outcomes. Results For the primary outcome of composite score of ICU length of stay ≥7 days or in-hospital mortality, the gradient boosting model had better performance than the logistic regression and random forest models. Nursing and physician notes achieved area under the curves (AUCs) of 0.826 and 0.796, respectively, with even better predictive power when combined (AUC, 0.839). Discussion Models using only nursing notes more accurately predicted short-term prognosis than did models using only physician notes, but in combination, the models achieved the greatest accuracy in prediction. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate that statistical models derived from text analysis in the first 48 hours of ICU admission can predict patient outcomes. Physicians’ and nurses’ notes are both uniquely important in mortality prediction and combining these notes can produce a better predictive model.

Download Full-text

Impact of the Injectable Opioid Drug Shortage on Analgesia and Sedation Management in the Medical Intensive Care Unit: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Hospital Pharmacy ◽

10.1177/0018578721999805 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 001857872199980

Author(s):

Kayla John ◽

Kari Cape ◽

Lauren Goodman ◽

Jessica Elefritz

Keyword(s):

Intensive Care Unit ◽

Mechanical Ventilation ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Intensive Care ◽

Length Of Stay ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Medical Intensive Care Unit ◽

Drug Shortage ◽

Icu Length Of Stay ◽

Medical Intensive Care

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the injectable opioid drug shortage on analgesia and sedation management in the medical intensive care unit (MICU). Methods: A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted of mechanically ventilated patients during the injectable opioid shortage. Outcomes were compared between a cohort of patients during the intravenous (IV) opioid shortage (01/01/18-03/31/18) and a control cohort (01/01/17-03/31/17). Total IV opioids and alternative sedative administration were assessed. Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS) and Clinical Pain Observation Score (CPOT) assessments were also evaluated. The primary outcome was percentage of RASS within goal. Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital/ICU length of stay, and mortality. Results: One hundred patients were included (50 patients per cohort). In the shortage cohort, 23.2% fewer IV opioids were used (40 501.8 vs 52 713.8 oral morphine equivalents [OME]). No statistical differences were found in percentage of patients within goal RASS between the shortage and control (median 63.7% vs 74.8%; P = .094) or CPOT (median 49.7% vs 47.7%; P = .575). More patients received enteral opioids and propofol on day 1 in the shortage cohort when compared to the control (22% vs 4%; P = .007 and 76% vs 56%; P = .035) but there were no differences in benzodiazepine, dexmedetomidine, or antipsychotic use. No differences in mechanical ventilation, hospital/ICU length of stay, or mortality were found. Conclusions: Use of less IV opioids during the injectable opioid shortage did not affect achievement of goal RASS and CPOT scores or increase prescribing of sedative medications such as benzodiazepines in the MICU.

Download Full-text