4.1 Article

Functional outcome and muscle wasting in adults with tetanus

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/trstmh/trz055

Keywords

functional outcome; hospital-acquired infection; muscle mass

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust [107367/Z/15/Z]
  2. Wellcome Trust [107367/Z/15/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: In many countries, in-hospital survival from tetanus is increasing, but long-term outcome is unknown. In high-income settings, critical illness is associated with muscle wasting and poor functional outcome, but there are few data from resource-limited settings. In this study we aimed to assess muscle wasting and long-term functional outcome in adults with tetanus. Methods: In a prospective observational study involving 80 adults with tetanus, sequential rectus femoris ultrasound measurements were made at admission, 7 days, 14 days and hospital discharge. Functional outcome was assessed at hospital discharge using the Timed Up and Go test, Clinical Frailty Score, Barthel Index and RAND 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and 3 and 6 months after discharge using the SF-36 and Barthel Index. Results: Significant muscle wasting occurred between hospital admission and discharge (p<0.01), particularly in severe disease, where a median 23.49% (interquartile range 10.01-26.07) reduction in rectus femoris cross-sectional area occurred in those with severe (Ablett grades 3 and 4) disease. Muscle mass at discharge was related to objective and subjective measures of physical and emotional function at discharge and 3 and 6 months after discharge. In patients >70 y of age, functional recovery at 6 months was reduced compared with younger patients. Hospital-acquired infection and age were risk factors for muscle wasting. Conclusions: Significant muscle wasting during hospitalization occurred in patients with tetanus, the extent of which correlates with functional outcome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available