4.5 Article

Physical function impairment in survivors of critical illness in an ICU Recovery Clinic

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Volume 45, Issue -, Pages 163-169

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.02.001

Keywords

Critical illness; Clinic; Recovery; Physical function; Healthcare utilization; Intensive care unit

Funding

  1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health [UL1TR001420]
  2. Wake Forest University Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center [P30-AG21332]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The aims were to 1) determine feasibility of measuring physical function in our ICU Recovery Clinic (RC), 2) determine if physical function was associated with 6-month re-hospitalization and 1-year mortality and 3) compare ICU survivors' physical function to other comorbid populations. Materials and methods: We established the Wake Forest ICU RC. Patients were seen in clinic 1 month following hospital discharge. Testing included the Short Form-36 questionnaire and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). We related these measures to 6 month re-hospitalizations and 1 year mortality, and compared patients' functional performance with other comorbid populations. Results: Thirty-six patients were seen in clinic from July 2014 to June 2015; the median SPPB score was 5 (IQR 5). The median SF-36 physical component summary score was 21.8 (IQR 28.8). Mortality was 14% at 1 year. Of those who did not die by 1 year, 35% were readmitted to our hospital within 6 months of hospital discharge. SPPB scores demonstrated a non-significant trend with both mortality (p = 0.06) and readmissions (p = 0.09). ICU survivors' SPPB scores were significantly lower than those of other chronically ill populations (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Physical function measurement in a recovery clinic is feasible and may inform subsequent morbidity and mortality. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available