4.5 Article

Comprehensive care of ICU survivors: Development and implementation of an ICU recovery center

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Volume 46, Issue -, Pages 141-148

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.02.011

Keywords

Post intensive care syndrome; ICU follow-up clinic; Delirium; Cognitive impairment; Models of care

Funding

  1. CTSA award from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences [UL1 TR002243]
  2. Vanderbilt Division of Allergy, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine
  3. Vanderbilt Department of Pharmaceutical Services

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To describe the design and initial implementation of an Intensive Care Unit Recovery Center (ICU-RC) in the United States. Materials andmethods: A prospective, observational feasibility study was undertaken at an academic hospital between July 2012 and December 2015. Clinical criteria were used to develop the ICU-RC, identify patients at high risk for post intensive care syndrome (PICS), and offer them post-ICU care. Results: 218/307 referred patients (71%) survived to hospital discharge; 62 (28% of survivors) were seen in clinic. Median time fromdischarge to ICU-RC visitwas 29 days. At initial evaluation, 64% of patients had clinically meaningful cognitive impairment. Anxiety and depression were present in 37% and 27% of patients, respectively. One in three patients was unable to ambulate independently; median 6 min walk distance was 56% predicted. Of 47 previously working patients, 7 (15%) had returned to work. Case management and referral services were provided 142 times. The median number of interventions per patient was 4. Conclusions: An ICU-RC identified a high prevalence of cognitive impairment, anxiety, depression, physical debility, lifestyle changes, and medication-related problems warranting intervention. Whether an ICU-RC can improve ICU recovery in the US should be investigated in a systematic way. (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