Detection of delirium by family members in the intensive care unit: Translation, Cross-Cultural adaptation and validation of the Family Confusion Assessment Method for the German-Speaking area

Aim: The aim of this study was the translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Family Confusion Assessment Method in critically ill patients. Background: Delirium is a frequently unrecognized disorder in critically ill patients. Visiting family members might be the first to notice subtle changes in a patient's cognition and behaviour. The Family Confusion Assessment Method was developed to detect delirium by family members, but has not been available for the German-speaking area yet. Design: A prospective validation study was conducted between January 2020 and October 2020. Methods: The Family Confusion Assessment Method was translated into German according to the Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes. Subsequently, we compared the Family Confusion Assessment Method with the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit in critically ill patients and their family members in a medical intensive care unit in Germany. Results: We included 50 dyads of critically ill patients and their family members. The prevalence of delirium measured by Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit was 44%. Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.84. The German Family Confusion Assessment Method had a high sensitivity of 95.5% and specificity of 89.3%. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 87.5% and 96.2% respectively. Conclusions: These findings suggest that the German Family Confusion Assessment Method is an accurate assessment tool for delirium detection in the intensive care unit by family members. Furthermore, the results indicate that family members may identify delirium by the Family Confusion Assessment Method without prior training. Impact: Collaborating medical staff with patients' family members to detect delirium in the intensive care unit may lead to early recognition of delirium. Keywords: Family Confusion Assessment Method; delirium; family members; intensive care unit; nurses; validation study

Assessment of mobilization capacity in 10 different ICU scenarios by different professions

Background: Mobilization of intensive care patients is a multi-professional task. Aim of this study was to explore how different professions working at Intensive Care Units (ICU) estimate the mobility capacity using the ICU Mobility Score in 10 different scenarios. Methods: Ten fictitious patient-scenarios and guideline-related knowledge were assessed using an online survey. Critical care team members in German-speaking countries were invited to participate. All datasets including professional data and at least one scenario were analyzed. Kruskal Wallis test was used for the individual scenarios, while a linear mixed-model was used over all responses. Results: In total, 515 of 788 (65%) participants could be evaluated. Physicians (p = 0.001) and nurses (p = 0.002) selected a lower ICU Mobility Score (-0.7 95% CI -1.1 to -0.3 and -0.4 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2, respectively) than physical therapists, while other specialists did not (p = 0.81). Participants who classified themselves as experts or could define early mobilization in accordance to the "S2e guideline: positioning and early mobilisation in prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary disorders" correctly selected higher mobilization levels (0.2 95% CI 0.0 to 0.4, p = 0.049 and 0.3 95% CI 0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.002, respectively). Conclusion: Different professions scored the mobilization capacity of patients differently, with nurses and physicians estimating significantly lower capacity than physical therapists. The exact knowledge of guidelines and recommendations, such as the definition of early mobilization, independently lead to a higher score. Interprofessional education, interprofessional rounds and mobilization activities could further enhance knowledge and practice of mobilization in the critical care team

The Functional Trajectory in Frail Compared With Non-frail Critically Ill Patients During the Hospital Stay

Background: Long-term outcome is determined not only by the acute critical illness but increasingly by the reduced functional reserve of pre-existing frailty. The patients with frailty currently account for one-third of the critically ill, resulting in higher mortality. There is evidence of how frailty affects the intrahospital functional trajectory of critically ill patients since prehospital status is often missing. Methods: In this prospective single-center cohort study at two interdisciplinary intensive care units (ICUs) at a university hospital in Germany, the frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in the adult patients with critical illness with an ICU stay >24 h. The functional status was assessed using the sum of the subdomains "Mobility" and "Transfer" of the Barthel Index (MTB) at three time points (pre-hospital, ICU discharge, and hospital discharge). Results: We included 1,172 patients with a median age of 75 years, of which 290 patients (25%) were frail. In a propensity score-matched cohort, the probability of MTB deterioration till hospital discharge did not differ in the patients with frailty (odds ratio (OR) 1.3 [95% CI 0.8-1.9], p = 0.301), confirmed in several sensitivity analyses in all the patients and survivors only. Conclusion: The patients with frailty have a reduced functional status. Their intrahospital functional trajectory, however, was not worse than those in non-frail patients, suggesting a rehabilitation potential of function in critically ill patients with frailty

Mobilisation of critically ill patients receiving norepinephrine: a retrospective cohort study

Background: Mobilisation and exercise intervention in general are safe and feasible in critically ill patients. For patients requiring catecholamines, however, doses of norepinephrine safe for mobilisation in the intensive care unit (ICU) are not defined. This study aimed to describe mobilisation practice in our hospital and identify doses of norepinephrine that allowed a safe mobilisation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective single-centre cohort study of 16 ICUs at a university hospital in Germany with patients admitted between March 2018 and November 2021. Data were collected from our patient data management system. We analysed the effect of norepinephrine on level (ICU Mobility Scale) and frequency (units per day) of mobilisation, early mobilisation (within 72 h of ICU admission), mortality, and rate of adverse events. Data were extracted from free-text mobilisation entries using supervised machine learning (support vector machine). Statistical analyses were done using (generalised) linear (mixed-effect) models, as well as chi-square tests and ANOVAs. Results: A total of 12,462 patients were analysed in this study. They received a total of 59,415 mobilisation units. Of these patients, 842 (6.8%) received mobilisation under continuous norepinephrine administration. Norepinephrine administration was negatively associated with the frequency of mobilisation (adjusted difference -0.07 mobilisations per day; 95% CI - 0.09, - 0.05; p 0.1). Higher compared to lower doses of norepinephrine did not lead to a significant increase in adverse events in our practice (p > 0.1). We identified that mobilisation was safe with up to 0.20 mu g/kg/min norepinephrine for out-of-bed (IMS >= 2) and 0.33 mu g/kg/min for in-bed (IMS 0-1) mobilisation. Conclusions: Mobilisation with norepinephrine can be done safely when considering the status of the patient and safety guidelines. We demonstrated that safe mobilisation was possible with norepinephrine doses up to 0.20 mu g/kg/min for out-of-bed (IMS >= 2) and 0.33 mu g/kg/min for in-bed (IMS 0-1) mobilisation

Cepheid Mass-loss and the Pulsation -- Evolutionary Mass Discrepancy

I investigate the discrepancy between the evolution and pulsation masses for Cepheid variables. A number of recent works have proposed that non-canonical mass-loss can account for the mass discrepancy. This mass-loss would be such that a 5Mo star loses approximately 20% of its mass by arriving at the Cepheid instability strip; a 14Mo star, none. Such findings would pose a serious challenge to our understanding of mass-loss. I revisit these results in light of the Padova stellar evolutionary models and find evolutionary masses are ($17\pm5$)% greater than pulsation masses for Cepheids between 5<M/Mo<14. I find that mild internal mixing in the main-sequence progenitor of the Cepheid are able to account for this mass discrepancy.Comment: 15 pages, 3 figures, ApJ accepte

Prehabilitation of elderly frail or pre-frail patients prior to elective surgery (PRAEP-GO): study protocol for a randomized, controlled, outcome assessor-blinded trial

BACKGROUND: Frailty is expressed by a reduction in physical capacity, mobility, muscle strength, and endurance. (Pre-)frailty is present in up to 42% of the older surgical population, with an increased risk for peri- and postoperative complications. Consequently, these patients often suffer from a delayed or limited recovery, loss of autonomy and quality of life, and a decrease in functional and cognitive capacities. Since frailty is modifiable, prehabilitation may improve the physiological reserves of patients and reduce the care dependency 12 months after surgery. METHODS: Patients ≥ 70 years old scheduled for elective surgery or intervention will be recruited in this multicenter, randomized controlled study, with a target of 1400 participants with an allocation ratio of 1:1. The intervention consists of (1) a shared decision-making process with the patient, relatives, and an interdisciplinary and interprofessional team and (2) a 3-week multimodal, individualized prehabilitation program including exercise therapy, nutritional intervention, mobility or balance training, and psychosocial interventions and medical assessment. The frequency of the supervised prehabilitation is 5 times/week for 3 weeks. The primary endpoint is defined as the level of care dependency 12 months after surgery or intervention. DISCUSSION: Prehabilitation has been proven to be effective for different populations, including colorectal, transplant, and cardiac surgery patients. In contrast, evidence for prehabilitation in older, frail patients has not been clearly established. To the best of our knowledge, this is currently the largest prehabilitation study on older people with frailty undergoing general elective surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04418271. Registered on 5 June 2020. Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1253-4820 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06401-x

Predicting lethal courses in critically ill COVID-19 patients using a machine learning model trained on patients with non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia

In a pandemic with a novel disease, disease-specific prognosis models are available only with a delay. To bridge the critical early phase, models built for similar diseases might be applied. To test the accuracy of such a knowledge transfer, we investigated how precise lethal courses in critically ill COVID-19 patients can be predicted by a model trained on critically ill non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia patients. We trained gradient boosted decision tree models on 718 (245 deceased) non-COVID-19 viral pneumonia patients to predict individual ICU mortality and applied it to 1054 (369 deceased) COVID-19 patients. Our model showed a significantly better predictive performance (AUROC 0.86 [95% CI 0.86-0.87]) than the clinical scores APACHE2 (0.63 [95% CI 0.61-0.65]), SAPS2 (0.72 [95% CI 0.71-0.74]) and SOFA (0.76 [95% CI 0.75-0.77]), the COVID-19-specific mortality prediction models of Zhou (0.76 [95% CI 0.73-0.78]) and Wang (laboratory: 0.62 [95% CI 0.59-0.65]; clinical: 0.56 [95% CI 0.55-0.58]) and the 4C COVID-19 Mortality score (0.71 [95% CI 0.70-0.72]). We conclude that lethal courses in critically ill COVID-19 patients can be predicted by a machine learning model trained on non-COVID-19 patients. Our results suggest that in a pandemic with a novel disease, prognosis models built for similar diseases can be applied, even when the diseases differ in time courses and in rates of critical and lethal courses

Muscular myostatin gene expression and plasma concentrations are decreased in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND The objective was to investigate the role of gene expression and plasma levels of the muscular protein myostatin in intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICUAW). This was performed to evaluate a potential clinical and/or pathophysiological rationale of therapeutic myostatin inhibition. METHODS A retrospective analysis from pooled data of two prospective studies to assess the dynamics of myostatin plasma concentrations (day 4, 8 and 14) and myostatin gene (MSTN) expression levels in skeletal muscle (day 15) was performed. Associations of myostatin to clinical and electrophysiological outcomes, muscular metabolism and muscular atrophy pathways were investigated. RESULTS MSTN gene expression (median [IQR] fold change: 1.00 [0.68-1.54] vs. 0.26 [0.11-0.80]; p = 0.004) and myostatin plasma concentrations were significantly reduced in all critically ill patients when compared to healthy controls. In critically ill patients, myostatin plasma concentrations increased over time (median [IQR] fold change: day 4: 0.13 [0.08/0.21] vs. day 8: 0.23 [0.10/0.43] vs. day 14: 0.40 [0.26/0.61]; p < 0.001). Patients with ICUAW versus without ICUAW showed significantly lower MSTN gene expression levels (median [IQR] fold change: 0.17 [0.10/0.33] and 0.51 [0.20/0.86]; p = 0.047). Myostatin levels were directly correlated with muscle strength (correlation coefficient 0.339; p = 0.020) and insulin sensitivity index (correlation coefficient 0.357; p = 0.015). No association was observed between myostatin plasma concentrations as well as MSTN expression levels and levels of mobilization, electrophysiological variables, or markers of atrophy pathways. CONCLUSION Muscular gene expression and systemic protein levels of myostatin are downregulated during critical illness. The previously proposed therapeutic inhibition of myostatin does therefore not seem to have a pathophysiological rationale to improve muscle quality in critically ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION ISRCTN77569430 -13th of February 2008 and ISRCTN19392591 17th of February 2011