Information sharing between intensive care and primary care after an episode of critical illness; A mixed methods analysis

Ideal Postdischarge Follow-Up After Severe Pneumonia or Acute Respiratory Failure: A Qualitative Study of Primary Care Clinicians in Diverse Settings

BACKGROUND

Most patients discharged after hospitalization for severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure receive follow-up care from primary care clinicians, yet guidelines are sparse.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What do primary care clinicians consider to be ideal follow-up care after hospitalization for severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure and what do they perceive to be barriers and facilitators to providing ideal follow-up?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted, via videoconferencing, semistructured interviews of 20 primary care clinicians working in diverse settings from five US states and Washington, DC. Participants described postdischarge visits, ongoing follow-up, and referrals for patients recovering from hospitalizations for pneumonia or respiratory failure bad enough to be hospitalized and to require significant oxygen support or seeking treatment at the ICU. Barriers and facilitators were probed using the capability, opportunity, motivation, behavior framework. Interview summaries and rigorous and accelerated data reduction analysis techniques were used.

RESULTS

Core elements of primary care follow-up after severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure included safety assessment, medication management, medical specialty follow-up, integrating the hospitalization into the primary care relationship, assessing mental and physical well-being, rehabilitation follow-up, and social context of recovery. Clinicians described specific practices as well as barriers and facilitators at multiple levels to optimal care.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings suggest that at least seven core elements are common in follow-up care after severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure, and conventional systems include barriers and facilitators to delivering what primary care clinicians consider to be optimal follow-up care. Future research could leverage identified barriers and facilitators to develop implementation tools that enhance the delivery of robust follow-up care for severe pneumonia or acute respiratory failure.

Clinician- and Patient-Identified Solutions to Reduce the Fragmentation of Post-ICU Care in Australia

BACKGROUND

Critical care survivors experience multiple care transitions, with no formal follow-up care pathway.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the potential solutions to improve the communication between treating teams and integration of care following an ICU admission, from the perspective of patients, their caregivers, intensivists, and general practitioners (GPs) from diverse socioeconomic areas?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This study included a qualitative design using semi-structured interviews with intensivists, GPs, and patients and caregivers. Framework analysis was used to analyze data and to identify solutions to improve the integration of care following hospital discharge. Patients were previously mechanically ventilated for > 24 h in the ICU and had access to a video-enabled device. Clinicians were recruited from hospital networks and a state-wide GP network.

RESULTS

Forty-six interviews with clinicians, patients, and caregivers were completed (15 intensivists, eight GPs, 15 patients, and eight caregivers). Three higher level feedback loops were identified that comprised 10 themes. Feedback loop 1 was an ICU and primary care collaboration. It included the following: (1) developing collaborative relationships between the ICU and primary care; (2) providing interprofessional education and resources to support primary care; and (3) improving role clarity for patient follow-up care. Feedback loop 2 was developing mechanisms for improved communication across the care continuum. It included: (4) timely, concise information-sharing with primary care on post-ICU recovery; (5) survivorship-focused information-sharing across the continuum of care; (6) empowering patients and caregivers in self-management; and (7) creation of a care coordinator role for survivors. Feedback loop 3 was learning from post-ICU outcomes to improve future care. It included: (8) developing comprehensive post-ICU care pathways; (9) enhancing support for patients following a hospital stay; and (10) integration of post-ICU outcomes within the ICU to improve clinician morale and understanding.

INTERPRETATION

Practical solutions to enhance the quality of survivorship for critical care survivors and their caregivers were identified. These themes are mapped to a novel conceptual model that includes key feedback loops for health system improvements and foci for future interventional trials to improve ICU survivorship outcomes.

Low prevalence of communication between intensive care unit medical staff and general practitioners: A single-centre retrospective study

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) have a central role in delivering care to the Australian community, which includes coordinating management of chronic diseases and treatment of patients after admission to intensive care units (ICUs). Consultations between ICUs and GPs may become increasingly relevant as patients of advancing age and chronic disease burden are admitted to ICUs. However, how frequently and for what reason such consultations occur remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and themes of consultations between ICU medical staff and GPs.

METHODS

Ten years of electronic medical records in the ICU of a regional Australian hospital were searched for patient admissions documenting the terms "gp", "general p∗", or "primary care∗" anywhere throughout the record. The proportion of ICU admissions in which a consultation between ICU staff members and GPs was documented was recorded along with the reason/s for the consultation and designation (resident, registrar, consultant) of those who communicated with the GP.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Main outcome measures included the proportion of ICU admissions with a documented consultation between ICU staff and GPs, theme of the consultation, and designation (resident, registrar, consultant) of those who communicated with the GP.

RESULTS

Of 13 402 admissions to the ICU, 137 (1.02%) had a documented consultation between ICU medical staff and GPs. Most consultations (n = 116, 85%) were initiated by junior ICU medical staff members seeking clinical information from the GPs. Few consultations were to discuss goals of care (n = 10, 7.3%) or care following ICU discharge (n = 15, 11%).

CONCLUSIONS

Consultations between ICU medical staff and GPs were infrequent. Further research is required on how best to integrate the health care provided by ICUs and GPs.

Mobilizing registry data for quality improvement: A convergent mixed-methods analysis and application to spinal cord injury

Introduction

The rising prevalence of complex chronic conditions and growing intricacies of healthcare systems emphasizes the need for interdisciplinary partnerships to advance coordination and quality of rehabilitation care. Registry databases are increasingly used for clinical monitoring and quality improvement (QI) of health system change. Currently, it is unclear how interdisciplinary partnerships can best mobilize registry data to support QI across care settings for complex chronic conditions.

Purpose

We employed spinal cord injury (SCI) as a case study of a highly disruptive and debilitating complex chronic condition, with existing registry data that is underutilized for QI. We aimed to compare and converge evidence from previous reports and multi-disciplinary experts in order to outline the major elements of a strategy to effectively mobilize registry data for QI of care for complex chronic conditions.

Methods

This study used a convergent parallel-database variant mixed design, whereby findings from a systematic review and a qualitative exploration were analyzed independently and then simultaneously. The scoping review used a three-stage process to review 282 records, which resulted in 28 articles reviewed for analysis. Concurrent interviews were conducted with multidisciplinary-stakeholders, including leadership from condition-specific national registries, members of national SCI communities, leadership from SCI community organizations, and a person with lived experience of SCI. Descriptive analysis was used for the scoping review and qualitative description for stakeholder interviews.

Results

There were 28 articles included in the scoping review and 11 multidisciplinary-stakeholders in the semi-structured interviews. The integration of the results allowed the identification of three key learnings to enhance the successful design and use of registry data to inform the planning and development of a QI initiative: enhance utility and reliability of registry data; form a steering committee lead by clinical champions; and design effective, feasible, and sustainable QI initiatives.

Conclusion

This study highlights the importance of interdisciplinary partnerships to support QI of care for persons with complex conditions. It provides practical strategies to determine mutual priorities that promote implementation and sustained use of registry data to inform QI. Learnings from this work could enhance interdisciplinary collaboration to support QI of care for rehabilitation for persons with complex chronic conditions.

A Survey to Assess Primary Care Physician Awareness of Complications Following Critical Illness

Background: Survivors of critical illness are at risk for post-intensive care syndrome (PICS, comprised of physical dysfunction, cognitive impairment, and neuropsychiatric disorders including anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress). Their family members and caregivers are at risk for PICS-F (PICS-family, comprised of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress). PICS and PICS-F are increasingly recognized in critical care; however, the awareness among primary providers of the domains and the terms of PICS/PICS-F is unknown. Objectives: To determine current practice patterns and knowledge among primary care physicians in regards to patients recovering from critical illness; to determine barriers to care of post-critically ill patients. Methods: A paper and electronic survey were developed and randomly distributed to a subset of North Carolina primary care physicians. Survey questions consisted of the following domains: demographics, current practice, barriers to providing care, knowledge of common issues/complications following critical illness, and interest in changing care for survivors of critical illness. Results: One hundred and ninety-six surveys were delivered and 77 completed surveys (39% response rate) were analyzed. Respondents confirmed significant barriers to care of post-critically ill patients including lack of awareness of PICS/PICS-F terminology, insufficient time to spend with patients, and inadequate education of patients/families about recovery after critical illness. Fifty-seven percent of respondents thought a specialized transitional post-ICU clinic would be helpful. Sixty-two percent reported feeling comfortable caring for patients after a critical illness and 75% felt they were aware of common problems encountered after critical illness. However, 84% also thought more education about PICS/PICS-F would be helpful as would a list of common problems seen after critical illness (91%). Conclusions: Significant gaps and barriers to providing optimal post-ICU care by PCPs exist. Providers identified time constraints and educational gaps as domains needing attention. Dedicated post-ICU clinics might provide a bridge to transition care post-critical illness back to primary care providers.

Hospital Discharge Summaries Are Insufficient Following ICU Stays: A Qualitative Study

Primary care providers (PCPs) receive limited information about their patients' ICU stays; we sought to understand what additional information PCPs desire to support patients' recovery following critical illness.

DESIGN

Semistructured interviews with PCPs conducted between September 2020 and April 2021.

SETTING

Academic health system with central quaternary-care hospital and associated Veterans Affairs medical center.

SUBJECTS

Fourteen attending internal medicine or family medicine physicians working in seven clinics across Southeast Michigan (median, 10.5 yr in practice).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

We analyzed using a modified Rigorous and Accelerated Data Reduction (RADaR) technique to identify gaps in current discharge summaries for patients with ICU stays, impacts of these gaps, and desired ICU-specific information. We employed RADaR to efficiently consolidate data in Excel Microsoft (Redmond, WA) tables across multiple formats (lists, themes, etc.).

RESULTS

PCPs reported receiving limited ICU-specific information in hospital discharge summaries. PCPs often spent significant time reading inpatient records for additional information. Information desired included life-support interventions provided and duration (mechanical ventilation, dialysis, etc.), reasons for treatment decisions (code status changes, medication changes, etc.), and potential complications (delirium, dysphagia, postintensive care syndrome, etc.). Pervasive discharge gaps (ongoing needs, incidental findings, etc.) were described as worse among patients with ICU stays due to more complex illness and required interventions. Insufficient information was felt to lead to incomplete follow-up on critical issues, PCP frustration, and patient harm. PCPs stated that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated gaps due to decreased staffing, limited visitation policies, and reliance on telehealth follow-up visits.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Our results identified key data elements sought by PCPs about patients' ICU stays and suggest opportunities to improve care through developing tools/templates to provide PCPs with ICU-specific information for outpatient follow-up.

Post-Intensive Care COVID Survivorship Clinic: A Single-Center Experience

Patients discharged from the ICU post-COVID-19 pneumonitis may experience long-term morbidity related to their critical illness, the treatment for this and the ICU environment. The aim of this study was to characterize the cognitive, psychologic, and physical consequences of COVID-19 in patients admitted to the ICU and discharged alive.

Patient discharge from intensive care: an updated scoping review to identify tools and practices to inform high-quality care

BACKGROUND

Critically ill patients require complex care and experience unique needs during and after their stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). Discharging or transferring a patient from the ICU to a hospital ward or back to community care (under the care of a general practitioner) includes several elements that may shape patient outcomes and overall experiences. The aim of this study was to answer the question: what elements facilitate a successful, high-quality discharge from the ICU?

METHODS

This scoping review is an update to a review published in 2015. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases from 2013-December 3, 2020 including adult, pediatric, and neonatal populations without language restrictions. Data were abstracted using different phases of care framework models, themes, facilitators, and barriers to the ICU discharge process.

RESULTS

We included 314 articles from 11,461 unique citations. Two-hundred and fifty-eight (82.2%) articles were primary research articles, mostly cohort (118/314, 37.6%) or qualitative (51/314, 16.2%) studies. Common discharge themes across all articles included adverse events, readmission, and mortality after discharge (116/314, 36.9%) and patient and family needs and experiences during discharge (112/314, 35.7%). Common discharge facilitators were discharge education for patients and families (82, 26.1%), successful provider-provider communication (77/314, 24.5%), and organizational tools to facilitate discharge (50/314, 15.9%). Barriers to a successful discharge included patient demographic and clinical characteristics (89/314, 22.3%), healthcare provider workload (21/314, 6.7%), and the impact of current discharge practices on flow and performance (49/314, 15.6%). We identified 47 discharge tools that could be used or adapted to facilitate an ICU discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Several factors contribute to a successful ICU discharge, with facilitators and barriers present at the patient and family, health care provider, and organizational level. Successful provider-patient and provider-provider communication, and educating and engaging patients and families about the discharge process were important factors in a successful ICU discharge.

Support and follow-up needs of patients discharged from intensive care after severe COVID-19: a mixed-methods study of the views of UK general practitioners and intensive care staff during the pandemic's first wave

OBJECTIVES

To identify follow-up services planned for patients with COVID-19 discharged from intensive care unit (ICU) and to explore the views of ICU staff and general practitioners (GPs) regarding these patients' future needs and care coordination.

DESIGN

This is a sequential mixed-methods study using online surveys and semistructured interviews. Interview data were inductively coded and thematically analysed. Survey data were descriptively analysed.

SETTING

GP surgeries and acute National Health Service Trusts in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

GPs and clinicians leading care for patients discharged from ICU.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Usual follow-up practice after ICU discharge, changes in follow-up during the pandemic, and GP awareness of follow-up and support needs of patients discharged from ICU.

RESULTS

We obtained 170 survey responses and conducted 23 interviews. Over 60% of GPs were unaware of the follow-up services generally provided by their local hospitals and whether or not these were functioning during the pandemic. Eighty per cent of ICUs reported some form of follow-up services, with 25% of these suspending provision during the peak of the pandemic and over half modifying their provision (usually to provide the service remotely). Common themes relating to barriers to provision of follow-up were funding complexities, remit and expertise, and communication between ICU and community services. Discharge documentation was described as poor and lacking key information. Both groups mentioned difficulties accessing services in the community and lack of clarity about who was responsible for referrals and follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The pandemic has highlighted long-standing issues of continuity of care and complex funding streams for post-ICU follow-up care. The large cohort of ICU patients admitted due to COVID-19 highlights the need for improved follow-up services and communication between specialists and GPs, not only for patients with COVID-19, but for all those discharged from ICU.

Long-term outcomes after critical illness: recent insights

Intensive care survivors often experience post-intensive care sequelae, which are frequently gathered together under the term “post-intensive care syndrome” (PICS). The consequences of PICS on quality of life, health-related costs and hospital readmissions are real public health problems. In the present Viewpoint, we summarize current knowledge and gaps in our understanding of PICS and approaches to management.