Long term outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians after hospital intensive care

Association between protocol change to a higher-protein formula with lower energy targets and nutrient delivery in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend prioritizing protein provision while avoiding excessive energy delivery to critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but there are no prospective studies evaluating such a targeted approach in this group. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a "higher-protein formula protocol" on protein, energy, and volume delivery when compared with standard nutrition protocol.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with COVID-19 who received mechanical ventilation for >72 h and enteral nutrition. Before October 2021, the standard nutrition protocol for patients was 0.7 ml/kg/h ideal body weight (IBW) of a 63 g/L protein and 1250 kcal/L formula. From October 2021, we implemented a higher-protein formula protocol for patients with COVID-19. The initial prescription was 0.5 ml/kg/h IBW of a 100 g/L protein and 1260 kcal/L formula with greater emphasis on energy targets being directed by indirect calorimetry when possible. Measured outcomes included protein, energy, and volume delivered.

RESULTS

There were 114 participants (standard protocol, 48; higher-protein protocol, 66) with 1324 days of nutrition support. The median (95% CI) differences in protein, energy, and volume delivery between targeted and standard protocol periods were 0.08 g/kg/day (-0.02 to 0.18 g/kg/day), -1.71 kcal/kg/day (-3.64 to 0.21 kcal/kg/day) and -1.5 ml/kg/day (-2.9 to -0.1 ml/kg/day). Thirty-three patients (standard protocol, 7; higher-protein protocol, 26) had 44 indirect calorimetry assessments. There was no difference in measured energy expenditure over time (increased by 0.49 kcal/kg/day [-0.89 to 1.88 kcal/kg/day]).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of a higher-protein formula protocol to patients with COVID-19 modestly reduced volume administration without impacting protein and energy delivery.

Fragmentation of care between intensive and primary care settings and opportunities for improvement

PURPOSE

To explore the gaps in care provided across the transitions from the intensive care unit (ICU) to primary care, in order to improve post-ICU care.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews with three participant groups: intensivists, general practitioners (GPs) and patients and carers with framework analysis of textual data were used to investigate experiences of transitions of care post-ICU. Participants were purposively sampled for diversity. Eligible patients were adults, mechanically ventilated for >24 hours, with access to a video-enabled device. Exclusion criteria were non-English speaking and any cognitive/neurological limitation precluding interview participation.

RESULTS

A total of 46 interviews (15 patients, 8 caregivers, 15 intensivists and 8 GPs) were completed. Eight themes were identified, and categorised into three healthcare tiers. Tier 1, health system factors: (1) fragmentation of care; (2) communication gaps; (3) limited awareness and recognition of issues beyond the ICU; (4) lack of a specialised ICU follow-up pathway; Tier 2, clinician factors: (5) relationships among ICU, hospitals, GPs and patients and carers; (6) need for clinician role definition and clarity in ICU follow-up; Tier 3, patient and carer factors: (7) patient autonomy and self-actualisation and (8) the evolving caregiver role. A conceptual model was developed, highlighting bidirectional feedback loops between hospital and primary care.

CONCLUSION

This study identified gaps in care between ICU discharge and reintegration with primary care from the lived experience of patients, caregivers, intensivists and GPs. These data provide foci for future interventional research to improve the integration of care for this vulnerable and underserved cohort.

Chest pain epidemiology and care quality for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Victoria, Australia: a population-based cohort study from 2015 to 2019

Background

This study examined chest pain epidemiology and care quality for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ('Indigenous') patients presenting to hospital via emergency medical services (EMS) with chest pain.

Methods

State-wide population-based cohort study of consecutive patients attended by ambulance for acute chest pain with individual linkage to emergency, hospital admission and mortality data in the state of Victoria, Australia from January 2015 to June 2019. Multivariable models were used to assess for differences in pre-hospital and hospital adherence to care quality, process measures and clinical outcomes.

Findings

From 204,969 EMS attendances for chest pain, 3890 attendances (1.9%) identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. Age-standardized incidence rates were higher overall for Indigenous people (3128 vs. 1147 per 100,000 person-years, incidence rate ratio 2.73, 95% CI 2.72-2.74), this difference being particularly striking for younger patients, women, and those residing in outer regional areas. In multivariable models, adherence to care quality and process measures was lower for attendances involving Indigenous people. In the pre-hospital setting, Indigenous people were less likely to be provided intravenous access or analgesia. In the hospital setting, Indigenous people were less likely to be seen by emergency clinicians within target time and less likely to transferred following myocardial infarction to a revascularization capable centre.

Interpretation

Incidence of acute chest pain presentations is high among Indigenous people in Victoria, Australia. Opportunities to improve the quality of care for Indigenous Australians presenting with acute chest pain are identified.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council, National Heart Foundation.

Incidence and outcomes of critical illness in indigenous peoples: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Indigenous Peoples experience health inequities and racism across the continuum of health services. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence and outcomes of critical illness among Indigenous Peoples.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to October 2022). Observational studies, case series of > 100 patients, clinical trial arms, and grey literature reports of Indigenous adults were eligible. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and appraised research quality from an Indigenous perspective using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Assessment Tool. ICU mortality, ICU length of stay, and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) were compared using risk ratios and mean difference (MD) for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively. ICU admission was synthesized descriptively.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (Australia and/or New Zealand [n = 12] and Canada [n = 3]) were included. Risk of bias was low in 10 studies and moderate in 5, and included studies had minimal incorporation of Indigenous perspectives or consultation. There was no difference in ICU mortality between Indigenous and non-Indigenous (RR 1.14, 95%CI 0.98 to 1.34, I2 = 87%). We observed a shorter ICU length of stay among Indigenous (MD - 0.25; 95%CI, - 0.49 to - 0.00; I2 = 95%) and a higher use for IMV among non-Indigenous (RR 1.10; 95%CI, 1.06 to 1.15; I2 = 81%).

CONCLUSION

Research on Indigenous Peoples experience with critical care is poorly characterized and has rarely included Indigenous perspectives. ICU mortality between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations was similar, while there was a shorter ICU length of stay and less mechanical ventilation use among Indigenous patients. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO CRD42021254661; Registered: 12 June, 2021.

Twelve-month mortality outcomes for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people admitted to intensive care units in Australia: a registry-based data linkage study

OBJECTIVE

To compare longer term (12-month) mortality outcomes for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective registry-based data linkage cohort study; analysis of all admissions of adults (16 years or older) to Australian ICUs, 1 January 2017 - 31 December 2019, as recorded in the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Adult Patient Database (APD), linked using the SLK-581 key to National Death Index data.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Unadjusted and adjusted mortality risk, censored at twelve months from the start of index ICU admission. Secondary outcomes were unadjusted and adjusted mortality twelve months from admission to the ICU.

RESULTS

The APD recorded 330 712 eligible ICU admissions during 2017-2019 (65% of all ICU admissions registered), of which 11 322 were of Indigenous people (3.4%). Median age at admission was lower for Indigenous patients (51.2 [IQR, 36.7-63.6] years) than for non-Indigenous patients (66.5 [IQR, 52.7-76.1] years). Unadjusted mortality risk was similar for Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.97-1.06), but was higher for Indigenous patients after adjusting for age, admission diagnosis, illness severity, hospital type, jurisdiction, remoteness and socio-economic status (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.14-1.27). Twelve-month mortality was higher for Indigenous than non-Indigenous patients (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.16-1.33).

CONCLUSIONS

Twelve-month mortality outcomes are poorer for people admitted to ICUs in Australia than for the general population. Further, after adjusting for age and other factors, survival outcomes are poorer for Indigenous than non-Indigenous people admitted to ICUs. Critical illness may therefore contribute to shorter life expectancy among Indigenous Australians.

Outcomes following severe septic shock in a cohort of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: a nested cohort study from the ADRENAL trial

Objective: To describe the pattern of acute illness and 6-month mortality and health-related quality-of-life outcomes for a cohort of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients presenting with septic shock. Design: Nested cohort study of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participants recruited to a large randomised controlled trial of corticosteroid treatment in patients with septic shock. Setting: Royal Darwin Hospital, Northern Territory. Participants: All Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients recruited to the Adjunctive Corticosteroid Treatment in Critically Ill Patients with Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial at Royal Darwin Hospital were compared with a non-Indigenous cohort drawn from the same site, and a cohort matched for age, sex and severity of disease. Main outcome measures: Mortality at 90 days and 6 months, time to shock resolution, mechanical ventilation requirement, renal replacement therapy requirement, and five-domain, five-level EuroQol questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) score at 6 months. Results: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients had significantly reduced risk of death at 90 days when compared with non-Indigenous patients recruited to ADRENAL at Royal Darwin Hospital (12/60 v 23/62; adjusted odds ratio, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.17 to 0.94]) which was robust to additional adjustment for baseline covariates (odds ratio, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.14 to 0.90]). When compared with the matched population drawn from the broader ADRENAL cohort, there was no significant difference in 90-day mortality (12/60 v 16/61; adjusted odds ratio, 1.43 [95% CI, 0.60 to 3.39]; P = 0.42). Only nine Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients provided 6-month health-related quality-of-life data. Conclusions: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients had reduced risk of death at 90 days when compared with non- Indigenous patients recruited to the ADRENAL trial at Royal Darwin Hospital, which was robust to adjustment for covariates, but similar outcomes when compared with a cohort matched for age, sex and severity of disease.

Transitions from short to long-term outcomes in pediatric critical care: considerations for clinical practice

Most children are surviving critical illness in highly resourced pediatric intensive care units (PICUs). However, in research studies, many of these children survive with multi-domain health sequelae that has the potential to affect development over many years, termed post-intensive care syndrome-pediatrics (PICS-p). Clinically, there are no recommendations for the assessment and follow-up of children with critical illness as exists for the premature neonatal and congenital heart disease populations. In research studies, primary and secondary outcomes are largely assessed at or prior to hospital discharge, disregarding post-hospital outcomes important to PICU stakeholders. Incorporating longer term outcomes into clinical and research programs, however, can no longer be overlooked. Barriers to outcomes assessments are varied and generalized vs. individualized, but some PICU centers are discovering how to overcome them and are providing this service to families-sometimes specific populations-in need. Research programs and funders are increasingly recognizing the value and need to assess long-term outcomes post-PICU. Finally, we should seek the strong backing of the PICU community and families to insist that long-term outcomes become our new clinical standard of care. PICUs should consider development of a multicenter, multinational collaborative to assess clinical outcomes and optimize care delivery and patient and family outcomes. The aim of this review is to present the potential considerations of implementing long-term clinical follow-up following pediatric critical illness.

Characteristics and outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients with dialysis-dependent kidney disease in Australian Intensive Care Units

BACKGROUND

In Australia, 531 people per million population have dialysis-dependent Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD5D). The incidence is four times higher for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) people compared to non-Indigenous Australians. CKD5D increases the risk of hospitalisation, admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and mortality compared to patients without CKD5D. There is limited literature describing short-term outcomes of patients with CKD5D who are admitted to ICU, comparing Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients.

AIMS

This registry-based retrospective cohort analysis compared demographic and clinical data between Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients with CKD5D and tested whether Indigenous status predicted short-term outcomes independently of other contributing factors. Adjusted hospital mortality was the primary outcome measure.

METHODS

Data were from the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society's Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation Adult Patient Database. Australian ICU admissions between 2010 and 2017 were included. Data from 173 ICUs (2,136 beds) include 1,051,697 ICU admissions of which 23,793 had a pre-existing diagnosis of CKD5D.

RESULTS

Indigenous patients comprised 11.9% of CKD5D patients in ICU. CKD5D was prevalent among 4.9% of Indigenous and 2.9% of non-Indigenous ICU admissions. Indigenous patients were 13.5 years younger, had fewer comorbidities and lower crude mortality despite equivalent calculated mortality risk. After adjusting for age, remoteness and severity of illness, Indigenous status did not predict mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Socioeconomic disadvantage contributes to earlier development of CKD5D and the over representation in ICU of Indigenous people. Mortality is equivalent once correcting for confounders, but addressing inequality requires strengthening preventative care. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.