A systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinimetric properties of the core outcome measurement instruments for clinical effectiveness trials of nutritional and metabolic interventions in critical illness (CONCISE)

BACKGROUND

CONCISE is an internationally agreed minimum set of outcomes for use in nutritional and metabolic clinical research in critically ill adults. Clinicians and researchers need to be aware of the clinimetric properties of these instruments and understand any limitations to ensure valid and reliable research. This systematic review and meta-analysis were undertaken to evaluate the clinimetric properties of the measurement instruments identified in CONCISE.

METHODS

Four electronic databases were searched from inception to December 2022 (MEDLINE via Ovid, EMBASE via Ovid, CINAHL via Healthcare Databases Advanced Search, CENTRAL via Cochrane). Studies were included if they examined at least one clinimetric property of a CONCISE measurement instrument or recognised variation in adults ≥ 18 years with critical illness or recovering from critical illness in any language. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures was used. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses were used in line with COSMIN guidance. The COSMIN checklist was used to evaluate the risk of bias and the quality of clinimetric properties. Overall certainty of the evidence was rated using a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Narrative synthesis was performed and where possible, meta-analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 4316 studies were screened. Forty-seven were included in the review, reporting data for 12308 participants. The Short Form-36 Questionnaire (Physical Component Score and Physical Functioning), sit-to-stand test, 6-m walk test and Barthel Index had the strongest clinimetric properties and certainty of evidence. The Short Physical Performance Battery, Katz Index and handgrip strength had less favourable results. There was limited data for Lawson Instrumental Activities of Daily Living and the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria. The risk of bias ranged from inadequate to very good. The certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to high.

CONCLUSIONS

Variable evidence exists to support the clinimetric properties of the CONCISE measurement instruments. We suggest using this review alongside CONCISE to guide outcome selection for future trials of nutrition and metabolic interventions in critical illness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42023438187). Registered 21/06/2023.

Genomic and non-genomic effects of glucocorticoids in respiratory diseases

Cortisol is an endogenous steroid hormone essential for the natural resolution of inflammation. Synthetic glucocorticoids (GCs) were developed and are currently amongst the most widely prescribed anti-inflammatory drugs in our modern clinical landscape owing to their potent anti-inflammatory activity. However, the extent of GC's effects has yet to be fully elucidated. Indeed, GCs modulate a broad spectrum of cellular activity, from their classical regulation of gene expression to acute non-genomic mechanisms of action. Furthermore, tissue specific effects, disease specific conditions, and dose-dependent responses complicate their use, with side-effects potentially plaguing their use. It is thus vital to outline and consolidate the effects of GCs, to demystify and maximize their therapeutic potential while avoiding pitfalls that would otherwise render them obsolete.

Core outcome measures for clinical effectiveness trials of nutritional and metabolic interventions in critical illness: an international modified Delphi consensus study evaluation (CONCISE)

Background

Clinical research on nutritional and metabolic interventions in critically ill patients is heterogenous regarding time points, outcomes and measurement instruments used, impeding intervention development and data syntheses, and ultimately worsening clinical outcomes. We aimed to identify and develop a set of core outcome domains and associated measurement instruments to include in all research in critically ill patients.

Methods

An updated systematic review informed a two-stage modified Delphi consensus process (domains followed by instruments). Measurement instruments for domains considered ‘essential’ were taken through the second stage of the Delphi and a subsequent consensus meeting.

Results

In total, 213 participants (41 patients/caregivers, 50 clinical researchers and 122 healthcare professionals) from 24 countries contributed. Consensus was reached on time points (30 and 90 days post-randomisation). Three domains were considered ‘essential’ at 30 days (survival, physical function and Infection) and five at 90 days (survival, physical function, activities of daily living, nutritional status and muscle/nerve function). Core ‘essential’ measurement instruments reached consensus for survival and activities of daily living, and ‘recommended’ measurement instruments for physical function, nutritional status and muscle/nerve function. No consensus was reached for a measurement instrument for Infection. Four further domains met criteria for ‘recommended,’ but not ‘essential,’ to measure at 30 days post-randomisation (organ dysfunction, muscle/nerve function, nutritional status and wound healing) and three at 90 days (frailty, body composition and organ dysfunction).

Conclusion

The CONCISE core outcome set is an internationally agreed minimum set of outcomes for use at 30 and 90 days post-randomisation, in nutritional and metabolic clinical research in critically ill adults.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13054-022-04113-x.

1059 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AMONG OLDER PEOPLE ADMITTED TO A UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL IN MALAYSIA

Introduction

Physical inactivity is prevalent among hospitalised older people and is associated with poor outcomes. This study aims to determine activity levels in a Malaysian university hospital.

Method

Direct observation of patients admitted to the geriatric medicine ward over 2 weeks between the hours of 8 am-8 pm was performed. Data was collated onto an observation diary which was piloted, and changes made iteratively. A taxonomy of inpatient activity and healthcare staff interaction was created. Observer training was done to ensure familiarity and consistency in the recording. Data was presented descriptively and comparison made between weekday/weekend. Minutes of activity time per-hour (mins/hr) was use to report findings.

Results

Ninety-one patients were observed over 1918.8 hours (weekday, 1579.67 hours; weekends, 363.87 hours). The observed median (Q1,Q3) was 15.1 (9.4, 30.1) hours per-patient. 32.6 minutes per day on average was spent upright, with the rest spent either sitting or lying down. 78.9% of patients’ time was spent doing nothing. Patients’ position was different between weekdays vs weekends, lying, 35.7 vs 40.8 mins/hr; sitting, 23.3 vs 18.2 mins/hr; and standing, 1.1 vs 1.0 mins/hr. Patients spent significantly less proportion of time active at the weekends (weekdays, 28.3% vs weekends, 19.9%). When individual activities were analysed, patients were doing less walking (weekend, 0.4 vs weekday, 0.01 mins/hr, p = 0.01) therapy-supervised exercise (1.1 vs 0.02 mins/hr, p < 0.01), and nursing care (0.6 vs 0.1 mins/hr, p < 0.01) over the weekend. There was also less doctor interaction (weekday, 1.1 vs 0.5 mins/hr, p = 0.04) and no therapist interaction at the weekend. Nursing input was unchanged.

Conclusion

Older people admitted to a university hospital in Malaysia were very inactive. There was further reduction in activity levels and healthcare interaction at the weekend. Maintaining physical activity during hospitalisation is required to ensure best possible recovery from their acute illness.

Tetraspanins: Host Factors in Viral Infections

Tetraspanins are transmembrane glycoproteins that have been shown increasing interest as host factors in infectious diseases. In particular, they were implicated in the pathogenesis of both non-enveloped (human papillomavirus (HPV)) and enveloped (human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), Zika, influenza A virus, (IAV), and coronavirus) viruses through multiple stages of infection, from the initial cell membrane attachment to the syncytium formation and viral particle release. However, the mechanisms by which different tetraspanins mediate their effects vary. This review aimed to compare and contrast the role of tetraspanins in the life cycles of HPV, HIV, Zika, IAV, and coronavirus viruses, which cause the most significant health and economic burdens to society. In doing so, a better understanding of the relative contribution of tetraspanins in virus infection will allow for a more targeted approach in the treatment of these diseases.

P13 Safety and efficacy of sacubitril-valsartan initiation during and after acute decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Background

The PIONEER-HF trial has demonstrated the safety of Sacubitril-Valsartan initiation during acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) compared to Enalapril. The efficacy outcome was also addressed by the surrogate end point of reduction in NT-proBNP. However, the safety and efficacy of Sacubitril-Valsartan initiation during ADHF compared to initiation after ADHF was unknown.

Objectives

(1) To compare the safety and efficacy of Sacubitril-Valsartan initiation during ADHF(inpatient) to initiation after ADHF(outpatient). (2) To explore the echocardiogram parameters associated with Sacubitril-Valsartan initiation during ADHF(inpatient) versus after ADHF(outpatient).

Methods

We enrolled patients diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) initiated on Sacubitril-Valsartan from February 2017 to December 2018. The baseline characteristics, echocardiogram parameters (changes in LVEF and positive remodeling), composite safety outcomes (hypotension, interruption of Sacubitril-Valsartan and worsening of renal function), and efficacy outcomes (cardiac death, readmission for heart failure) were compared.

Results

Thirty-seven patients were identified out of which 21 patients started Entresto after ADHF (outpatient group) and 16 patients during ADHF (inpatient group). The median follow-up duration was 196 days (IQR: 105 to 328days). The baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Outpatient groups achieved a significantly higher maximally tolerable dose of Sacubitril-Valsartan compared to inpatient group (median 400mg/day versus 200mg/day, p = 0.008) despite a similar starting dose (median 100mg/day versus 100mg/day, p = 0.127). The composite efficacy outcomes were similar between the 2 groups (4.8% versus 18.8%, p = 0.296). The composite safety outcome was similar between the groups (18.8% versus 4.8%, HR5.70 p = 0.054, 95%CI 0.967 to 33.60). Both groups achieved a significant improvement in LVEF after initiation of Sacubitril-Valsartan therapy: mean LVEF 23.44 ± 7.88% to 34.30 ± 13.88% (p = 0.001) in outpatient group; mean LVEF 22.99 ± 11.31% to 38.81 ± 13.91% (p = 0.002) in inpatient group. Reverse remodeling (reduction of LVESV≥15%) was similar between the 2 groups (61.9% versus 50.0%, p = 0.506).

Conclusions

Among patients with HFrEF in ADHF, initiation of Sacubitril-Valsartan therapy during or after ADHF led to similar safety and efficacy. Overall, there was a significant improvement in LVEF and positive remodeling of the LV regardless of the timing of initiation of therapy.