MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Functional Outcomes, Goals, and Goal Attainment among Chronically Critically Ill Long-Term Acute Care Hospital Patients

2021· article· en· W3160425708 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Randy M. Dubin, Joshua Veith, Michael A. Grippi, Joanne McPeake, Michael O. Harhay, Mark E. Mikkelsen

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineAnxietyHospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleIntensive care unitPopulationRehabilitationPhysical therapyAcute careObservational studyDepression (economics)Cohort studyIntensive care medicinePsychiatryHealth careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale Chronically critically ill patients admitted to a long-term acute care hospital (LTACH) setting are a vulnerable population of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors. Little is known of the goals and functional outcomes achieved by patients after rehabilitation in the LTACH setting. Objectives We sought to examine patient goals and functional outcomes, including swallowing function, among ICU survivors admitted to an LTACH with a tracheostomy. Methods This was a prospective observational cohort study of chronic critically ill LTACH patients. Results Fifty older subjects with a median duration of intubation before tracheostomy of 13 days were enrolled. ICU-acquired weakness and cognitive impairment were present in 40 (80%) and 36 (72%) patients, as measured by the Medical Research Council scale and Montreal Cognitive Assessment, respectively. Mental health problems were also common, with 16 (32%) patients experiencing moderate to severe anxiety, 9 (18%) experiencing moderate to severe depression, and 11 (22%) reporting symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder, according to the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome 10-Questions Inventory, respectively. Pharyngeal dysfunction, as measured by Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallow examination, was present in 37 (74%) patients. Patient goals, in decreasing order of frequency, included eating and drinking, speaking, walking, returning home, and toileting. By LTACH discharge, goal attainment was variable, with 97% of those who ranked speaking as important being able to speak and 88% of those who ranked eating and drinking as important being able to eat and drink but with only 21% being able to walk and only 18% being able to self-toilet. Discharge to the home or acute rehabilitation setting, achieved in 52% of the population, was associated with greater strength, as measured by the total Medical Research Council score (P = 0.002) as well as by the European 5-dimension, 5-level health-related quality of life instrument domains of mobility (P = 0.008) and self-care (P = 0.04). Conclusions Goal attainment during this period of recovery was variable. The ability to speak, eat, and drink, frequently identified as goals by these patients, were achieved, whereas functional goals such as walking were rarely achieved. These findings highlight the importance of identifying patient goals and setting realistic expectations informed by functional assessments when rehabilitating this vulnerable patient population in the LTACH and subsequent post–acute care settings.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.847

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Thoracic SocietySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207