Instruments to measure outcomes of post-intensive care syndrome in outpatient care settings – Results of an expert consensus and feasibility field test

Author:

Spies Claudia D1ORCID,Krampe Henning1,Paul Nicolas1ORCID,Denke Claudia1,Kiselev Jörn1,Piper Sophie K23ORCID,Kruppa Jochen23,Grunow Julius J1,Steinecke Karin1,Gülmez Tuba1,Scholtz Kathrin1,Rosseau Simone4,Hartog Christiane15,Busse Reinhard6,Caumanns Jörg7,Marschall Ursula8,Gersch Martin9,Apfelbacher Christian1011,Weber-Carstens Steffen1,Weiss Björn1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anesthesiology and Operative Intensive Care Medicine (CCM, CVK), Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany

2. Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany

3. Berlin Institute of Health (BIH), Berlin, Germany

4. Klinikum Ernst von Bergmann, Pneumologisches Beatmungszentrum, Bad Belzig, Germany

5. Klinik Bavaria, Kreischa, Germany

6. Department for Health Care Management, Berlin University of Technology, Berlin, Germany

7. Innovation Center Telehealth Technologies, Fraunhofer Institute for Open Communication Systems (FOKUS), Berlin, Germany

8. Barmer BARMER, Berlin, Germany

9. Department of Information Systems, School of Business & Economics, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

10. Medical Sociology, Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany

11. Institute of Social Medicine and Health Economics, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany

Abstract

Background There is no consensus on the instruments for diagnosis of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS). We present a proposal for a set of outcome measurement instruments of PICS in outpatient care. Methods We conducted a three-round, semi-structured consensus-seeking process with medical experts, followed each by exploratory feasibility investigations with intensive care unit survivors (n1 = 5; n2 = 5; n3 = 7). Fourteen participants from nine stakeholder groups participated in the first and second consensus meeting. In the third consensus meeting, a core group of six clinical researchers refined the final outcome measurement instrument set proposal. Results We suggest an outcome measurement instrument set used in a two-step process. First step: Screening with brief tests covering PICS domains of (1) mental health (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4)), (2) cognition (MiniCog, Animal Naming), (3) physical function (Timed Up-and-Go (TUG), handgrip strength), and (4) health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (EQ-5D-5L). Single items measure subjective health before and after the intensive care unit stay. If patients report new or worsened health problems after intensive care unit discharge and show relevant impairment in at least one of the screening tests, a second extended assessment follows: (1) Mental health (Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8), Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7 (GAD-7), Impact of Event Scale – revised (IES-R)); (2) cognition (Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), Trail Making Test (TMT) A and B); (3) physical function (2-Minute Walk Test (2-MWT), handgrip strength, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB)); and (4) HRQoL (EQ-5D-5L, 12-Item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0)). Conclusions We propose an outcome measurement instrument set used in a two-step measurement of PICS, combining performance-based and patient-reported outcome measures. First-step screening is brief, free-of-charge, and easily applicable by health care professionals across different sectors. If indicated, specialized healthcare providers can perform the extended, second-step assessment. Usage of the first-step screening of our suggested outcome measurement instrument set in outpatient clinics with subsequent transfer to specialists is recommended for all intensive care unit survivors. This may increase awareness and reduce the burden of PICS. Trial registration This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04175236; first posted 22 November 2019).

Funder

Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA) / Federal Joint Committee

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine,Critical Care

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3