Post-intensive care syndrome screening: a French multicentre survey.

IF 5.7 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Annals of Intensive Care Pub Date : 2024-07-09 DOI:10.1186/s13613-024-01341-y
Maïté Agbakou, Margot Combet, Maëlle Martin, Gauthier Blonz, Luc Desmedt, Amélie Seguin, Jérémie Lemarié, Olivier Zambon, Jean Reignier, Jean-Baptiste Lascarrou, Stephan Ehrmann, Emmanuel Canet
{"title":"Post-intensive care syndrome screening: a French multicentre survey.","authors":"Maïté Agbakou, Margot Combet, Maëlle Martin, Gauthier Blonz, Luc Desmedt, Amélie Seguin, Jérémie Lemarié, Olivier Zambon, Jean Reignier, Jean-Baptiste Lascarrou, Stephan Ehrmann, Emmanuel Canet","doi":"10.1186/s13613-024-01341-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), defined as physical, cognitive, and mental-health symptoms persisting long after intensive-care-unit (ICU) discharge, is increasingly recognised as a healthcare priority. Data on screening for PICS are sparse. Our objective here was to describe post-ICU screening in France, with special attention to visit availability and evaluations done during visits.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an online multicentre survey by emailing an anonymous 43-item questionnaire to French ICUs. For each ICU, a single survey was sent to either the head or the intensivist in charge of follow-up visits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 252 ICUs invited to participate, 161 (63.9%) returned the completed survey. Among them, 46 (28.6%) offered follow-up visits. Usually, a single visit led by an intensivist was scheduled 3 to 6 months after ICU discharge. Approximately 50 patients/year/ICU, that is, about 5% of admitted patients, attended post-ICU visits. The main criteria used to select patients for follow-up were ICU stay and/or invasive mechanical ventilation duration longer than 48 h, cardiac arrest, septic shock, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Among ICUs offering visits, 80% used validated instruments to screen for PICS. Of the 115 ICUs not offering follow-up, 50 (43.5%) indicated an intention to start follow-up within the next year. The main barriers to offering follow-up were lack of available staff and equipment or not viewing PICS screening as a priority. Half the ICUs offering visits worked with an established network of post-ICU care professionals, and another 17% were setting up such a network. Obstacles to network creation were lack of interest among healthcare professionals and lack of specific training in PICS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Only a small minority of ICU survivors received follow-up designed to detect PICS. Less than a third of ICUs offered follow-up visits but nearly another third planned to set up such visits within the next year. Recommendations issued by French health authorities in 2023 can be expected to improve the availability and standardisation of post-ICU follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":7966,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Intensive Care","volume":"14 1","pages":"109"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11233491/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13613-024-01341-y","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS), defined as physical, cognitive, and mental-health symptoms persisting long after intensive-care-unit (ICU) discharge, is increasingly recognised as a healthcare priority. Data on screening for PICS are sparse. Our objective here was to describe post-ICU screening in France, with special attention to visit availability and evaluations done during visits.

Methods: We conducted an online multicentre survey by emailing an anonymous 43-item questionnaire to French ICUs. For each ICU, a single survey was sent to either the head or the intensivist in charge of follow-up visits.

Results: Of 252 ICUs invited to participate, 161 (63.9%) returned the completed survey. Among them, 46 (28.6%) offered follow-up visits. Usually, a single visit led by an intensivist was scheduled 3 to 6 months after ICU discharge. Approximately 50 patients/year/ICU, that is, about 5% of admitted patients, attended post-ICU visits. The main criteria used to select patients for follow-up were ICU stay and/or invasive mechanical ventilation duration longer than 48 h, cardiac arrest, septic shock, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Among ICUs offering visits, 80% used validated instruments to screen for PICS. Of the 115 ICUs not offering follow-up, 50 (43.5%) indicated an intention to start follow-up within the next year. The main barriers to offering follow-up were lack of available staff and equipment or not viewing PICS screening as a priority. Half the ICUs offering visits worked with an established network of post-ICU care professionals, and another 17% were setting up such a network. Obstacles to network creation were lack of interest among healthcare professionals and lack of specific training in PICS.

Conclusion: Only a small minority of ICU survivors received follow-up designed to detect PICS. Less than a third of ICUs offered follow-up visits but nearly another third planned to set up such visits within the next year. Recommendations issued by French health authorities in 2023 can be expected to improve the availability and standardisation of post-ICU follow-up.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重症监护后综合征筛查:法国多中心调查。
背景:重症监护室出院后综合征(PICS)是指重症监护室(ICU)出院后长期存在的身体、认知和精神健康症状。有关 PICS 筛查的数据很少。我们在此旨在介绍法国的重症监护室出院后筛查情况,特别关注就诊机会和就诊期间所做的评估:我们通过电子邮件向法国的重症监护病房发送了一份包含 43 个项目的匿名问卷,从而开展了一项在线多中心调查。每间重症监护室都向负责随访的负责人或重症监护医师发送了一份调查问卷:在受邀参与调查的 252 个 ICU 中,有 161 个(63.9%)ICU 返回了填写完整的调查问卷。其中,46 家(28.6%)提供了随访服务。通常情况下,由一名重症监护医师带领的一次随访安排在重症监护病房出院后的 3 至 6 个月。每年每间重症监护室约有 50 名患者(约占入院患者的 5%)接受重症监护室出院后的随访。选择患者进行随访的主要标准是:ICU住院时间和/或有创机械通气时间超过 48 小时、心脏骤停、脓毒性休克和急性呼吸窘迫综合征。在提供随访服务的 ICU 中,80% 的 ICU 使用经过验证的工具筛查 PICS。在 115 个未提供随访的 ICU 中,有 50 个(43.5%)表示有意在未来一年内开始随访。提供随访的主要障碍是缺乏可用的人员和设备,或未将 PICS 筛查视为优先事项。提供随访的 ICU 中,有一半与已建立的 ICU 后护理专业人员网络合作,另有 17% 正在建立这样的网络。建立网络的障碍是医护人员缺乏兴趣以及缺乏有关 PICS 的专门培训:结论:只有少数 ICU 幸存者接受了旨在检测 PICS 的随访。只有不到三分之一的重症监护病房提供随访服务,但另有近三分之一的重症监护病房计划在明年内开展此类随访服务。法国卫生当局将于2023年发布相关建议,有望改善ICU术后随访的可用性和标准化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Intensive Care
Annals of Intensive Care CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
107
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Intensive Care is an online peer-reviewed journal that publishes high-quality review articles and original research papers in the field of intensive care medicine. It targets critical care providers including attending physicians, fellows, residents, nurses, and physiotherapists, who aim to enhance their knowledge and provide optimal care for their patients. The journal's articles are included in various prestigious databases such as CAS, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition, OCLC, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Citation Index Expanded, SCOPUS, and Summon by Serial Solutions.
期刊最新文献
Alteplase in COVID-19 severe hypoxemic respiratory failure: the TRISTARDS multicenter randomized trial. Angiopoietin-2 as a prognostic biomarker in septic adult patients: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Editorial: Severe bleeding events among critically ill patients with hematological malignancies. Changes in portal pulsatility index induced by a fluid challenge in patients with haemodynamic instability and systemic venous congestion: a prospective cohort study. Corticosteroid treatment in COVID-19 patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: benefit from rational use - authors' reply.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1