Outcomes after critical care admission in people with a learning disability.

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Journal of the Intensive Care Society Pub Date : 2024-12-02 DOI:10.1177/17511437241301922
Ben Messer, Emily Harrison, Alison Carter, Ian Clement, Holly Gillott, Ching Khai Ho, Thomas Ross, Nicholas Lane, Hilary Tedd
{"title":"Outcomes after critical care admission in people with a learning disability.","authors":"Ben Messer, Emily Harrison, Alison Carter, Ian Clement, Holly Gillott, Ching Khai Ho, Thomas Ross, Nicholas Lane, Hilary Tedd","doi":"10.1177/17511437241301922","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>People with learning disabilities experience worse healthcare outcomes than the general population. There is evidence that they are more likely to experience avoidable mortality and less likely to receive critical care interventions during an acute illness. Decisions regarding critical care admission or intervention must be based on evidence of whether a patient will receive lasting benefit from a critical care admission. We therefore investigated outcomes from critical care admissions in people with learning disabilities and compared them to general critical care patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>People with learning disabilities who were admitted to our critical care unit were identified via our coding department, from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) database and from our local electronic patient record. Mortality and length of stay outcomes for people with learning disabilities were recorded following critical care admission over a 5 years period and compared with the general critical care cohort over the same 5 years period. Longer term survival of patients with learning disabilities was also recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>297 critical care admissions in 176 people with learning disabilities were identified. The general critical care cohort included 6224 admissions in 4976 patients. The standardised mortality rate in people with learning disabilities admitted to critical care was 0.59 compared to the general critical care cohort which was 0.98. Mortality outcomes remained better in patients with learning disabilities compared to the general critical care cohort in invasively ventilated patients and in people with profound and multiple learning disability. Critical care length of stay was longer in people with learning disabilities. 12 month mortality was 14.8% in the learning disability cohort. By the end of the study, 23.9% of people with learning disabilities had died after a mean of 482 days following their first critical care admission. Patients who are currently still alive after having survived to hospital discharge following critical care admission have lived an average of 1129 days. After only 7.4% of critical care admissions in people with learning disabilities was there an increase in dependence on assistance in activities of daily living.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>We have shown that people with learning disabilities are more likely to survive following a critical care admission than general critical care patients. This is regardless of whether they were invasively ventilated or whether they had profound and multiple learning disabilities. Critical care admission and invasive ventilation are associated with good short and longer term mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":39161,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","volume":" ","pages":"17511437241301922"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11613150/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437241301922","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: People with learning disabilities experience worse healthcare outcomes than the general population. There is evidence that they are more likely to experience avoidable mortality and less likely to receive critical care interventions during an acute illness. Decisions regarding critical care admission or intervention must be based on evidence of whether a patient will receive lasting benefit from a critical care admission. We therefore investigated outcomes from critical care admissions in people with learning disabilities and compared them to general critical care patients.

Methods: People with learning disabilities who were admitted to our critical care unit were identified via our coding department, from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) database and from our local electronic patient record. Mortality and length of stay outcomes for people with learning disabilities were recorded following critical care admission over a 5 years period and compared with the general critical care cohort over the same 5 years period. Longer term survival of patients with learning disabilities was also recorded.

Results: 297 critical care admissions in 176 people with learning disabilities were identified. The general critical care cohort included 6224 admissions in 4976 patients. The standardised mortality rate in people with learning disabilities admitted to critical care was 0.59 compared to the general critical care cohort which was 0.98. Mortality outcomes remained better in patients with learning disabilities compared to the general critical care cohort in invasively ventilated patients and in people with profound and multiple learning disability. Critical care length of stay was longer in people with learning disabilities. 12 month mortality was 14.8% in the learning disability cohort. By the end of the study, 23.9% of people with learning disabilities had died after a mean of 482 days following their first critical care admission. Patients who are currently still alive after having survived to hospital discharge following critical care admission have lived an average of 1129 days. After only 7.4% of critical care admissions in people with learning disabilities was there an increase in dependence on assistance in activities of daily living.

Discussion: We have shown that people with learning disabilities are more likely to survive following a critical care admission than general critical care patients. This is regardless of whether they were invasively ventilated or whether they had profound and multiple learning disabilities. Critical care admission and invasive ventilation are associated with good short and longer term mortality.

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
学习障碍患者重症监护入院后的结局。
简介:与一般人群相比,学习障碍患者的医疗保健结果更差。有证据表明,他们更有可能经历可避免的死亡,在急性疾病期间接受重症监护干预的可能性更小。关于重症监护住院或干预的决定必须基于患者是否能从重症监护住院中获得持久益处的证据。因此,我们调查了学习障碍患者重症监护入院的结果,并将其与普通重症监护患者进行了比较。方法:通过我们的编码部门,从重症监护国家审计和研究中心(ICNARC)数据库和我们当地的电子病历中识别入我们重症监护病房的学习障碍患者。在5年的重症监护期间,记录了学习障碍患者的死亡率和住院时间,并与同样5年的普通重症监护队列进行了比较。学习障碍患者的长期生存率也被记录下来。结果:176例学习障碍患者中有297例进入重症监护病房。一般重症监护队列包括4976例患者中的6224例入院患者。接受重症监护的学习障碍患者的标准化死亡率为0.59,而普通重症监护队列的标准化死亡率为0.98。与一般重症监护队列中的有创通气患者和重度和多重学习障碍患者相比,学习障碍患者的死亡率结果仍然更好。学习障碍患者的重症监护时间更长。学习障碍组12个月死亡率为14.8%。到研究结束时,23.9%的学习障碍患者在首次重症监护后平均482天后死亡。在重症监护入院后存活至出院后目前仍存活的患者平均寿命为1129天。在接受重症监护的学习障碍患者中,只有7.4%的人在日常生活活动中对援助的依赖有所增加。讨论:我们已经表明,学习障碍患者在重症监护住院后比一般重症监护患者更有可能存活。不管他们是否有侵入性通气,也不管他们是否有严重的和多重的学习障碍。重症监护住院和有创通气与良好的短期和长期死亡率相关。
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
Journal of the Intensive Care Society
Journal of the Intensive Care Society Nursing-Critical Care Nursing
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Intensive Care Society (JICS) is an international, peer-reviewed journal that strives to disseminate clinically and scientifically relevant peer-reviewed research, evaluation, experience and opinion to all staff working in the field of intensive care medicine. Our aim is to inform clinicians on the provision of best practice and provide direction for innovative scientific research in what is one of the broadest and most multi-disciplinary healthcare specialties. While original articles and systematic reviews lie at the heart of the Journal, we also value and recognise the need for opinion articles, case reports and correspondence to guide clinically and scientifically important areas in which conclusive evidence is lacking. The style of the Journal is based on its founding mission statement to ‘instruct, inform and entertain by encompassing the best aspects of both tabloid and broadsheet''.
期刊最新文献
Predicting risk of maternal critical care admission in Scotland: Development of a risk prediction model. Management of traumatic brain injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome-What evidence exists? A scoping review. Psychological impact of an intensive care admission for COVID-19 on patients in the United Kingdom. Exploring perspectives of supporting the process of dying, death and bereavement among critical care staff: A multidisciplinary, qualitative approach. Factors to consider when designing post-hospital interventions to support critical illness recovery: Systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.
×
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