Dataset Information

Are physical measures related to patient-centred outcomes in ARDS survivors?

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To inform selection of physical measures for studies of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) survivors within 12?months of ARDS. METHODS:Secondary analysis of data from 6-month survivors participating in a US multicentre prospective study (ARDSNet Long-Term Outcome Study, N=134) or a multisite prospective study in Baltimore, Maryland, USA (Improving Care of Acute Lung Injury Patients, N=99). Physical measures, assessed at 6-month follow-up, were categorised according to the WHO's International Classification of Disability and Health: body functions and structures, activity and participation. Patient-centred outcomes were evaluated at 6 and 12 months: survival, hospitalisation, alive at home status and health-related quality of life. Pearson correlation, linear and logistic regression models were used to quantify associations of physical measures with patient-centred outcomes. MAIN RESULTS:No 6-month body functions and structures measure demonstrated consistent association with 6-month or 12-month outcomes in multivariable regression. The 6?min walk test, an activity measure, was associated with 6-month Short-Form 36 (SF-36) physical component scores (PCS, ? range: 0.99 to 1.52, p<0.05). Participation measures (Functional Performance Inventory, FPI; Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, IADLs) were associated with SF-36 PCS (? range: FPI, 1.51-1.52; IADL, -1.88 to -1.32; all p<0.05) and Euro-QOL-5D utility score (? range: FPI, 2.00-3.67; IADL, -2.89 to -2.50; all p<0.01) at 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS:Participation measures better reflect patient's quality of life than measures of body functions and structures within 12?months of ARDS among 6-month survivors, and are recommended for inclusion as a core measure in future studies.

SUBMITTER: Chan KS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6888961 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Are physical measures related to patient-centred outcomes in ARDS survivors?

Chan Kitty S KS Aronson Friedman Lisa L Dinglas Victor D VD Hough Catherine L CL Shanholtz Carl C Ely E Wesley EW Morris Peter E PE Mendez-Tellez Pedro A PA Jackson James C JC Hopkins Ramona O RO Needham Dale M DM

Thorax 20170120 10

<h4>Objective</h4>To inform selection of physical measures for studies of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) survivors within 12 months of ARDS.<h4>Methods</h4>Secondary analysis of data from 6-month survivors participating in a US multicentre prospective study (ARDSNet Long-Term Outcome Study, N=134) or a multisite prospective study in Baltimore, Maryland, USA (Improving Care of Acute Lung Injury Patients, N=99). Physical measures, assessed at 6-month follow-up, were categorised accordi ...[more]

PMID: 28108621

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rationale: Increasingly, patients are surviving acute respiratory failure (ARF), prompting the need to better understand standardized outcome measures commonly used during ARF follow-up studies. Objectives: Investigate standardized outcome measures (patient-reported physical and mental health measures, and cognitive testing) compared with findings from semistructured, qualitative interviews. Methods: As part of two ARF multicenter follow-up studies, standardized outcome measures were obtained, followed by qualitative evaluation via an in-depth, semistructured interview conducted and coded by two independent researchers. Qualitative interviews revealed the following post-ARF survivorship themes: physical impairment; anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms; and cognitive impairment. Scores from standardized measures related to these themes were compared for ARF survivors reporting versus not reporting these themes in their qualitative interviews. Results: Of 59 invited ARF survivors, 48 (81%) completed both standardized outcome measures and qualitative interviews. Participants' median (interquartile range) age was 53 (43-64) years; 54% were female, and 88% were living independently before hospitalization. The two independent reviewers classifying the presence or absence of themes from the qualitative interviews had excellent agreement (κ = 0.80). There were significantly worse scores on standardized outcome measures for survivors reporting (vs. not reporting) physical and mental health impairments in their qualitative interviews. However, standardized cognitive test scores did not differ between patients reporting versus not reporting cognitive impairments in their qualitative interviews. Conclusions: These findings support the use of recommended, commonly used standardized outcome measures for physical and mental health impairments in ARF survivorship research. However, caution is needed in interpreting self-reported cognitive function compared with standardized cognitive testing.

Project description:BackgroundARDS may occur after either septic or nonseptic injuries. Sepsis is the major cause of ARDS, but little is known about the differences between sepsis-related and non-sepsis-related ARDS.MethodsA total of 2,786 patients with ARDS-predisposing conditions were enrolled consecutively into a prospective cohort, of which 736 patients developed ARDS. We defined sepsis-related ARDS as ARDS developing in patients with sepsis and non-sepsis-related ARDS as ARDS developing after nonseptic injuries, such as trauma, aspiration, and multiple transfusions. Patients with both septic and nonseptic risks were excluded from analysis.ResultsCompared with patients with non-sepsis-related ARDS (n = 62), patients with sepsis-related ARDS (n = 524) were more likely to be women and to have diabetes, less likely to have preceding surgery, and had longer pre-ICU hospital stays and higher APACHE III (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III) scores (median, 78 vs 65, P < .0001). There were no differences in lung injury score, blood pH, Pao(2)/Fio(2) ratio, and Paco(2) on ARDS diagnosis. However, patients with sepsis-related ARDS had significantly lower Pao(2)/Fio(2) ratios than patients with non-sepsis-related ARDS patients on ARDS day 3 (P = .018), day 7 (P = .004), and day 14 (P = .004) (repeated-measures analysis, P = .011). Compared with patients with non-sepsis-related ARDS, those with sepsis-related had a higher 60-day mortality (38.2% vs 22.6%; P = .016), a lower successful extubation rate (53.6% vs 72.6%; P = .005), and fewer ICU-free days (P = .0001) and ventilator-free days (P = .003). In multivariate analysis, age, APACHE III score, liver cirrhosis, metastatic cancer, admission serum bilirubin and glucose levels, and treatment with activated protein C were independently associated with 60-day ARDS mortality. After adjustment, sepsis-related ARDS was no longer associated with higher 60-day mortality (hazard ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.71-2.22).ConclusionSepsis-related ARDS has a higher overall disease severity, poorer recovery from lung injury, lower successful extubation rate, and higher mortality than non-sepsis-related ARDS. Worse clinical outcomes in sepsis-related ARDS appear to be driven by disease severity and comorbidities.

Project description:BackgroundAnaemia is a nearly universal complication of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been demonstrated to improve clinical outcomes and quality of life (QOL) in renal patients with anaemia. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used to evaluate the patient-centred impact of medical therapy. Here, we describe a systematic review of studies that evaluated patient-centred outcomes (PCOs) in renal patients undergoing anaemia treatment.MethodsWe conducted a search of Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsychINFO, and CINAHL databases for studies published until March 2018 that investigated an intervention to treat anaemia in renal patients and used at least one PROM. We also performed a quality assessment for all included studies. Statistical analyses characterized each study, PROMs used, the quality of PCO reporting, and the association between haematological outcomes and PCOs.ResultsOf the 3,533 studies identified in the database search, 21 met all eligibility criteria. Fourteen (67%) of the studies were randomized-controlled trials. Most studies (81%) investigated CKD patients, 14% investigated post-renal transplant patients and 5% assessed patients with heart disease on haemodialysis. The most common anaemia intervention, used in 95% of studies, was ESAs. Forty-three percent of studies utilized one PROM, most commonly the SF-36, a measure of QOL not specifically created for use in nephrology patients. About a third of studies selectively reported PROM subscales, rather than reporting all subscales. Notable biases among included studies included lack of blinding, selective outcome reporting, and lack of power estimates for PCOs. We did not find a statistically significant association between improvements in haemoglobin and QOL.ConclusionsFuture studies employing anaemia and nephrology-specific PROMs and conducted with greater rigour, standardization in the research methods, and reporting of PCOs in renal populations will improve understanding of PCOs in this patient group and hopefully improve patient outcomes and experiences.

Dataset Information

Are physical measures related to patient-centred outcomes in ARDS survivors?

Publications

Are physical measures related to patient-centred outcomes in ARDS survivors?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets