Dataset Information

Multimorbidity and Its Relationship With Long-Term Outcomes After Critical Care Discharge: A Prospective Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Survivors of critical illness have poor long-term outcomes with subsequent increases in health care utilization. Less is known about the interplay between multimorbidity and long-term outcomes.

Research question

How do baseline patient demographics impact mortality and health care utilization in the year after discharge from critical care?

Study design and methods

Using data from a prospectively collected cohort, we used propensity score matching to assess differences in outcomes between patients with a critical care encounter and patients admitted to the hospital without critical care. Long-term mortality was examined via nationally linked data as was hospital resource use in the year after hospital discharge. The cause of death was also examined.

Results

This analysis included 3,112 participants. There was no difference in long-term mortality between the critical care and hospital cohorts (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.90-1.32; P = .39). Prehospitalization emotional health issues (eg, clinical diagnosis of depression) were associated with increased long-term mortality (hazard ratio, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.14-1.96; P < .004). Health care utilization was different between the two cohorts in the year after discharge with the critical care cohort experiencing a 29% increased risk of hospital readmission (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.11-1.50; P = .001).

Interpretation

This national cohort study has demonstrated increased resource use for critical care survivors in the year after discharge but fails to replicate past findings of increased longer-term mortality. Multimorbidity, lifestyle factors, and socioeconomic status appear to influence long-term outcomes and should be the focus of future research.

SUBMITTER: McPeake J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9199363 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: This study aimed to understand the impact of a critical care admission on long-term outcomes, compared to other hospitalised patients without a critical care encounter. A secondary aim was to examine the interrelationship between emotional, physical, and social problems during recovery.Methods: We utilised data from the UK Biobank, an on-going, prospective population-based cohort study. We employed propensity score matching to assess differences in outcomes between patients with a critical care encounter and patients admitted to the hospital (first admission to hospital available) without critical care. Structural equation modelling was used to analyse emotional, physical and social outcomes following critical illness and the relationships between these health domains.Findings: Data from 1,618 patients were analysed. The median time to follow-up in the critical care cohort was 4427 days (IQR:788-6146) vs 4516 days (IQR: 811-6369) in the non-critical care, hospitalised cohort. Across the two time periods assessed (pre and post 2000), patients exposed to critical care were more likely to experience mental health issues such as depression (p < 0.01) and social isolation (p = 0.01) following discharge from hospital. The critical care cohort were also more likely to have social problems such as the requirement for government funded welfare support (p = 0.02). In the critical care cohort, social and emotional health were closely correlated (p < 0.001, 95% CI:0.33-0.54). The nature of physical problems changed over time; pre-2000 there was a significant difference between the critical and non-critical care in physical outcomes following discharge from hospital, however, there was no difference detected between the two cohorts post-2000.InterpretationThis cohort study has demonstrated that survivors of critical illness have different psycho-social outcomes to matched patients, hospitalised without a critical care encounter.FundingJM is funded by a THIS.Institute (University of Cambridge) Research Fellowship (PD-2019-02-16). AHL is part of the Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, funded by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12017/13) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU13).

Project description:IntroductionThe aim of the present prospective multicenter cohort study was to examine the prevalence of sleep disturbance and its relation to the patient's reported health-related quality of life after intensive care. We also assessed the possible underlying causes of sleep disturbance, including factors related to the critical illness.MethodsBetween August 2000 and November 2003 we included 1,625 consecutive patients older than 17 years of age admitted for more than 24 hours to combined medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs) at three hospitals in Sweden. Conventional intensive care variables were prospectively recorded in the unit database. Six months and 12 months after discharge from hospital, sleep disturbances and the health-related quality of life were evaluated using the Basic Nordic Sleep Questionnaire and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-form Health Survey, respectively. As a nonvalidated single-item assessment, the quality of sleep prior to the ICU period was measured. As a reference group, a random sample (n = 10,000) of the main intake area of the hospitals was used.ResultsThe prevalence of self-reported quality of sleep did not change from the pre-ICU period to the post-ICU period. Intensive care patients reported significantly more sleep disturbances than the reference group (P < 0.01). At both 6 and 12 months, the main factor that affected sleep in the former hospitalised patients with an ICU stay was concurrent disease. No effects were related to the ICU period, such as the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, the length of stay or the treatment diagnosis. There were minor correlations between the rate and extent of sleep disturbance and the health-related quality of life.ConclusionThere is little change in the long-term quality of sleep patterns among hospitalised patients with an ICU stay. This applies both to the comparison before and after critical care as well as between 6 and 12 months after the ICU stay. Furthermore, sleep disturbances for this group are common. Concurrent disease was found to be most important as an underlying cause, which emphasises that it is essential to include assessment of concurrent disease in sleep-related research in this group of patients.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether there is a relation between aortic diameter and morbidity and mortality in men screened for abdominal aortic aneurysm.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingHighland and Western Isles (a large, sparsely populated area of Scotland).Participants8146 men aged 65-74.Main outcome measuresMorbidity and mortality in relation to presence of abdominal aortic aneurysm and three categories of aortic diameter (≤ 24 mm, 25-29 mm, and ≥ 30 mm).ResultsWhen screened, 414 men (5.1%) had an aneurysm (diameter ≥ 30 mm), 669 (8.2%) an aortic diameter of 25-29 mm, and 7063 (86.7%) an aortic diameter of ≤ 24 mm. The cohort was followed up for a median of 7.4 (interquartile range 6.9-8.2) years. Mortality was significantly associated with aortic diameter: 512 (7.2%) men in the ≤ 24 mm group died compared with 69 (10.3%) in the 25-29 mm group and 73 (17.6%) in the ≥ 30 mm group. The mortality risk in men with an aneurysm or with an aorta measuring 25-29 mm was significantly higher than in men with an aorta of ≤ 24 mm. The increased mortality risk in the 25-29 mm group was reduced when taking confounders such as smoking and known heart disease into account. After adjustment, compared with men with an aortic diameter of ≤ 24 mm, the risk of hospital admission for cardiovascular disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was significantly higher in men with aneurysm and those with aortas measuring 25-29 mm. Men with an aneurysm also had an increased risk of hospital admission for cerebrovascular disease, atherosclerosis, peripheral arterial disease, and respiratory disease. In men with aortas measuring 25-29 mm, the risk of hospital admission with abdominal aortic aneurysm was significantly higher than in men with an aorta of ≤ 24 mm (adjusted hazard ratio 6.7, 99% confidence interval 3.4 to 13.2) and this increased risk became apparent two years after screening.ConclusionsMen with abdominal aortic aneurysm and those with aortic diameters measuring 25-29 mm have an increased risk of mortality and subsequent hospital admissions compared with men with an aorta diameter of ≤ 24 mm. Consideration should be given to control of risk factors and to rescreening men with aortas measuring 25-29 mm at index scanning.

Project description:BackgroundThe association between obesity, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and mortality in patients with incident stroke is not well established. We assessed the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and MACE in patients with incident stroke.MethodsThe population-based cohort study identified 30 702 individuals from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD GOLD) and Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) databases from the United Kingdom. Individuals were aged ≥18 years with incident stroke between 1-1-1998 and 31-12-2017, a BMI recorded within 24 months before incident stroke, and no prior history of MACE. BMI was categorized as underweight (<18.5 kg/m2 ), normal (18.5-24.9 kg/m2 ), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2 ), obesity class I (30.0-34.9 kg/m2 ), class II (35.0-39.9 kg/m2 ) and class III (≥40 kg/m2). MACE was defined as a composite of incident coronary heart disease, recurrent stroke, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), heart failure, and cardiovascular-related mortality. Multivariable Cox regression was used to assess differences in MACE risk between BMI categories.ResultsAt baseline, 1217 (4.0%) were underweight, 10 783 (35.1%) had a normal BMI, 10 979 (35.8%) had overweight, 5206 (17.0%) had obesity Class I, 1749 (5.7%) Class II, and 768 (2.5%) Class III. In multivariable analysis, higher BMI were associated with lower risk of subsequent MACE [overweight: HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99)]; PVD [overweight: 0.65 (0.49-0.85); obesity Class III: 0.19 (0.50-0.77)]; cardiovascular-related death [overweight: 0.80 (0.74-0.86); obesity Class I: 0.79 (0.71-0.88); Class II: 0.80 (0.67-0.96)]; and all-cause mortality [overweight: 0.75 (0.71-0.79); obesity Class I: 0.75 (0.70-0.81); Class II: 0.77 (0.68-0.86)] when compared to those with normal BMI. The results were similar irrespective of sex, diabetes mellitus, smoking or cancer at time of incident stroke.ConclusionsIn patients with incident stroke, overweight or obesity were associated with a more favourable prognosis for subsequent MACE, PVD, and mortality, irrespective of sex, diabetes mellitus, smoking, or cancer at baseline. As with other cohort studies, our study demonstrates an association. Randomized control trials should be considered to robustly evaluate the impact of weight management recommendations on subsequent cardiovascular outcomes in stroke survivors.

Project description:BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant (B.1.1.529) is highly transmissible, but disease severity appears to be reduced compared with previous variants such as alpha and delta. We investigated the risk of severe outcomes following infection in residents of long-term care facilities.MethodsWe did a prospective cohort study in residents of long-term care facilities in England who were tested regularly for SARS-CoV-2 between Sept 1, 2021, and Feb 1, 2022, and who were participants of the VIVALDI study. Residents were eligible for inclusion if they had a positive PCR or lateral flow device test during the study period, which could be linked to a National Health Service (NHS) number, enabling linkage to hospital admissions and mortality datasets. PCR or lateral flow device test results were linked to national hospital admission and mortality records using the NHS-number-based pseudo-identifier. We compared the risk of hospital admission (within 14 days following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test) or death (within 28 days) in residents who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the period shortly before omicron emerged (delta-dominant) and in the omicron-dominant period, adjusting for age, sex, primary vaccine course, past infection, and booster vaccination. Variants were confirmed by sequencing or spike-gene status in a subset of samples.Results795 233 tests were done in 333 long-term care facilities, of which 159 084 (20·0%) could not be linked to a pseudo-identifier and 138 012 (17·4%) were done in residents. Eight residents had two episodes of infection (>28 days apart) and in these cases the second episode was excluded from the analysis. 2264 residents in 259 long-term care facilities (median age 84·5 years, IQR 77·9-90·0) were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2, of whom 253 (11·2%) had a previous infection and 1468 (64·8%) had received a booster vaccination. About a third of participants were male. Risk of hospital admissions was markedly lower in the 1864 residents infected in the omicron-period (4·51%, 95% CI 3·65-5·55) than in the 400 residents infected in the pre-omicron period (10·50%, 7·87-13·94), as was risk of death (5·48% [4·52-6·64] vs 10·75% [8·09-14·22]). Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) also indicated a reduction in hospital admissions (0·64, 95% CI 0·41-1·00; p=0·051) and mortality (aHR 0·68, 0·44-1·04; p=0·076) in the omicron versus the pre-omicron period. Findings were similar in residents with a confirmed variant.InterpretationObserved reduced severity of the omicron variant compared with previous variants suggests that the wave of omicron infections is unlikely to lead to a major surge in severe disease in long-term care facility populations with high levels of vaccine coverage or natural immunity. Continued surveillance in this vulnerable population is important to protect residents from infection and monitor the public health effect of emerging variants.FundingUK Department of Health and Social Care.