Background The COVID-19 pandemic has led highly developed healthcare systems to the brink of collapse due to the large numbers of patients being admitted into hospitals. One of the potential prognostic indicators in patients with COVID-19 is frailty. The degree of frailty could be used to assist both the triage into intensive care, and decisions regarding treatment limitations. Our study sought to determine the interaction of frailty and age in elderly COVID-19 ICU patients. Methods A prospective multicentre study of COVID-19 patients ≥ 70 years admitted to intensive care in 138 ICUs from 28 countries was conducted. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Frailty was assessed using the clinical frailty scale. Additionally, comorbidities, management strategies and treatment limitations were recorded. Results The study included 1346 patients (28% female) with a median age of 75 years (IQR 72–78, range 70–96), 16.3% were older than 80 years, and 21% of the patients were frail. The overall survival at 30 days was 59% (95% CI 56–62), with 66% (63–69) in fit, 53% (47–61) in vulnerable and 41% (35–47) in frail patients (p < 0.001). In frail patients, there was no difference in 30-day survival between different age categories. Frailty was linked to an increased use of treatment limitations and less use of mechanical ventilation. In a model controlling for age, disease severity, sex, treatment limitations and comorbidities, frailty was independently associated with lower survival. Conclusion Frailty provides relevant prognostic information in elderly COVID-19 patients in addition to age and comorbidities. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04321265, registered 19 March 2020.

Background and purpose of study Transition from the intensive care unit to the hospital ward can be considered as a vulnerable period for patients as nursing care changes hands. How the transition is experienced by the ICU patient and the family is influenced by how it is organised, communicated and executed. The transition may positively or negatively affect patient recovery. Aim To explore the experiences of intensive care unit patients and their relatives during the transition to hospital ward in order to find ways of supporting them during the transition process. Methods Eligible participants were asked for participation from April to September 2016 from a mixed medical and surgical intensive care unit (Level II) at a university hospital. We conducted six semi‐structured interviews with former intensive care unit patients and four dyad interviews with patients and spouses. Data were analysed according to the methodology Interpretive Description with the aim to discover associations, relationships and patterns within the phenomenon. Results Our analysis revealed the following three themes: (1) Taking up the mantel (2) Adjusting to ‘being one in the crowd’ and (3) Integrated spouses became visitors. It was a change from an environment with high dependence to increasing independence and a shift from attention to loneliness. Focus moved from the bodily functions to basic activities of living. Spouses experienced that their position was reduced from integrated relatives in the intensive care unit to visitors of the hospital ward. Conclusions This article shows that it is important to mentally prepare patients and their family for transfer and a gradual withdrawal of intense nursing observation and monitoring. Discharge planning should begin early and involve spouses to a higher extent as they have a major role in the recovery process far beyond hospitalisation.

No abstract

Purpose The number of patients ≥ 80 years admitted into critical care is increasing. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) added another challenge for clinical decisions for both admission and limitation of life-sustaining treatments (LLST). We aimed to compare the characteristics and mortality of very old critically ill patients with or without COVID-19 with a focus on LLST. Methods Patients 80 years or older with acute respiratory failure were recruited from the VIP2 and COVIP studies. Baseline patient characteristics, interventions in intensive care unit (ICU) and outcomes (30-day survival) were recorded. COVID patients were matched to non-COVID patients based on the following factors: age (± 2 years), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (± 2 points), clinical frailty scale (± 1 point), gender and region on a 1:2 ratio. Specific ICU procedures and LLST were compared between the cohorts by means of cumulative incidence curves taking into account the competing risk of discharge and death. Results 693 COVID patients were compared to 1393 non-COVID patients. COVID patients were younger, less frail, less severely ill with lower SOFA score, but were treated more often with invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) and had a lower 30-day survival. 404 COVID patients could be matched to 666 non-COVID patients. For COVID patients, withholding and withdrawing of LST were more frequent than for non-COVID and the 30-day survival was almost half compared to non-COVID patients. Conclusion Very old COVID patients have a different trajectory than non-COVID patients. Whether this finding is due to a decision policy with more active treatment limitation or to an inherent higher risk of death due to COVID-19 is unclear. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00134-022-06642-z.

Introduction The transition process from the intensive care unit (ICU) to hospital ward may impact the illness trajectory and compromise the continuity of safe care for ICU survivors. ICU and ward nurses are involved with the transition and are responsible for the quality of the transitional care. Aim The aim was to explore ICU and ward nurses’ views on assignments in relation to patients’ transition between ICU and hospital ward. Methods We conducted a qualitative study with 20 semi‐structured interviews with ICU nurses and ward nurses and analysed data by content analysis. Setting A university hospital with 690 beds and an 11‐bed mixed medical/surgical ICU. Findings The overarching themes were (1) ‘Ritual of hand over’ with the categories: (a) ‘Ready, able and willing’, (b) ‘Transfer of responsibility’ and (c) ‘Nice to know versus need to know’ and (2) ‘From lifesaving care to rehabilitative care’ with the categories: (a) ‘Complex care needs persist’, (b) ‘Fight or flight mode’ and (c) ‘“Weaning” the family’. Nurses were highly focused on the ritual of the actual handover of the patient and discussed readiness as an indicator of quality and the feeling of passing on the responsibility. Nurses had different opinions on what useful knowledge was and thus necessary to communicate during handover. Although patients’ complex care needs may not have been resolved when exiting the ICU, ward nurses had to receive patients in a setting where nurses were mostly comfortable within their own specialty – this was worrying for both type of nurses. Patients could enter the ward very exhausted and weak or in ‘fight mode’ and demand rehabilitation at a pace the ward was not capable of delivering. ICU nurses encouraged families to be demanding after the ICU stay, and ward nurses asked them to trust them and steep back.

Purpose Critically ill old intensive care unit (ICU) patients suffering from Sars-CoV-2 disease (COVID-19) are at increased risk for adverse outcomes. This post hoc analysis investigates the association of the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) with the outcome in this vulnerable patient group. Methods The COVIP study is a prospective international observational study that recruited ICU patients ≥ 70 years admitted with COVID-19 (NCT04321265). Several parameters including ADL (ADL; 0 = disability, 6 = no disability), Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), SOFA score, intensive care treatment, ICU- and 3-month survival were recorded. A mixed-effects Weibull proportional hazard regression analyses for 3-month mortality adjusted for multiple confounders. Results This pre-specified analysis included 2359 patients with a documented ADL and CFS. Most patients evidenced independence in their daily living before hospital admission (80% with ADL = 6). Patients with no frailty and no disability showed the lowest, patients with frailty (CFS ≥ 5) and disability (ADL < 6) the highest 3-month mortality (52 vs. 78%, p < 0.001). ADL was independently associated with 3-month mortality (ADL as a continuous variable: aHR 0.88 (95% CI 0.82–0.94, p < 0.001). Being “disable” resulted in a significant increased risk for 3-month mortality (aHR 1.53 (95% CI 1.19–1.97, p 0.001) even after adjustment for multiple confounders. Conclusion Baseline Activities of Daily Living (ADL) on admission provides additional information for outcome prediction, although most critically ill old intensive care patients suffering from COVID-19 had no restriction in their ADL prior to ICU admission. Combining frailty and disability identifies a subgroup with particularly high mortality. Trial registration number: NCT04321265. Graphical Abstract

Background Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is a promising alternative to invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) with a particular importance amidst the shortage of intensive care unit (ICU) beds during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to evaluate the use of NIV in Europe and factors associated with outcomes of patients treated with NIV. Methods This is a substudy of COVIP study—an international prospective observational study enrolling patients aged ≥ 70 years with confirmed COVID-19 treated in ICU. We enrolled patients in 156 ICUs across 15 European countries between March 2020 and April 2021.The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Results Cohort included 3074 patients, most of whom were male (2197/3074, 71.4%) at the mean age of 75.7 years (SD 4.6). NIV frequency was 25.7% and varied from 1.1 to 62.0% between participating countries. Primary NIV failure, defined as need for endotracheal intubation or death within 30 days since ICU admission, occurred in 470/629 (74.7%) of patients. Factors associated with increased NIV failure risk were higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (OR 3.73, 95% CI 2.36–5.90) and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) on admission (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.06–2.00). Patients initially treated with NIV (n = 630) lived for 1.36 fewer days (95% CI − 2.27 to − 0.46 days) compared to primary IMV group (n = 1876). Conclusions Frequency of NIV use varies across European countries. Higher severity of illness and more severe frailty were associated with a risk of NIV failure among critically ill older adults with COVID-19. Primary IMV was associated with better outcomes than primary NIV. Clinical Trial RegistrationNCT04321265, registered 19 March 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov.

There is a mistake in the list of participating countries and ICUs listed in the Acknowledgement section. The Publisher apologizes for this mistake.Additionally, the correct full name of Alex Cornet is Alexander Daniel Cornet. The authors apologize for the mistake.