SummaryWe assessed the impact of a United Kingdom government‐recommended triage process, designed to guide the decision to admit patients to intensive care during an influenza pandemic, on patients in a teaching hospital intensive care unit. We found that applying the triage criteria to a current case‐mix would result in 116 of the 255 patients (46%) admitted during the study period being denied intensive care treatment they would have otherwise received, of which 45 (39%) survived to hospital discharge. In turn, 69% of those categorised as too ill to warrant admission according to the criteria survived. The sensitivity and specificity of the triage category at ICU admission predicting mortality was 0.29 and 0.84, respectively. If the need for intensive care beds is estimated to be 275 patients per week, the triage criteria would not exclude enough patients to prevent the need for further rationing. We conclude that the proposed triage tool failed adequately to prioritise patients who would benefit from intensive care.

Background Critical illness can have a long-term impact. A service evaluation was conducted in a hospital in the south west of Britain with an adult inter-connected general, surgical and neurological intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of the service evaluation was to generate knowledge on experiences of psychological and physical rehabilitation in intensive care, on other hospital wards and at home to inform the development of an Intensive Care follow up clinic. Method Data was collected from two sources. A week of ICU discharges was randomly selected, and a sample of 30 patients generated. All were sent information sheets and consent forms and offered telephone appointments. 12 participants took part in telephone interviews. The second source of participants was the ICU Expert by Experience group. Informed consent was gained with eight participants taking part. The data was analysed using thematic analysis, employing initial open coding to build a framework of emergent themes. A research group was formed to facilitate cross coding of extracts. Results The analysis identified three overarching themes: sense making difficulties; rehabilitation context; and sense of self. The theme of sense making difficulties had sub-themes of memory gaps, delirium, lack of information and anxiety. The theme of rehabilitation context had sub-themes of ICU environment, transitions, isolation and abandonment and valued support. Conclusion the process of sense making can be difficult, is filtered through contextual factors, and may influence sense of self. The results have been used to inform the development of an ICU follow up clinic.

Purpose Delirium is a neuropsychiatric disorder delineated by an acute change in cognition, attention, and consciousness. It is common, particularly in older adults, but poorly recognised. Frailty is the accumulation of deficits conferring an increased risk of adverse outcomes. We set out to determine how severity of frailty, as measured using the CFS, affected delirium rates, and recognition in hospitalised older people in the United Kingdom. Methods Adults over 65 years were included in an observational multi-centre audit across UK hospitals, two prospective rounds, and one retrospective note review. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), delirium status, and 30-day outcomes were recorded. Results The overall prevalence of delirium was 16.3% (483). Patients with delirium were more frail than patients without delirium (median CFS 6 vs 4). The risk of delirium was greater with increasing frailty [OR 2.9 (1.8–4.6) in CFS 4 vs 1–3; OR 12.4 (6.2–24.5) in CFS 8 vs 1–3]. Higher CFS was associated with reduced recognition of delirium (OR of 0.7 (0.3–1.9) in CFS 4 compared to 0.2 (0.1–0.7) in CFS 8). These risks were both independent of age and dementia. Conclusion We have demonstrated an incremental increase in risk of delirium with increasing frailty. This has important clinical implications, suggesting that frailty may provide a more nuanced measure of vulnerability to delirium and poor outcomes. However, the most frail patients are least likely to have their delirium diagnosed and there is a significant lack of research into the underlying pathophysiology of both of these common geriatric syndromes.

No abstract

No abstract