Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis during Invasive Mechanical Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Whether proton-pump inhibitors are beneficial or harmful for stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients undergoing invasive ventilation is unclear. METHODS: In this international, randomized trial, we assigned critically ill adults who were undergoing invasive ventilation to receive intravenous pantoprazole (at a dose of 40 mg daily) or matching placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU) at 90 days, and the primary safety outcome was death from any cause at 90 days. Multiplicity-adjusted key secondary outcomes were ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, and patient-important bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 4821 patients underwent randomization in 68 ICUs. Clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 25 of 2385 patients (1.0%) receiving pantoprazole and in 84 of 2377 patients (3.5%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.47; P<0.001). At 90 days, death was reported in 696 of 2390 patients (29.1%) in the pantoprazole group and in 734 of 2379 patients (30.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.04; P = 0.25). Patient-important bleeding was reduced with pantoprazole; all other key secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing invasive ventilation, pantoprazole resulted in a significantly lower risk of clinically important upper gastrointestinal bleeding than placebo, with no significant effect on mortality. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; REVISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03374800.).

Comparison of energy intake in critical illness survivors, general medical patients, and healthy volunteers: A descriptive cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU) survivors have reduced oral intake; it is unknown whether intake and associated barriers are unique to this group. OBJECTIVE: To quantify energy intake and potential barriers in ICU survivors compared with general medical (GM) patients and healthy volunteers. DESIGN: A descriptive cohort study in ICU survivors, GM patients, and healthy volunteers. Following an overnight fast, participants consumed a 200 ml test-meal (213 kcal) and 180 min later an ad libitum meal to measure energy intake (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes; taste recognition, nutrition-impacting symptoms, malnutrition, and quality of life (QoL). Data are mean ± SD, median (interquartile range [IQR]) or number [percentage]). RESULTS: Twelve ICU survivors (57 ± 17 years, BMI: 30 ± 6), eight GM patients (69 ± 19 years, BMI: 30 ± 6), and 25 healthy volunteers (58 ± 27 years, BMI: 25 ± 4) were included. Recruitment ceased early because of slow recruitment and SARS-CoV-2. Energy intake was lower in both patient groups than in health (ICU: 289 [288, 809], GM: 426 [336, 592], health: 815 [654, 1165] kcal). Loss of appetite was most common (ICU: 78%, GM: 67%). For ICU survivors, GM patients and healthy volunteers, respectively, severe malnutrition prevalence; 40%, 14%, and 0%; taste identification; 8.5 [7.0, 11.0], 8.5 [7.0, 9.5], and 8.0 [6.0, 11.0]; and QoL; 60 [40-65], 50 [31-55], and 90 [81-95] out of 100. CONCLUSIONS: Energy intake at a buffet meal is lower in hospital patients than in healthy volunteers but similar between ICU survivors and GM patients. Appetite loss potentially contributes to reduced energy intake.

Observed differences in nutrition management at two time points spanning a decade in critically ill trauma patients with and without head injury.

BACKGROUND: Nutritional needs of trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit may differ from general critically ill patients, but most current evidence is based on large clinical trials recruiting mixed populations. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate nutrition practices at two time points that span a decade in trauma patients with and without head injury. METHODS: This observational study recruited adult trauma patients receiving mechanical ventilation and artificial nutrition from a single-centre intensive care unit between February 2005 to December 2006 (cohort 1), and December 2018 to September 2020 (cohort 2). Patients were categorised into head injury and non-head injury subgroups. Data regarding energy and protein prescription and delivery were collected. Data are presented as median [interquartile range]. Wilcoxon rank-sum test assessed the differences between cohorts and subgroups, with a P value ≤ 0.05. The protocol was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (Trial ID: ACTRN12618001816246). RESULTS: Cohort 1 included 109 patients, and 112 patients were included in cohort 2 (age: 46 ± 19 vs 50 ± 19 y; 80 vs 79% M). Overall, nutrition practice did not differ between head-injured and non-head-injured subgroups (all P > 0.05). Energy prescription and delivery decreased from time point one to time point two, regardless of subgroup (Prescription: 9824 [8820-10 581] vs 8318 [7694-9071] kJ; Delivery: 6138 [5130-7188] vs 4715 [3059-5996] kJ; all P < 0.05). Protein prescription did not change from time point one to time point two. Although protein delivery remained constant from time point one to time point two in the head injury group, protein delivery reduced in the non-head injury subgroup (70 [56-82] vs 45 [26-64] g/d, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In this single-centre study, energy prescription and delivery in critically ill trauma patients reduced from time point one to time point two. Protein prescription did not change, but protein delivery reduced from time point one to time point two in non-head injury patients. Reasons for these differing trajectories require exploration. STUDY REGISTRATION: Trial registered at www.anzctr.org.au. TRIAL ID: ACTRN12618001816246.

REVISE: Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU: a randomised trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) Trial aims to determine the impact of the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole compared with placebo on clinically important upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU), 90-day mortality and other endpoints in critically ill adults. The objective of this report is to describe the rationale, methodology, ethics and management of REVISE. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: REVISE is an international, randomised, concealed, stratified, blinded parallel-group individual patient trial being conducted in ICUs in Canada, Australia, Saudi Arabia, UK, US, Kuwait, Pakistan and Brazil. Patients≥18 years old expected to remain invasively mechanically ventilated beyond the calendar day after enrolment are being randomised to either 40 mg pantoprazole intravenously or an identical placebo daily while mechanically ventilated in the ICU. The primary efficacy outcome is clinically important upper GI bleeding within 90 days of randomisation. The primary safety outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes include rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, new renal replacement therapy, ICU and hospital mortality, and patient-important GI bleeding. Tertiary outcomes are total red blood cells transfused, peak serum creatinine level in the ICU, and duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital stay. The sample size is 4800 patients; one interim analysis was conducted after 2400 patients had complete 90-day follow-up; the Data Monitoring Committee recommended continuing the trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All participating centres receive research ethics approval before initiation by hospital, region or country, including, but not limited to - Australia: Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee and Mater Misericordiae Ltd Human Research Ethics Committee; Brazil: Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa; Canada: Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board; Kuwait: Ministry of Health Standing Committee for Coordination of Health and Medical Research; Pakistan: Maroof Institutional Review Board; Saudi Arabia: Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs Institutional Review Board: United Kingdom: Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee; United States: Institutional Review Board of the Nebraska Medical Centre. The results of this trial will inform clinical practice and guidelines worldwide. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03374800.

Study protocol for TARGET protein: The effect of augmented administration of enteral protein to critically ill adults on clinical outcomes: A cluster randomised, cross-sectional, double cross-over, clinical trial.

Background: It is unknown whether increasing dietary protein to 1.2-2.0 g/kg/day as recommended in international guidelines compared to current practice improves outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The TARGET Protein trial will evaluate this. Objective: To describe the study protocol for the TARGET Protein trial. Design setting and participants: TARGET Protein is a cluster randomised, cross-sectional, double cross-over, pragmatic clinical trial undertaken in eight ICUs in Australia and New Zealand. Each ICU will be randomised to use one of two trial enteral formulae for three months before crossing over to the other formula, which is then repeated, with enrolment continuing at each ICU for 12 months. All patients aged ≥16 years in their index ICU admission commencing enteral nutrition will be eligible for inclusion. Eligible patients will receive the trial enteral formula to which their ICU is allocated. The two trial enteral formulae are isocaloric with a difference in protein dose: intervention 100g/1000 ml and comparator 63g/1000 ml. Staggered recruitment commenced in May 2022. Main outcomes measures: The primary outcome is days free of the index hospital and alive at day 90. Secondary outcomes include days free of the index hospital at day 90 in survivors, alive at day 90, duration of invasive ventilation, ICU and hospital length of stay, incidence of tracheostomy insertion, renal replacement therapy, and discharge destination. Conclusion: TARGET Protein aims to determine whether augmented enteral protein delivery reduces days free of the index hospital and alive at day 90. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621001484831).

Inter-relationships between gastric emptying and glycaemia: Implications for clinical practice.

Gastric emptying (GE) exhibits a wide inter-individual variation and is a major determinant of postprandial glycaemia in health and diabetes; the rise in blood glucose following oral carbohydrate is greater when GE is relatively more rapid and more sustained when glucose tolerance is impaired. Conversely, GE is influenced by the acute glycaemic environment acute hyperglycaemia slows, while acute hypoglycaemia accelerates it. Delayed GE (gastroparesis) occurs frequently in diabetes and critical illness. In diabetes, this poses challenges for management, particularly in hospitalised individuals and/or those using insulin. In critical illness it compromises the delivery of nutrition and increases the risk of regurgitation and aspiration with consequent lung dysfunction and ventilator dependence. Substantial advances in knowledge relating to GE, which is now recognised as a major determinant of the magnitude of the rise in blood glucose after a meal in both health and diabetes and, the impact of acute glycaemic environment on the rate of GE have been made and the use of gut-based therapies such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, which may profoundly impact GE, in the management of type 2 diabetes, has become commonplace. This necessitates an increased understanding of the complex inter-relationships of GE with glycaemia, its implications in hospitalised patients and the relevance of dysglycaemia and its management, particularly in critical illness. Current approaches to management of gastroparesis to achieve more personalised diabetes care, relevant to clinical practice, is detailed. Further studies focusing on the interactions of medications affecting GE and the glycaemic environment in hospitalised patients, are required.

Muscle size, strength, and physical function in response to augmented calorie delivery: A TARGET sub-study.

PURPOSE: Augmented calories may attenuate muscle loss experienced in critical illness. This exploratory sub-study assessed the effect of augmented calorie delivery on muscle mass, strength, and function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in The Augmented versus Routine approach to Giving Energy Trial (TARGET) randomised to 1.5 kcal/ml or 1.0 kcal/ml enteral formulae at a single-centre were included. Ultrasound-derived muscle layer thickness (MLT) at quadriceps, forearm and mid-upper arm, and handgrip strength, were measured weekly from baseline to hospital discharge, and 3- and 6-months. Physical function was assessed at 3- and 6-months using the 'get up and go' and 6-min walk tests. Data are mean ± SD. RESULTS: Eighty patients were recruited (1.5 kcal: n = 38, 58 ± 14y, 60%M, APACHE II 20 ± 7; 1.0 kcal: n = 42, 54 ± 18y, 66%M, APACHE II 22 ± 10). The 1.5 kcal/ml group received more calories with no difference in quadriceps MLT at any timepoint including ICU discharge (primary outcome) (2.90 ± 1.27 vs 2.39 ± 1.06 cm; P = 0.141). Relationships were similar for all MLT measures, handgrip strength, and 6-min walk test. Patients in the 1.5 kcal/ml group had improved 'get up and go' test at 3-months (6.66 ± 1.33 vs. 9.11 ± 2.94 s; P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: Augmented calorie delivery may not attenuate muscle loss or recovery of strength or function 6-months post-ICU, but this requires exploration in a larger trial.

Higher versus lower enteral calorie delivery and gastrointestinal dysfunction in critical illness: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In critical illness, enteral nutrition (EN) is frequently limited by gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine relationships between enteral calorie delivery and GI dysfunction in critically ill adults. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMCARE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases were searched from 1 January 2000 to 11 August 2021 to identify parallel group randomised controlled trials of an EN intervention that resulted in a significant difference in calorie delivery between groups and reported at least one outcome relating to GI dysfunction. Study groups were categorised as 'higher' or 'lower' calorie delivery and data were extracted on study interventions, GI dysfunction and clinical outcomes. Extracted data were aggregated using a random effects model and presented as risk ratio with 95% confidence intervals. A P-value <0.05 was considered significant. The risk of publication bias was assessed graphically using a funnel plot. RESULTS: From 13 studies involving 6824 patients the mean calorie delivery in the higher calorie group was 1673 ± 468 kcal/day compared to 1121 ± 312 kcal/day in the lower calorie group. The higher calorie group had an increased risk of a large (any volume ≥300 ml) gastric residual volume (GRV) (RR 1.40; 95% CI 1.09, 1.80; P = 0.009) and prokinetic administration (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.11, 1.27; P < 0.00001). There were no between group differences in the presence of vomiting/regurgitation (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.58, 1.49; P = 0.76), diarrhoea (RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.93, 1.35; P = 0.22) or abdominal distension (RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.49, 1.04; P = 0.08). There was no evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSION: Higher calorie delivery is associated with increased rates of GRV≥300 ml and prokinetic administration, but not vomiting/regurgitation, diarrhoea or abdominal distension. OTHER: No funding was received for the conduct of this systematic review and meta-analysis. The protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021268876).

Methodological Rigor and Transparency in Clinical Practice Guidelines for Nutrition Care in Critically Ill Adults: A Systematic Review Using the AGREE II and AGREE-REX Tools.

Background: To evaluate the methodological quality of (1) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that inform nutrition care in critically ill adults using the AGREE II tool and (2) CPG recommendations for determining energy expenditure using the AGREE-REX tool. Methods: CPGs by a professional society or academic group, intended to guide nutrition care in critically ill adults, that used a systematic literature search and rated the evidence were included. Four databases and grey literature were searched from January 2011 to 19 January 2022. Five investigators assessed the methodological quality of CPGs and recommendations specific to energy expenditure determination. Scaled domain scores were calculated for AGREE II and a scaled total score for AGREE-REX. Data are presented as medians (interquartile range). Results: Eleven CPGs were included. Highest scoring domains for AGREE II were clarity of presentation (82% [76-87%]) and scope and purpose (78% [66-83%]). Lowest scoring domains were applicability (37% [32-42%]) and stakeholder involvement (46% [33-51%]). Eight (73%) CPGs provided recommendations relating to energy expenditure determination; scores were low overall (37% [36-40%]) and across individual domains. Conclusions: Nutrition CPGs for critically ill patients are developed using systematic methods but lack engagement with key stakeholders and guidance to support application. The quality of energy expenditure determination recommendations is low.

Muscle Protein Synthesis after Protein Administration in Critical Illness.

Rationale: Dietary protein may attenuate the muscle atrophy experienced by patients in the ICU, yet protein handling is poorly understood. Objectives: To quantify protein digestion and amino acid absorption and fasting and postprandial myofibrillar protein synthesis during critical illness. Methods: Fifteen mechanically ventilated adults (12 male; aged 50 ± 17 yr; body mass index, 27 ± 5 kg⋅m-2) and 10 healthy control subjects (6 male; 54 ± 23 yr; body mass index, 27 ± 4 kg⋅m-2) received a primed intravenous L-[ring-2H5]-phenylalanine, L-[3,5-2H2]-tyrosine, and L-[1-13C]-leucine infusion over 9.5 hours and a duodenal bolus of intrinsically labeled (L-[1-13C]-phenylalanine and L-[1-13C]-leucine) intact milk protein (20 g protein) over 60 minutes. Arterial blood and muscle samples were taken at baseline (fasting) and for 6 hours following duodenal protein administration. Data are mean ± SD, analyzed with two-way repeated measures ANOVA and independent samples t test. Measurements and Main Results: Fasting myofibrillar protein synthesis rates did not differ between ICU patients and healthy control subjects (0.023 ± 0.013% h-1 vs. 0.034 ± 0.016% h-1; P = 0.077). After protein administration, plasma amino acid availability did not differ between groups (ICU patients, 54.2 ± 9.1%, vs. healthy control subjects, 61.8 ± 13.1%; P = 0.12), and myofibrillar protein synthesis rates increased in both groups (0.028 ± 0.010% h-1 vs. 0.043 ± 0.018% h-1; main time effect P = 0.046; P-interaction = 0.584) with lower rates in ICU patients than in healthy control subjects (main group effect P = 0.001). Incorporation of protein-derived phenylalanine into myofibrillar protein was ∼60% lower in ICU patients (0.007 ± 0.007 mol percent excess vs. 0.017 ± 0.009 mol percent excess; P = 0.007). Conclusions: The capacity for critically ill patients to use ingested protein for muscle protein synthesis is markedly blunted despite relatively normal protein digestion and amino acid absorption.

Gastrointestinal dysfunction during enteral nutrition delivery in intensive care unit (ICU) patients: Risk factors, natural history, and clinical implications. A post-hoc analysis of The Augmented versus Routine approach to Giving Energy Trial (TARGET).

BACKGROUND: Slow gastric emptying occurs frequently during critical illness and is roughly quantified at bedside by large gastric residual volumes (GRVs). A previously published trial (The Augmented versus Routine approach to Giving Energy Trial; TARGET) reported larger GRVs with energy-dense (1.5 kcal/mL) compared with standard (1.0 kcal/mL) enteral nutrition (EN), warranting further exploration. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence, risk factors, duration, and timing of large GRVs (≥250 mL) and its relation to clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated adults. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of TARGET data in patients with ≥1 GRV recorded. Data are n (%) or median [IQR]. RESULTS: Of 3876 included patients, 1777 (46%) had ≥1 GRV ≥250 mL, which was more common in males (50 compared with 39%; P < 0.001) and in patients receiving energy-dense compared with standard EN (52 compared with 40%; RR = 1.27 (95% CI: 1.19, 1.36); P < 0.001) in whom it also lasted longer (1 [0-2] compared with 0 [0-1] d; P < 0.001), with no difference in time of onset after EN initiation (day 1 [0-2] compared with 1 [0-2]; P = 0.970). Patients with GRV ≥250 mL were more likely to have the following: vasopressor administration (88 compared with 76%; RR = 1.15 [1.12, 1.19]; P < 0.001), positive blood cultures (16 compared with 8%; RR = 1.92 [1.60, 2.31]; P < 0.001), intravenous antimicrobials (88 compared with 81%; RR = 1.09 [1.06, 1.12]; P < 0.001), and prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay (ICU-free days to day 28; 12.9 [0.0-21.0] compared with 20.0 [3.9-24.0]; P < 0.001), hospital stay (hospital-free days to day 28: 0.0 [0.0-12.0] compared with 7.0 [0.0-17.6] d; P < 0.001), ventilatory support (ventilator-free days to day 28: 16.0 [0.0-23.0] compared with 22.0 [8.0-25.0]; P < 0.001), and a higher 90-d mortality (29 compared with 23%; adjusted: RR = 1.17 [1.05, 1.30]; P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Large GRVs were more common in males and those receiving energy-dense formulae, occurred early and were short-lived, and were associated with a number of negative clinical sequelae, including increased mortality, even when adjusted for illness severity. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02306746.

Protocol summary and statistical analysis plan for Intensive Nutrition Therapy comparEd to usual care iN criTically ill adults (INTENT): a phase II randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: It is plausible that a longer duration of nutrition intervention may have a greater impact on clinical and patient-centred outcomes. The Intensive Nutrition care Therapy comparEd to usual care iN criTically ill adults (INTENT) trial will determine if a whole hospital nutrition intervention is feasible and will deliver more total energy compared with usual care in critically ill patients with at least one organ system failure. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a prospective, multicentre, unblinded, parallel-group, phase II randomised controlled trial (RCT) conducted in 23 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Mechanically ventilated critically ill adult patients with at least one organ failure who have been in intensive care unit (ICU) for 72-120 hours and meet all of the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria will be randomised to receive either intensive or usual nutrition care. INTENT started recruitment in October 2018 and a sample size of 240 participants is anticipated to be recruited in 2022. The study period is from randomisation to hospital discharge or study day 28, whichever occurs first, and the primary outcome is daily energy delivery from nutrition therapy. Secondary outcomes include daily energy and protein delivery during ICU and in the post-ICU period, duration of ventilation, ventilator-free days, total bloodstream infection rate and length of hospital stay. All other outcomes are considered tertiary and results will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been received in Australia (Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee (HREC/18/Alfred/101) and Human Research Ethics Committee of the Northern Territory Department of Health (2019-3372)) and New Zealand (Northern A Health and Disability Ethics Committee (18/NTA/222). Results will be disseminated in an international peer-reviewed journal(s), at scientific meetings and via social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03292237.

Corticosteroid-Binding Globulin Deficiency Independently Predicts Mortality in Septic Shock.

CONTEXT: Hydrocortisone administration in septic shock remains controversial. Corticosteroid-binding globulin (CBG) transports cortisol to inflammatory sites and is depleted in septic shock. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether severely deficient serum CBG < 200 nmol/L (reference range 269-641 nmol/L) independently predicts septic shock mortality. METHODS: A prospective observational study in patients with septic shock. Patients were categorized into 2 groups: mean plasma CBG concentrations <200 nmol/L and ≥200 nmol/L (day 1/2), with additional categorization by nadir CBG. Primary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Secondary outcomes were 28- and 90-day mortality, norepinephrine requirements, renal replacement therapy, and clinician-instituted hydrocortisone. RESULTS: 135 patients were included. Mortality rates in ICU were higher in the CBG < 200 nmol/L vs the CBG ≥ 200 nmol/L group: 32.4% vs 13.9% [odds ratio (OR) 2.97 (95% CI 1.19, 7.41); P = 0.02] with 28-day mortality OR 2.25 (95% CI 0.99, 5.11) and 90-day mortality OR 2.21 (95% CI 0.99, 4.91). Multivariate analysis revealed 4 factors independently associated with ICU mortality: CBG < 200 nmol/L (adjusted OR 3.23, 95% CI 1.06, 9.88), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II > 25 (adjusted OR 3.58, 95% CI 1.20, 10.68), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) liver score (adjusted OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.04, 3.72), and renal replacement therapy (adjusted OR 6.59, 95% CI 2.17, 20.01). Nadir CBG levels were associated with higher SOFA cardiovascular scores and norepinephrine total dose (µg; P < 0.01) and duration (days; P < 0.01). Plasma cortisol concentrations and hydrocortisone administration did not relate to ICU mortality. CONCLUSION: Septic shock patients with CBG < 200 nmol/L had higher norepinephrine requirements and 3.2-fold higher ICU mortality. CBG concentration was the only directly reversible independent mortality risk factor.

The use of smartphone-derived location data to evaluate participation following critical illness: A pilot observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Disability is common following critical illness, impacting the quality of life of survivors, and is difficult to measure. 'Participation' can be quantified as involvement in life outside of their home requiring movement from their home to other locations. Participation restriction is a key element of disability, and following critical illness, participation may be diminished. It may be possible to quantify this change using pre-existing smartphone data. OBJECTIVES: The feasibility of extracting location data from smartphones of survivors of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and assessing participation, using location-based outcomes, during recovery from critical illness was evaluated. METHODS: Fifty consecutively admitted, consenting adult survivors of non-elective admission to ICU of greater than 48-h duration were recruited to a prospective observational cohort study where they were followed up at 3 and 6 months following discharge. The feasibility of extracting location data from survivors' smartphones and creating location-derived outcomes assessing participation was investigated over three 28-d study periods: pre-ICU admission and at 3 and 6 months following discharge. The following were calculated: time spent at home; the number of destinations visited; linear distance travelled; and two 'activity spaces', a minimum convex polygon and standard deviation ellipse. RESULTS: Results are median [interquartile range] or n (%). The number of successful extractions was 9/50 (18%), 12/39 (31%), and 13/33 (39%); the percentage of time spent at home was 61 [56-68]%, 77 [66-87]%, and 67 [58-77]% (P = 0.16); the number of destinations visited was 34 [18-64], 38 [22-63], and 65 [46-88] (P = 0.02); linear distance travelled was 367 [56-788], 251 [114-323], and 747 [326-933] km over 28 d (P = 0.02), pre-ICU admission and at 3 and 6 months following ICU discharge, respectively. Activity spaces were successfully created. CONCLUSION: Limited smartphone ownership, missing data, and time-consuming data extraction limit current implementation of mass extraction of location data from patients' smartphones to aid prognostication or measure outcomes. The number of journeys taken and the linear distance travelled increased between 3 and 6 months, suggesting participation may improve over time.

Assessment of physiological barriers to nutrition following critical illness.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Nutrition may be important for recovery from critical illness. Gastrointestinal dysfunction is a key barrier to nutrition delivery in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and metabolic rate is elevated exacerbating nutritional deficits. Whether these factors persist following ICU discharge is unknown. We assessed whether delayed gastric emptying (GE) and impaired glucose absorption persist post-ICU discharge. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted in mechanically ventilated adults at 3 time-points: in ICU (V1); on the post-ICU ward (V2); and 3-months after ICU discharge (V3); and compared to age-matched healthy volunteers. On each visit, all participants received a test-meal containing 100 ml of 1 kcal/ml liquid nutrient, labelled with 0.1 g 13C-octanoic acid and 3 g 3-O-Methyl-glucose (3-OMG), and breath and blood samples were collected over 240min to quantify GE (gastric emptying coefficient (GEC)), and glucose absorption (3-OMG concentration; area under the curve (AUC)). Data are mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM) and differences shown with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). RESULTS: Twenty-six critically ill patients completed V1 (M:F 20:6; 62.0 ± 2.9 y; BMI 29.8 ± 1.2 kg/m2; APACHE II 19.7 ± 1.9), 15 completed V2 and eight completed V3; and were compared to 10 healthy volunteers (M:F 6:4; 60.5 ± 7.5 y; BMI 26.0 ± 1.0 kg/m2). GE was significantly slower on V1 compared to health (GEC difference: -0.96 (95%CI -1.61, -0.31); and compared to V2 (-0.73 (-1.16, -0.31) and V3 (-1.03 (-1.47, -0.59). GE at V2 and V3 were not different to that in health (V2: -0.23 (-0.61, 0.14); V3: 0.10 (-0.27, 0.46)). GEC: V1: 2.64 ± 0.19; V2: 3.37 ± 0.12; V3: 3.67 ± 0.10; health: 3.60 ± 0.13. Glucose absorption (3-OMG AUC0-240) was impaired on V1 compared to V2 (-37.9 (-64.2, -11.6)), and faster on V3 than in health (21.8 (0.14, 43.4) but absorption at V2 and V3 did not differ from health. Intestinal glucose absorption: V1: 63.8 ± 10.4; V2: 101.7 ± 7.0; V3: 111.9 ± 9.7; health: 90.7 ± 3.8. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that delayed GE and impaired intestinal glucose absorption recovers rapidly post-ICU. This requires further confirmation in a larger population. The REINSTATE trial was prospectively registered at www.anzctr.org.au. TRIAL ID: ACTRN12618000370202.

Mixed-mode versus paper surveys for patient-reported outcomes after critical illness: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the response rate to a mixed-mode survey using email compared with that to a paper survey in survivors of critical illness. DESIGN: This is a prospective randomised controlled trial. SETTING: The study was conducted at a single-centre quaternary intensive care unit (ICU) in Adelaide, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Study participants were patients admitted to the ICU for ≥48 h and discharged from the hospital. INTERVENTIONS: The participants were randomised to receive a survey by paper (via mail) or via online (via email, or if a non-email user, via a letter with a website address). Patients who did not respond to the initial survey received a reminder paper survey after 14 days. The survey included quality of life (EuroQol-5D-5L), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and post-traumatic symptom (Impact of Event Scale-Revised) assessment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Survey response rate, extent of survey completion, clinical outcomes at different time points after discharge, and survey cost analysis were the main outcome measures. Outcomes were stratified based on follow-up time after ICU discharge (3, 6, and 12 months). RESULTS: A total of 239 patients were randomised. The response rate was similar between the groups (mixed-mode: 78% [92/118 patients] vs. paper: 80% [97/121 patients], p = 0.751) and did not differ between time points of follow-up. Incomplete surveys were more prevalent in the paper group (10% vs 18%). The median EuroQol-5D-5L index value was 0.83 [0.71-0.92]. Depressive symptoms were reported by 25% of patients (46/187), anxiety symptoms were reported by 27% (50/187), and probable post-traumatic stress disorder was reported by 14% (25/184). Patient outcomes did not differ between the groups or time points of follow-up. The cost per reply was AU$ 16.60 (mixed-mode) vs AU$ 19.78 (paper). CONCLUSION: The response rate of a mixed-mode survey is similar to that of a paper survey and may provide modest cost savings.

Effects of Standard vs Energy-Dense Formulae on Gastric Retention, Energy Delivery, and Glycemia in Critically Ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: Energy-dense formulae are often provided to critically ill patients with enteral feed intolerance with the aim of increasing energy delivery, yet the effect on gastric emptying is unknown. The rate of gastric emptying of a standard compared with an energy-dense formula was quantified in critically ill patients. METHODS: Mechanically ventilated adults were randomized to receive radiolabeled intragastric infusions of 200 mL standard (1 kcal/mL) or 100 mL energy-dense (2 kcal/mL) enteral formulae on consecutive days in this noninferiority, blinded, crossover trial. The primary outcome was scintigraphic measurement of gastric retention (percentage at 120 minutes). Other measures included area under the curve (AUC) for gastric retention and intestinal energy delivery (calculated from gastric retention of formulae over time), blood glucose (peak and AUC), and intestinal glucose absorption (using 3-O-methyl-D-gluco-pyranose [3-OMG] concentrations). Comparisons were undertaken using paired mixed-effects models. Data presented are mean ± SE. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were studied (male/female, 14:4; age, 55.2 ± 5.3 years). Gastric retention at 120 minutes was greater with the energy-dense formula (standard, 17.0 ± 5.9 vs energy-dense, 32.5 ± 7.1; difference, 12.7% [90% confidence interval, 0.8%-30.1%]). Energy delivery (AUC120 , 13,038 ± 1119 vs 9763 ± 1346 kcal/120 minutes; P = 0.057), glucose control (peak glucose, 10.1 ± 0.3 vs 9.7 ± 0.3 mmol/L, P = 0.362; and glucose AUC120 8.7 ± 0.3 vs 8.5 ± 0.3 mmol/L.120 minutes, P = 0.661), and absorption (3-OMG AUC120 , 38.5 ± 4.0 vs 35.7 ± 4.0 mmol/L.120 minutes; P = .508) were not improved with the energy-dense formula. CONCLUSION: In critical illness, administration of an energy-dense formula does not reduce gastric retention, increase energy delivery to the small intestine, or improve glucose absorption or glucose control; instead, there is a signal for delayed gastric emptying.