A qualitative study portraying nurses' perspectives on transitional care between intensive care units and hospitals wards.

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.

Patient and spouses experiences with transition from intensive care unit to hospital ward - qualitative study.

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.

Pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding-1-year mortality in the SUP-ICU trial.

BACKGROUND: The long-term effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis with pantoprazole are unknown in ICU patients. We report 1-year mortality outcome in the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP-ICU) trial. METHODS: In the SUP-ICU trial, acutely admitted adult ICU patients at risk of gastrointestinal bleeding were randomised to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg vs placebo (saline) once daily during their ICU stay. We assessed mortality at 1 year and did sensitivity analyses according to the trial protocol and statistical analysis plan. RESULTS: A total of 3261 of the 3291 patients with available data (99.1%) were followed up at 1 year after randomisation; 1635 were allocated to pantoprazole and 1626 to placebo. At 1 year after randomisation, 610 of 1635 patients (37.3%) had died in the pantoprazole group as compared with 601 of 1626 (37.0%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.01; 95% confidence interval 0.92-1.10). The results were consistent in the sensitivity analysis adjusted for baseline risk factors and in those of the per-protocol population. We did not observe heterogeneity in the effect of pantoprazole vs placebo on 1-year mortality in the predefined subgroups, that is, patients with and without shock, mechanical ventilation, liver disease, coagulopathy, high disease severity (SAPS II > 53) or in medical vs surgical ICU patients. CONCLUSION: We did not observe a difference in 1-year mortality among acutely admitted adult ICU patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding allocated to stress ulcer prophylaxis with pantoprazole or placebo during the ICU stay. (The SUP-ICU trial was funded by Innovation Fund Denmark and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02467621).

A recovery program to improve quality of life, sense of coherence and psychological health in ICU survivors: a multicenter randomized controlled trial, the RAPIT study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to test the effectiveness of a post-ICU recovery program compared to standard care during the first year after ICU discharge. METHODS: A pragmatic, non-blinded, multicenter, parallel-group RCT was conducted between December 2012 and December 2015, at ten intensive care units (ICUs) in Denmark. We randomly assigned 386 adult patients (≥18 years) after receiving mechanical ventilation (≥48 h) to standard care (SC) plus a nurse-led intensive care recovery program or standard care alone after ICU discharge (190 intervention, 196 SC). Primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQOL) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were sense of coherence (SOC), anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) assessed at 3 and 12 months after ICU discharge including utilization of healthcare services at 12 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, we found no differences in HRQOL between groups (mean difference in the Physical Component Summary score, 1.41 [95 % CI, -1.53 to 4.35; p = 0.35] (n = 235); and in the Mental Component Summary score, 1.92 [95 % CI, -1.06 to 4.90; p = 0.11] (n = 235). No differences were found on self-reported SOC (p = 0.63), anxiety (p = 0.68), depression (p = 0.67), PTSD (p = 0.27), or the utilization of healthcare services including rehabilitation. We found a difference on anxiety, when a cut-off point ≥11 was applied, in per protocol analysis of complete cases at 3 months favoring the intervention (8.8 % vs. 16.2 %, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The tested recovery program was not superior to standard care during the first 12 months post-ICU. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov, identification no. NCT01721239.