Accuracy of Zero-Heat-Flux Cutaneous Temperature in Intensive Care Adults.

OBJECTIVES: To compare accuracy of a continuous noninvasive cutaneous temperature using zero-heat-flux method to esophageal temperature and arterial temperature. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: ICU and NeuroICU, University Hospital. PATIENTS: Fifty-two ICU patients over a 4-month period who required continuous temperature monitoring were included in the study, after informed consent. INTERVENTIONS: All patients had esophageal temperature probe and a noninvasive cutaneous device to monitor their core temperature continuously. In seven patients who required cardiac output monitoring, continuous iliac arterial temperature was collected. Simultaneous core temperatures were recorded from 1 to 5 days. Comparison to the esophageal temperature, considered as the reference in this study, used the Bland and Altman method with adjustment for multiple measurements per patient. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The esophageal temperature ranged from 33°C to 39.7°C, 61,298 pairs of temperature using zero-heat-flux and esophageal temperature were collected and 1,850 triple of temperature using zero-heat-flux, esophageal temperature, and arterial temperature. Bias and limits of agreement for temperature using zero-heat-flux were 0.19°C ± 0.53°C compared with esophageal temperature with an absolute difference of temperature pairs equal to or lower than 0.5°C of 92.6% (95% CI, 91.9-93.4%) of cases and equal to or lower than 1°C for 99.9% (95% CI, 99.7-100.0%) of cases. Compared with arterial temperature, bias and limits of agreement were -0.00°C ± 0.36°C with an absolute difference of temperature pairs equal to or lower than 0.5°C of 99.8% (95% CI, 95.3-100%) of cases. All absolute difference of temperature pairs between temperature using zero-heat-flux and arterial temperature and between arterial temperature and esophageal temperature were equal to or lower than 1°C. No local or systemic serious complication was observed. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a comparable reliability of the cutaneous sensor using the zero-heat-flux method compared with esophageal or iliac arterial temperatures measurements.

Prevalence and impact of frailty on mortality in elderly ICU patients: a prospective, multicenter, observational study.

PURPOSE: Frailty is a recent concept used for evaluating elderly individuals. Our study determined the prevalence of frailty in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and its impact on the rate of mortality. METHODS: A multicenter, prospective, observational study performed in four ICUs in France included 196 patients aged ≥65 years hospitalized for >24 h during a 6-month study period. Frailty was determined using the frailty phenotype (FP) and the clinical frailty score (CFS). The patients were separated as follows: FP score <3 or ≥3 and CFS <5 or ≥5. RESULTS: Frailty was observed in 41 and 23% of patients on the basis of an FP score ≥3 and a CFS ≥5, respectively. At admission to the ICU, the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores did not differ between the frail and nonfrail patients. In the multivariate analysis, the risk factors for ICU mortality were FP score ≥3 [hazard ratio (HR), 3.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.6-6.6; p < 0.001], male gender (HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.1-5.3; p = 0.026), cardiac arrest before admission (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-7.4; p = 0.036), SAPS II score ≥46 (HR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.3; p = 0.011), and brain injury before admission (HR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.6-7.7; p = 0.002). The risk factors for 6-month mortality were a CFS ≥5 (HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.49-3.87; p < 0.001) and a SOFA score ≥7 (HR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.35-3.64; p = 0.002). An increased CFS was associated with significant incremental hospital and 6-month mortalities. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is a frequent occurrence and is independently associated with increased ICU and 6-month mortalities. Notably, the CFS predicts outcomes more effectively than the commonly used ICU illness scores.

Risk factors and outcomes for prolonged versus brief fever: a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Prolonged fever occurs with infectious and noninfectious diseases but is poorly studied in intensive care units. The aims of this prospective multicenter noninterventional study were to determine the incidence and etiologies of prolonged fever in critically ill patients and to compare outcomes for prolonged fever and short-lasting fever. METHODS: The study involved two periods of 2 months each, with 507 patients hospitalized ≥ 24 hours. Fever was defined by at least one episode of temperature ≥ 38.3 °C, and prolonged fever, as lasting > 5 days. Backward stepwise logistic regression was performed to identify the independent factors associated with prolonged fever versus short-lasting fever. RESULTS: Prolonged or short-lasting fever occurred in 87 (17%) and 278 (55%) patients, respectively. Infectious and noninfectious causes were found in 54 (62%) and 27 (31%) of 87 patients, respectively; in six patients (7%), prolonged fever remained unexplained. The two most common sites of infection were ventilator-associated pneumonia (n = 25) and intraabdominal infection (n = 13). Noninfectious fever (n = 27) was neurogenic in 19 (70%) patients and mainly associated with cerebral injury (84%). Independent risk factors for prolonged fever were cerebral injury at admission (OR = 5.03; 95% CI, 2.51 to 10.06), severe sepsis (OR = 2.79; 95% CI, 1.35 to 5.79), number of infections (OR = 2.35; 95% CI, 1.43 to 3.86), and mechanical-ventilation duration (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.09). Older patients were less likely to develop prolonged fever. ICU mortality did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged fever was common, mainly due to severe infections, particularly ventilator-associated pneumonia, and mixed infectious causes were frequent, warranting systematic and careful search for multiple causes. Neurogenic fever was also especially frequent.