Patient satisfaction with care in the intensive care unit: can we rely on proxies?

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether next of kin can be addressed as proxy to assess patients' satisfaction with care in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: Prospective observational multicentre study. Two hundred and thirty-five patients with an ICU length of stay of ≥2 days and 266 of their adult next of kin participated. Patient satisfaction was assessed by a questionnaire, distributed upon discharge from an ICU and compared with next of kin's answers. The possible range of answers was 0-100, with higher numbers indicating higher satisfaction. The main outcome measure was the extent of agreement between patients' satisfaction with care and the ratings of their next of kin. RESULTS: Patients were most satisfied concerning physicians' competence (86.7±16.3), while least satisfaction was observed for the management of agitation and restlessness (78.2±23.5). There was no significant difference between next of kin's and patients' ratings. Agreement between patients and proxies was the highest concerning overall satisfaction (Cohen's κ 0.40) and the lowest for coordination of care (0.24). Spouses/partners had a higher agreement with the patients' ratings than other proxies. CONCLUSIONS: If the patient is unable to rate his satisfaction with care in the ICU, next of kin may be taken as an appropriate surrogate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, Reg No: NTC 00890513.

Does ICU length of stay influence quality of life?

BACKGROUND: Patients with prolonged stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) use a disproportionate share of resources. However, it is not known if such treatment results in impaired quality of life (QOL) as compared to patients with a short length of stay (LOS) when taking into account the initial severity of illness. METHODS: Prospective, observational case-control study in a university hospital surgical and trauma adult ICU. All patients admitted to the ICU during a 1-year period were included. Patients with a cumulative LOS in the ICU > 7 days, surviving up to 1 year after ICU admission and consenting were identified (group L, n = 75) and matched to individuals with a shorter stay (group S). Matching criteria were diagnostic group and severity of illness. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was assessed 1 year after admission using the short-form 36 (SF-36) and was compared between groups and to the general population. Further, overall QOL was estimated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and willingness to consent to future intensive care, and was compared between groups L and S. RESULTS: Based on ANCOVA, a significant difference between groups L and S was noted for two out of eight scales: role physical (P = 0.033) and vitality (P = 0.041). No differences were found for the physical component summary (P = 0.065), the mental component summary (P = 0.267) or the VAS (P = 0.316). Further, there was no difference in expectation to consent to future intensive care (P = 0.149). As compared to the general population, we found similar scores for the mental component summary and for three of eight scales in group L and five of eight scales in group S. CONCLUSIONS: When taking into account severity of illness, HRQOL 1 year after intensive care is comparable between patients with a short and a long LOS in the ICU. Thus, prolonged stay in the ICU per se must not be taken as an indicator of future poorer HRQOL. However, as compared to the general population, significant differences, mostly in physical aspects of QOL, were found for both groups of patients.