Trauma-related admissions to intensive care units in Australia: the influence of Indigenous status on outcomes

Beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate supplementation and functional outcomes in multitrauma patients: A pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate (HMB) is a nutrition supplement that may attenuate muscle wasting from critical illness. This trial aimed to determine feasibility of administering a blinded nutrition supplement in the intensive care unit (ICU) and continuing it after ICU discharge.

METHODS

Single-center, parallel-group, blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized feasibility trial. After traumatic injury necessitating admission to ICU, participants were randomized to receive an enteral study supplement of 3 g of HMB (intervention) or placebo daily for 28 days or until hospital discharge. Primary outcome was feasibility of administering the study supplement, quantified as protocol adherence. Secondary outcomes included change in quadriceps muscle thickness, measured weekly until day 28 or hospital discharge by using ultrasound and analyzed by using a linear mixed model.

RESULTS

Fifty randomized participants (intervention, n = 26; placebo, n = 24) showed comparable baseline characteristics. Participants received 862 (84.3%) of the 1022 prescribed supplements during hospitalization with 543 (62.8%) delivered via an enteral feeding tube. The median (IQR) number of study supplements successfully administered per participant was 19.5 (13.0-24.0) in the intervention group and 16.5 (8.5-23.5) in the placebo group. Marked loss of quadriceps muscle thickness occurred in both groups, with the point estimate favoring attenuated muscle loss with the intervention, albeit with wide CIs (mean intervention difference after 28 days, 0.26 cm [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.64]).

CONCLUSION

A blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial of daily enteral HMB supplementation for up to 28 days in hospital is feasible. Any effect of HMB supplementation to attenuate muscle wasting after traumatic injury remains uncertain.

Incidence and outcomes of critical illness in indigenous peoples: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Indigenous Peoples experience health inequities and racism across the continuum of health services. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence and outcomes of critical illness among Indigenous Peoples.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE/PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to October 2022). Observational studies, case series of > 100 patients, clinical trial arms, and grey literature reports of Indigenous adults were eligible. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and appraised research quality from an Indigenous perspective using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Assessment Tool. ICU mortality, ICU length of stay, and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) were compared using risk ratios and mean difference (MD) for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively. ICU admission was synthesized descriptively.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (Australia and/or New Zealand [n = 12] and Canada [n = 3]) were included. Risk of bias was low in 10 studies and moderate in 5, and included studies had minimal incorporation of Indigenous perspectives or consultation. There was no difference in ICU mortality between Indigenous and non-Indigenous (RR 1.14, 95%CI 0.98 to 1.34, I2 = 87%). We observed a shorter ICU length of stay among Indigenous (MD - 0.25; 95%CI, - 0.49 to - 0.00; I2 = 95%) and a higher use for IMV among non-Indigenous (RR 1.10; 95%CI, 1.06 to 1.15; I2 = 81%).

CONCLUSION

Research on Indigenous Peoples experience with critical care is poorly characterized and has rarely included Indigenous perspectives. ICU mortality between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations was similar, while there was a shorter ICU length of stay and less mechanical ventilation use among Indigenous patients. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO CRD42021254661; Registered: 12 June, 2021.

Characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with severe traumatic brain injury in Victoria, Australia compared to United Kingdom and Europe: A comparison between two harmonised prospective cohort studies

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this manuscript is to compare characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with severe Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) between Australia, the United Kingdom (UK) and Europe.

METHODS

We enrolled patients with severe TBI in Victoria, Australia (OzENTER-TBI), in the UK and Europe (CENTER-TBI) from 2015 to 2017. Main outcome measures were mortality and unfavourable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended <5) 6 months after injury. Expected outcomes were compared according to the IMPACT-CT prognostic model, with observed to expected (O/E) ratios and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

We included 107 patients from Australia, 171 from UK, and 596 from Europe. Compared to the UK and Europe, patients in Australia were younger (median 32 vs 44 vs 44 years), a larger proportion had secondary brain insults including hypotension (30% vs 17% vs 21%) and a larger proportion received ICP monitoring (75% vs 74% vs 58%). Hospital length of stay was shorter in Australia than in the UK (median: 17 vs 23 vs 16 days), and a higher proportion of patients were discharged to a rehabilitation unit in Australia than in the UK and Europe (64% vs 26% vs 28%). Mortality overall was lower than expected (27% vs 35%, O/E ratio 0.77 [95% CI: 0.64 - 0.87]. O/E ratios were comparable between regions for mortality in Australia 0.86 [95% CI: 0.49-1.23] vs UK 0.82 [0.51-1.15] vs Europe 0.76 [0.60-0.87]). Unfavourable outcome rates overall were in line with historic expectations (O/E ratio 1.32 [0.96-1.68] vs 1.13 [0.84-1.42] vs 0.96 [0.85-1.09]).

CONCLUSIONS

There are major differences in case-mix between Australia, UK, and Europe; Australian patients are younger and have a higher rate of secondary brain insults. Despite some differences in management and discharge policies, mortality was less than expected overall, and did not differ between regions. Functional outcomes were similar between regions, but worse than expected, emphasizing the need to improve treatment for patients with severe TBI.

Sarcopenia as a predictor of mortality among the critically ill in an intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The evidence of sarcopenia based on CT-scan as an important prognostic factor for critically ill patients has not seen consistent results. To determine the impact of sarcopenia on mortality in critically ill patients, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the association between sarcopenia and mortality.

METHODS

We searched studies from the literature of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from database inception to June 15, 2020. All observational studies exploring the relationship between sarcopenia based on CT-scan and mortality in critically ill patients were included. The search and data analysis were independently conducted by two investigators. A meta-analysis was performed using STATA Version 14.0 software using a fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a total of 3,249 participants were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of sarcopenia among critically ill patients was 41 % (95 % CI:33-49 %). Critically ill patients with sarcopenia in the intensive care unit have an increased risk of mortality compared to critically ill patients without sarcopenia (OR = 2.28, 95 %CI: 1.83-2.83; P < 0.001; I² = 22.1 %). In addition, a subgroup analysis found that sarcopenia was associated with high risk of mortality when defining sarcopenia by total psoas muscle area (TPA, OR = 3.12,95 %CI:1.71-5.70), skeletal muscle index (SMI, OR = 2.16,95 %CI:1.60-2.90), skeletal muscle area (SMA, OR = 2.29, 95 %CI:1.37-3.83), and masseter muscle(OR = 2.08, 95 %CI:1.15-3.77). Furthermore, critically ill patients with sarcopenia have an increased risk of mortality regardless of mortality types such as in-hospital mortality (OR = 1.99, 95 %CI:1.45-2.73), 30-day mortality(OR = 2.08, 95 %CI:1.36-3.19), and 1-year mortality (OR = 3.23, 95 %CI:2.08 -5.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Sarcopenia increases the risk of mortality in critical illness. Identifying the risk factors of sarcopenia should be routine in clinical assessments and offering corresponding interventions may help medical staff achieve good patient outcomes in ICU departments.

Associations Between Socioeconomic Status, Patient Risk, and Short-Term Intensive Care Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the association of socioeconomic status as measured by the average socioeconomic status of the area where a person resides on short-term mortality in adults admitted to an ICU in Queensland, Australia.

DESIGN

Secondary data analysis using de-identified data from the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation linked to the publicly available area-level Index of Relative Socioeconomic Advantage and Disadvantage from the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

SETTING

Adult ICUs from 35 hospitals in Queensland, Australia, from 2006 to 2015.

PATIENTS

A total of 218,462 patient admissions.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The outcome measure was inhospital mortality. The main study variable was decile of Index of Relative Socioeconomic Advantage and Disadvantage. The overall crude inhospital mortality was 7.8%; 9% in the most disadvantaged decile and 6.9% in the most advantaged decile (p < 0.001). Increasing socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with increasing severity of illness as measured by Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score, admission with a diagnosis of sepsis or trauma, cardiac, respiratory, renal, and hepatic comorbidities, and remote location. Increasing socioeconomic advantage was associated with elective surgical admission, hematological and oncology comorbidities, and admission to a private hospital (all p < 0.001). After excluding patients admitted after elective surgery, in the remaining 106,843 patients, the inhospital mortality was 13.6%, 13.3% in the most disadvantaged, and 14.1% in the most advantaged. There was no trend in mortality across deciles of socioeconomic status after excluding elective surgery patients. In the logistic regression model adjusting for severity of illness and diagnosis, there was no statistically significant difference in the odds ratio of inhospital mortality for the most disadvantaged decile compared with other deciles. This suggests variables used for risk adjustment may lie on the causal pathway between socioeconomic status and outcome in ICU patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Socioeconomic status as defined as Index of Relative Socioeconomic Advantage and Disadvantage of the area in which a patient lives was associated with ICU admission diagnosis, comorbidities, severity of illness, and crude inhospital mortality in this study. Socioeconomic status was not associated with inhospital mortality after excluding elective surgical patients or when adjusted for severity of illness and admission diagnosis. Commonly used measures for risk adjustment in intensive care improve understanding of the pathway between socioeconomic status and outcomes.

Characteristics and outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients with dialysis-dependent kidney disease in Australian Intensive Care Units

BACKGROUND

In Australia, 531 people per million population have dialysis-dependent Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD5D). The incidence is four times higher for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) people compared to non-Indigenous Australians. CKD5D increases the risk of hospitalisation, admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and mortality compared to patients without CKD5D. There is limited literature describing short-term outcomes of patients with CKD5D who are admitted to ICU, comparing Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients.

AIMS

This registry-based retrospective cohort analysis compared demographic and clinical data between Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients with CKD5D and tested whether Indigenous status predicted short-term outcomes independently of other contributing factors. Adjusted hospital mortality was the primary outcome measure.

METHODS

Data were from the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society's Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation Adult Patient Database. Australian ICU admissions between 2010 and 2017 were included. Data from 173 ICUs (2,136 beds) include 1,051,697 ICU admissions of which 23,793 had a pre-existing diagnosis of CKD5D.

RESULTS

Indigenous patients comprised 11.9% of CKD5D patients in ICU. CKD5D was prevalent among 4.9% of Indigenous and 2.9% of non-Indigenous ICU admissions. Indigenous patients were 13.5 years younger, had fewer comorbidities and lower crude mortality despite equivalent calculated mortality risk. After adjusting for age, remoteness and severity of illness, Indigenous status did not predict mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Socioeconomic disadvantage contributes to earlier development of CKD5D and the over representation in ICU of Indigenous people. Mortality is equivalent once correcting for confounders, but addressing inequality requires strengthening preventative care. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Long term outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians after hospital intensive care

OBJECTIVES

To assess long term outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) Australians admitted non-electively to intensive care units (ICUs).

DESIGN

Data linkage cohort study; analysis of ICU patient data (Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database), prospectively collected during 2007-2016.

SETTING

All four university-affiliated level 3 ICUs in South Australia.

MAIN OUTCOMES

Mortality (in-hospital, and 12 months and 8 years after admission to ICU), by Indigenous status.

RESULTS

2035 of 39 784 non-elective index ICU admissions (5.1%) were of Indigenous Australians, including 1461 of 37 661 patients with South Australian residential postcodes. The median age of Indigenous patients (45 years; IQR, 34-57 years) was lower than for non-Indigenous ICU patients (64 years; IQR, 47-76 years). For patients with South Australian postcodes, unadjusted mortality at discharge and 12 months and 8 years after admission was lower for Indigenous patients; after adjusting for age, sex, diabetes, severity of illness, and diagnostic group, mortality was similar for both groups at discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81-1.10), but greater for Indigenous patients at 12 months (aOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.26) and 8 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.13-1.35). The number of potential years of life lost was greater for Indigenous patients (median, 24.0; IQR, 15.8-31.8 v 12.5; IQR, 0-22.3), but, referenced to respective population life expectancies, relative survival at 8 years was similar (proportions: Indigenous, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.75-0.80; non-Indigenous, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.76-0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjusted long term mortality and median number of potential life years lost are higher for Indigenous than non-Indigenous patients after intensive care in hospital. These differences reflect underlying population survival patterns rather than the effects of ICU admission.