1. In-person peer support for critical care survivors: The ICU REcovery Solutions cO-Led through surVivor Engagement (ICURESOLVE) pilot randomised controlled trial.
- Author
-
Haines KJ, Hibbert E, Skinner EH, Leggett N, Holdsworth C, Ali Abdelhamid Y, Bates S, Bicknell E, Booth S, Carmody J, Deane AM, Emery K, Farley KJ, French C, Krol L, MacLeod-Smith B, Maher L, Paykel M, and Iwashyna TJ
- Subjects
- Humans, Female, Male, Pilot Projects, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Aged, Feasibility Studies, Critical Care, Australia, Adult, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Peer Group, Survivors, Social Support, Intensive Care Units
- Abstract
Background: Peer support is a promising intervention to mitigate post-ICU disability, however there is a paucity of rigorously designed studies., Objectives: The objective of this study was to establish feasibility of an in-person, co-designed, peer-support model., Methods: Prospective, randomised, adaptive, single-centre pilot trial with blinded outcome assessment, conducted at a university-affiliated hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Intensive care unit survivors (and their nominated caregiver, where survivor and caregiver are referred to as a dyad), >18 years of age, able to speak and understand English and participate in phone surveys, were eligible. Participants were randomised to the peer-support model (six sessions, fortnightly) or usual care (no follow-up or targeted information). Two sequential models were piloted: 1. Early (2-3 weeks post hospital discharge) 2. Later (4-6 weeks post hospital discharge). Primary outcome was feasibility of implementation measured by recruitment, intervention attendance, and outcome completion. Secondary outcomes included post-traumatic stress and social support., Results: Of the 231 eligible patients, 80 participants were recruited. In the early model we recruited 38 participants (28 patients, 10 carers; 18 singles, 10 dyads), with an average (standard deviation) age of 60 (18) years; 55 % were female. Twenty-two participants (58 %) were randomised to intervention. Participants in the early intervention model attended a median (interquartile range) of 0 (0-1) sessions (total 24 sessions), with 53% (n = 20) completing the main secondary outcome of interest (Impact of Event Scale) at the baseline and 37 % (n = 14) at the follow-up. For the later model we recruited 42 participants (32 patients, 10 carers; 22 singles, 10 dyads), with an average (standard deviation) age of 60.4 (15.4) years; 50 % were female. Twenty-one participants (50 %) were randomised to intervention. The later intervention model attended a median (interquartile range) of 1 (0-5) sessions (total: 44 sessions), with the main secondary outcome impact of events scale (IES-R) completed by 41 (98 %) participants at baseline and 29 (69 %) at follow-up., Conclusions: In this pilot trial, a peer-support model that required in-person attendance delivered in a later posthospital phase of recovery appeared more feasible than an early model. Further research should investigate alternative modes of intervention delivery to improve feasibility (ACTRN12621000737831)., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest K Haines received a SCCM Thrive Award from SCCM to undertake this study. No conflicts of interest were declared by other authors., (Copyright © 2024 Australian College of Critical Care Nurses Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF