Search

Rationale: Clinical critical care research often hinges on surrogate informed consent, as patients commonly lack decision-making capacity because of their acute illness. The surrogate informed consent process has been identified as having flaws and needing improvement. A better understanding of surrogates' perspectives is required to understand and address these shortcomings and thereby improve this process. Objectives: To explore the perspectives of surrogate decision makers of critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients about being approached about having their loved one participate in hypothetical research studies. Methods: We performed semistructured qualitative interviews of surrogate decision makers of critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients, exploring their decisional needs surrounding participation in research. These interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis of transcripts was performed with an iterative group framework using a mixed inductive and deductive approach. Results: A sample of 21 surrogate decision makers were interviewed. Thematic saturation was achieved by the consensus of the investigators. We identified trust as a unifying domain for the themes that emerged through the analytic process. Embedded within the domain of trust, two central themes became apparent: knowledge-based trust and context-based trust. Knowledge-based trust includes subthemes of logistics, accountability, and mutual respect, whereas context-based trust includes trust in the individual clinicians and trust in the hospital system. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the nuanced layers of trust central to the surrogate informed consent process. To enhance the surrogate informed consent process for participation in critical care research studies, it is crucial that researchers recognize the inherent importance of trust to ensure an effective informed consent process.

The mechanisms responsible for aspiration are relatively unknown in patients recovering from acute respiratory failure (ARF) who required mechanical ventilation. Though many conditions may contribute to swallowing dysfunction, alterations in laryngeal structure and swallowing function likely play a role in the development of aspiration. At four university-based tertiary medical centers, we conducted a prospective cohort study of ARF patients who required intensive care and mechanical ventilation for at least 48 h. Within 72 h after extubation, a Fiberoptic Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) examination was performed. Univariate and multivariable analyses examined the relationship between laryngeal structure and swallowing function abnormalities. Aspiration was the primary outcome, defined as a Penetration- Aspiration Scale (PAS) score of 6 or greater. Two other salient signs of dysphagia—spillage and residue—were secondary outcomes. A total of 213 patients were included in the final analysis. Aspiration was detected in 70 patients (33%) on at least one bolus. The most commonly aspirated consistency was thin liquids (27%). In univariate analyses, several abnormalities in laryngeal anatomy and structural movement were significantly associated with aspiration, spillage, and residue. In a multivariable analysis, the only variables that remained significant with aspiration were pharyngeal weakness (Odds ratio = 2.57, 95%CI = 1.16–5.84, p = 0.019) and upper airway edema (Odds ratio = 3.24, 95%CI = 1.44–7.66, p = 0.004). These results demonstrated that dysphagia in ARF survivors is multifactorial and characterized by both anatomic and physiologic abnormalities. These findings may have important implications for the development of novel interventions to treat dysphagia in ARF survivors. Clinical Trials Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02363686, Aspiration in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors

Introduction We describe a protocol for FIRE CORAL, an observational cohort study that examines the recovery from COVID-19 disease following acute hospitalization with an emphasis on functional, imaging, and respiratory evaluation. Methods and analysis FIRE CORAL is a multicenter prospective cohort study of participants recovering from COVID-19 disease with in-person follow-up for functional and pulmonary phenotyping conducted by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury (PETAL) Network. FIRE CORAL will include a subset of participants enrolled in Biology and Longitudinal Epidemiology of PETAL COVID-19 Observational Study (BLUE CORAL), an NHLBI-funded prospective cohort study describing the clinical characteristics, treatments, biology, and outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 across the PETAL Network. FIRE CORAL consists of a battery of in-person assessments objectively measuring pulmonary function, abnormalities on lung imaging, physical functional status, and biospecimen analyses. Participants will attend and perform initial in-person testing at 3 to 9 months after hospitalization. The primary objective of the study is to determine the feasibility of longitudinal assessments investigating multiple domains of recovery from COVID-19. Secondarily, we will perform descriptive statistics, including the prevalence and characterization of abnormalities on pulmonary function, chest imaging, and functional status. We will also identify potential clinical and biologic factors that predict recovery or the occurrence of persistent impairment of pulmonary function, chest imaging, and functional status. Ethics and dissemination FIRE CORAL is approved via the Vanderbilt University central institutional review board (IRB) and via reliance agreement with the site IRBs. Results will be disseminated via the writing group for the protocol committee and reviewed by the PETAL Network publications committee prior to publication. Data obtained via the study will subsequently be made publicly available via NHLBI’s biorepository. Strengths and limitations of the study Strengths: First US-based multicenter cohort of pulmonary and functional outcomes in patients previously hospitalized for COVID-19 infection Longitudinal biospecimen measurement allowing for biologic phenotyping of abnormalities Geographically diverse cohort allowing for a more generalizable understanding of post-COVID pulmonary sequela Limitations: Selected cohort given proximity to a participating center Small cohort which may be underpowered to identify small changes in pulmonary function

Importance Data on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are needed. Objective To determine whether hydroxychloroquine is an efficacious treatment for adults hospitalized with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants This was a multicenter, blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial conducted at 34 hospitals in the US. Adults hospitalized with respiratory symptoms from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were enrolled between April 2 and June 19, 2020, with the last outcome assessment on July 17, 2020. The planned sample size was 510 patients, with interim analyses planned after every 102 patients were enrolled. The trial was stopped at the fourth interim analysis for futility with a sample size of 479 patients. Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to hydroxychloroquine (400 mg twice daily for 2 doses, then 200 mg twice daily for 8 doses) (n = 242) or placebo (n = 237). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was clinical status 14 days after randomization as assessed with a 7-category ordinal scale ranging from 1 (death) to 7 (discharged from the hospital and able to perform normal activities). The primary outcome was analyzed with a multivariable proportional odds model, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) greater than 1.0 indicating more favorable outcomes with hydroxychloroquine than placebo. The trial included 12 secondary outcomes, including 28-day mortality. Results Among 479 patients who were randomized (median age, 57 years; 44.3% female; 37.2% Hispanic/Latinx; 23.4% Black; 20.1% in the intensive care unit; 46.8% receiving supplemental oxygen without positive pressure; 11.5% receiving noninvasive ventilation or nasal high-flow oxygen; and 6.7% receiving invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), 433 (90.4%) completed the primary outcome assessment at 14 days and the remainder had clinical status imputed. The median duration of symptoms prior to randomization was 5 days (interquartile range [IQR], 3 to 7 days). Clinical status on the ordinal outcome scale at 14 days did not significantly differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (median [IQR] score, 6 [4-7] vs 6 [4-7]; aOR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.42]). None of the 12 secondary outcomes were significantly different between groups. At 28 days after randomization, 25 of 241 patients (10.4%) in the hydroxychloroquine group and 25 of 236 (10.6%) in the placebo group had died (absolute difference, −0.2% [95% CI, −5.7% to 5.3%]; aOR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.54 to 2.09]). Conclusions and Relevance Among adults hospitalized with respiratory illness from COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve clinical status at day 14. These findings do not support the use of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 among hospitalized adults. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT04332991

Objectives To determine whether a modifiable risk factor, endotracheal tube size, is associated with the diagnosis of postextubation aspiration in survivors of acute respiratory failure. Design Prospective cohort study. Setting ICUs at four academic tertiary care medical centers. Patients Two hundred ten patients who were at least 18 years old, admitted to an ICU, and mechanically ventilated with an endotracheal tube for longer than 48 hours were enrolled. Interventions Within 72 hours of extubation, all patients received a flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing examination that entailed administration of ice, thin liquid, thick liquid, puree, and cracker boluses. Patient demographics, treatment variables, and hospital outcomes were abstracted from the patient's medical records. Endotracheal tube size was independently selected by the patient's treating physicians. Measurements and main results For each flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing examination, laryngeal pathology was evaluated, and for each bolus, a Penetration Aspiration Scale score was assigned. Aspiration (Penetration Aspiration Scale score ≥ 6) was further categorized into nonsilent aspiration (Penetration Aspiration Scale score = 6 or 7) and silent aspiration (Penetration Aspiration Scale score = 8). One third of patients (n = 68) aspirated (Penetration Aspiration Scale score ≥ 6) on at least one bolus, 13.6% (n = 29) exhibited silent aspiration, and 23.8% (n = 50) exhibited nonsilent aspiration. In a multivariable analysis, endotracheal tube size (≤ 7.5 vs ≥ 8.0) was significantly associated with patients exhibiting any aspiration (Penetration Aspiration Scale score ≥ 6) (p = 0.016; odds ratio = 2.17; 95% CI 1.14-4.13) and with risk of developing laryngeal granulation tissue (p = 0.02). Conclusions Larger endotracheal tube size was associated with increased risk of aspiration and laryngeal granulation tissue. Using smaller endotracheal tubes may reduce the risk of postextubation aspiration.

The mechanisms responsible for aspiration are relatively unknown in patients recovering from acute respiratory failure (ARF) who required mechanical ventilation. Though many conditions may contribute to swallowing dysfunction, alterations in laryngeal structure and swallowing function likely play a role in the development of aspiration. At four university-based tertiary medical centers, we conducted a prospective cohort study of ARF patients who required intensive care and mechanical ventilation for at least 48 h. Within 72 h after extubation, a Fiberoptic Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) examination was performed. Univariate and multivariable analyses examined the relationship between laryngeal structure and swallowing function abnormalities. Aspiration was the primary outcome, defined as a Penetration- Aspiration Scale (PAS) score of 6 or greater. Two other salient signs of dysphagia-spillage and residue-were secondary outcomes. A total of 213 patients were included in the final analysis. Aspiration was detected in 70 patients (33%) on at least one bolus. The most commonly aspirated consistency was thin liquids (27%). In univariate analyses, several abnormalities in laryngeal anatomy and structural movement were significantly associated with aspiration, spillage, and residue. In a multivariable analysis, the only variables that remained significant with aspiration were pharyngeal weakness (Odds ratio = 2.57, 95%CI = 1.16-5.84, p = 0.019) and upper airway edema (Odds ratio = 3.24, 95%CI = 1.44-7.66, p = 0.004). These results demonstrated that dysphagia in ARF survivors is multifactorial and characterized by both anatomic and physiologic abnormalities. These findings may have important implications for the development of novel interventions to treat dysphagia in ARF survivors.Clinical Trials Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02363686, Aspiration in Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors.

Background The bedside swallowing evaluation (BSE) is an assessment of swallowing function and airway safety during swallowing. After extubation, the BSE often is used to identify the risk of aspiration in acute respiratory failure (ARF) survivors. Research Question We conducted a multicenter prospective study of ARF survivors to determine the accuracy of the BSE and to develop a decision tree algorithm to identify aspiration risk. Study Design and Methods Patients extubated after ≥ 48 hours of mechanical ventilation were eligible. Study procedures included the BSE followed by a gold standard evaluation, the flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). Results Overall, 213 patients were included in the final analysis. Median time from extubation to BSE was 25 hours (interquartile range, 21-45 hours). The FEES was completed 1 hour after the BSE (interquartile range, 0.5-2 hours). A total of 33% (70/213; 95% CI, 26.6%-39.2%) of patients aspirated on at least one FEES bolus consistency test. Thin liquids were the most commonly aspirated consistency: 27% (54/197; 95% CI, 21%-34%). The BSE detected any aspiration with an accuracy of 52% (95% CI, 45%-58%), a sensitivity of 83% (95% CI, 74%-92%), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 81% (95% CI, 72%-91%). Using recursive partitioning analyses, a five-variable BSE-based decision tree algorithm was developed that improved the detection of aspiration with an accuracy of 81% (95% CI, 75%-87%), sensitivity of 95% (95% CI, 90%-98%), and NPV of 97% (95% CI, 95%-99%). Interpretation The BSE demonstrates variable accuracy to identify patients at high risk for aspiration. Our decision tree algorithm may enhance the BSE and may be used to identify patients at high risk for aspiration, yet requires further validation. Trial Registry ClinicalTrials.gov ; No.: NCT02363686; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov

Introduction Although as many as 75% of the >2 million annual intensive care unit (ICU) survivors experience symptoms of psychological distress that persist for months to years, few therapies exist that target their symptoms and accommodate their unique needs. In response, we developed LIFT, a mobile app-based mindfulness intervention. LIFT reduced distress symptoms more than either a telephone-based mindfulness program or education control in a pilot randomized clinical trial (LIFT1). Objective To describe the methods of a factorial experimental clinical trial (LIFT2) being conducted to aid in the development and implementation of the version of the LIFT intervention that is optimized across domains of effect, feasibility, scalability, and costs. Methods and analysis The LIFT2 study is an optimization trial conceptualized as a component of a larger multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) project. The goal of LIFT2 is to use a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial experimental trial involving 152 patients to determine the ideal components of the LIFT mobile mindfulness program for ICU survivors across factors including (1) study introduction by call from a therapist vs. app only, (2) response to persistent or worsening symptoms over time by therapist vs. app only, and (3) high dose vs. low dose. The primary trial outcome is change in depression symptoms 1 month from randomization measured by the PHQ-9 instrument. Secondary outcomes include anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and physical symptoms; measures of feasibility, acceptability, and usability; as well as themes assessed through qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with study participants conducted after follow up completion. We will use general linear models to compare outcomes across the main effects and interactions of the factors., Highlights • Intensive care unit (ICU) survivors experience psychological distress but have few therapies. • LIFT is a self-guided mobile app-based mindfulness intervention we developed for ICU survivors. • LIFT2 is a factorial experimental clinical trial using a multiphase optimization strategy (MOST). • LIFT2 tests the impact of 3 intervention factors on effect, feasibility, scalability, and costs.

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is common in hospitalized patients post-extubation and associated with poor outcomes. Laryngeal sensation is critical for airway protection and safe swallowing. However, current understanding of the relationship between laryngeal sensation and aspiration in post-extubation populations is limited. METHODS: Acute respiratory failure patients requiring intensive care unit admission and mechanical ventilation received a Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) within 72 hours of extubation. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to examine the relationship between laryngeal sensation, length of intubation, and aspiration. Secondary outcomes included pharyngolaryngeal secretions, pneumonia, and diet recommendations. RESULTS: One-hundred and three patients met inclusion criteria. Fifty-one patients demonstrated an absent laryngeal adductor reflex (LAR). Altered laryngeal sensation correlated with the presence of secretions (p = 0.004). There was a significant interaction between the LAR, aspiration, and duration of mechanical ventilation. Altered laryngeal sensation was significantly associated with aspiration on FEES only in patients with a shorter length of intubation (p = 0.008). Patients with altered laryngeal sensation were prescribed significantly more restricted liquid (p = 0.03) and solid (p = 0.001) diets. No relationship was found between laryngeal sensation and pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high prevalence of laryngeal sensory deficits in mechanically ventilated patients post-extubation. Altered laryngeal sensation was associated with secretions, aspiration, and modified diet recommendations especially in those patients with a shorter length of mechanical ventilation. These results demonstrate that laryngeal sensory abnormalities impact the development of post-extubation dysphagia.