Background: Although studies on the effectiveness of the use of ICU diaries on psychiatric disorders and quality of life have been published, the results still seem to be controversial. The study aimed to determine the effects of using an ICU diary on psychiatric disorders, sleep quality, and quality of life (QoL) in adult ICU survivors in China. Methods: One hundred and twenty-six patients who underwent a scheduled cardiac surgery and were expected to stay ≥ 24 h in ICU were randomized to two groups (63 in each group). The patients in the intervention group received the use of ICU diaries during the period of post-ICU follow-up, while the patients in the control group received usual care without ICU diaries. The primary outcome was significant PTSD symptoms (Chinese version of Impact of Event Scale-Revised, IES-R; total score ≥ 35 was defined as significant PTSD symptoms) and its severity in patients 3 months post-ICU. The secondary outcomes included memories of the ICU at 1 month, QoL (Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form, SF-36), sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index Questionnaire, PSQI), anxiety, and depression symptoms (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS) at 3 months. Results: Eighty-five and 83 patients completed the follow-up interviews at 1 month and 3 months post-ICU, respectively. Significant PTSD symptoms were reported by 6 of 41 (14.63%) in the intervention group vs 9 of 42 (21.43%) in the control group (risk difference, − 9% [95% CI, − 2% to 21%], P = 0.10). There was no significant differences between groups in IES-R score, symptoms of intrusion, symptoms of avoidance, numbers of memories of feeling and delusional memories, SF-36 score and anxiety score (P > 0.05), while significant differences were found in symptom of hyperarousal score, numbers of factual memories and PSQI score (P < 0.05). No adverse effect was reported. Conclusions: Using an ICU diary is not useful for preventing PTSD symptoms and anxiety symptoms and preserving the quality of life of the patients at 3 months post-ICU, while it significantly improves the survivor's factual memory of ICU and sleep quality, and prevents the hyperarousal symptom.
Markers of prothrombotic state and inflammation are associated with the prognosis of patients with acute type A aortic dissection (AAAD). However, it is unclear that the relationship between these biomarkers and their combined impact on risk stratification. The present study evaluated the prognostic value of platelet counts, lymphocyte to neutrophil ratio (LNR), and lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR), alone and in combination. A retrospective analysis of clinical data of 744 AAAD patients was conducted to identify whether these biomarkers were related to the 30-day mortality risk. A Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test were used to compare survival between groups. A Cox hazard regression multivariable analysis was performed for 30-day mortality. Individual biomarker (platelet count, LNR, or LMR) was unable to predict 30-day mortality. However, combinations of all three biomarkers provided additive predictive value over either marker alone, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) model had a prediction probability of 0.739 when platelet counts, LNR, and LMR were included. Cox hazard regression multivariable analysis showed that combinations of all three biomarkers were the strongest predictor of 30-day mortality (p<0.021). Combined with these three easily measurable biomarkers at admission, they could help identify AAAD patients with a high risk of 30-day mortality.
Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the relationship between lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR) at admission and in-hospital mortality of patients with acute type A aortic dissection (AAAD). Patients & methods: We enrolled 536 patients with AAAD between June 2013 and December 2017. Patients were divided into two groups: the deceased group and the survival group. Results: In multivariable analysis, the association between LMR and in-hospital mortality was still significant. When the Q4 was set as the reference value, the odds ratios values of Q1, Q2 and Q3 were 4.4 (95% CI: 2.2–8.9; p < 0.001), 1.4 (95% CI: 1.1–3.4; p = 0.03) and 1.7 (95% CI: 0.8–2.9; p = 0.158). Conclusion: Lower LMR may be independently associated with in-hospital mortality in AAAD.
Background: Neurological complications is a common complication following novel triple-branched stent graft implantation in patients with Stanford type A aortic dissection (AAD). But the incidence and risk factors of postoperative delirium (POD) are not completely clear. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors of POD after novel triple-branched stent graft implantation. Methods: An observational study of AAD patients who underwent novel triple-branched stent graft implantation between January 2017 and July 2019 were followed up after surgery. Patients' delirium was screened by the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale and the Confusion Assessment Method for the intensive care unit from the first day after the operation, lasted 5 days. The risk factors of POD were analyzed by the Cox proportional hazard models. Results: A total of 280 AAD patients were enrolled in this research, the incidence of POD was 37.86%. Adjusting for age, body mass index, and mechanical ventilation duration, multivariate Cox regression analysis model revealed that non-manual work (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] = .554; 95% CI: 0.335-0.915; P = .021), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE-II) scores > 20 (AHR = 3.359, 95% CI: 1.707-6.609, P < .001), hypoxemia (AHR = 1.846, 95% CI: 1.118-3.048, P = .017), and more than two types of analgesics and sedatives were independently associated with POD. Conclusions: This study showed that risk factors independently associated with POD were APACHE-II score > 20, hypoxemia, and more types of analgesics and sedatives, and non-manual work was the protective factor. Trial registration: This study was retrospectively registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR1900022408; Date: 2019/4/10).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.