Journal of psychiatric research · 2023
Psychological impact of medical evacuation for ICU saturation in Covid-19-related ARDS patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gauchery J, Rieul G, Painvin B, Canet E, Renault A, Jonas M, Kergoat P, Grillet G, Frerou A, Egreteau P-Y, Seguin P, Fedun Y, Delbove A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Psychological impact of Medical Evacuation (MEDEVAC) in Covid-19 patients is undetermined. The objectives were to evaluate: Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in MEDEVAC patients hospitalized in ICU for Covid-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) compared to control group; anxiety, depression rates and outcomes in patients and PTSD in relatives.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective multicentric 1/1 paired cohort performed in 10 ICUs in the West of France. Evaluation was performed 18 months after discharge. Patients and closest relatives performed IES-R (Impact and Event Scale-Revised) and/or HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) scales.
RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included in each group. Patients were 64 ± 11 years old, with 83% male. We report 12 vs 20% of PTSD in control vs MEDEVAC groups (p = 0.7). Anxiety disorder affected 43.5 vs 28.0% (p = 0.26) and depression 12.5 vs 14.3% (p > 0.99) in control vs MEDEVAC groups. PTSD affects 33.3 vs 42.1% of closest relatives (p = 0.55). Ways of communication were adapted: video calls were more frequent in MEDEVAC patients (8.7 vs 60.9%, p < 0.01) whereas physical visits concerned more control group (45.8 vs 13.0%, p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: PTSD rate were similar between groups. Adaptive ways of communication, restricted visits and global uncertainties could explain the absence of differences.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective multicentric 1/1 paired cohort performed in 10 ICUs in the West of France. Evaluation was performed 18 months after discharge. Patients and closest relatives performed IES-R (Impact and Event Scale-Revised) and/or HADS (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) scales.
RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included in each group. Patients were 64 ± 11 years old, with 83% male. We report 12 vs 20% of PTSD in control vs MEDEVAC groups (p = 0.7). Anxiety disorder affected 43.5 vs 28.0% (p = 0.26) and depression 12.5 vs 14.3% (p > 0.99) in control vs MEDEVAC groups. PTSD affects 33.3 vs 42.1% of closest relatives (p = 0.55). Ways of communication were adapted: video calls were more frequent in MEDEVAC patients (8.7 vs 60.9%, p < 0.01) whereas physical visits concerned more control group (45.8 vs 13.0%, p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: PTSD rate were similar between groups. Adaptive ways of communication, restricted visits and global uncertainties could explain the absence of differences.