Within the last couple of decades, advances in critical care medicine have led to increased survival of critically ill patients, as well as the discovery of notable, long-term health challenges in survivors and their loved ones. The terms post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) and PICS-family (PICS-F) have been used in non-neurocritical care populations to characterize the cognitive, psychiatric, and physical sequelae associated with critical care hospitalization in survivors and their informal caregivers (e.g., family and friends who provide unpaid care). In this review, we first summarize the literature on the cognitive, psychiatric, and physical correlates of PICS and PICS-F in non-neurocritical patient populations and draw attention to their long-term negative health consequences. Next, keeping in mind the distinction between disease-related neurocognitive changes and those that are associated directly with the experience of a critical illness, we review the neuropsychological sequelae among patients with common neurocritical illnesses. We acknowledge the clinical factors contributing to the difficulty in studying PICS in the neurocritical care patient population, provide recommendations for future lines of research, and encourage collaboration among critical care physicians in all specialties to facilitate continuity of care and to help elucidate mechanism(s) of PICS and PICS-F in all critical illness survivors. Finally, we discuss the importance of early detection of PICS and PICS-F as an opportunity for multidisciplinary interventions to prevent and treat new neuropsychological deficits in the neurocritical care population.

Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is an ascending demyelinating polyneuropathy often associated with recent infection. Miller Fisher syndrome represents a variant with predominant facial and cranial nerve involvement, although Miller Fisher and Guillain-Barré overlap syndromes can occur. Guillain-Barré spectrum syndromes have been thought to be rare among solid organ transplant recipients. We describe an immunocompromised patient with a liver transplant who presented with ophthalmoplegia and bulbar deficits. His symptoms rapidly progressed to a state of descending paralysis involving the diaphragm; he then developed acute respiratory failure and eventually developed quadriparesis. Electromyography and a nerve conduction study demonstrated a severe sensorimotor axonal polyneuropathy consistent with Miller Fisher variant Guillain-Barré syndrome. Despite several negative nasopharyngeal swabs for COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction, a serology for SARS-CoV-2 IgG was positive. He was diagnosed with Miller Fisher-Guillain-Barré overlap syndrome with rapid recovery following treatment with plasma exchange. Although Guillain-Barré is a rare complication in solid organ transplant recipients, this case highlights the importance of rapid diagnosis and treatment of neurologic complications in transplant patients. Furthermore, it demonstrates a possible case of neurological complications from COVID-19 infection.

Thymomas are associated with autoimmune disease, most commonly myasthenia gravis, and rarely with autoimmune encephalitis. More recently, viral triggers including COVID-19 have also been implicated in autoimmunity. We present a case of antibody-positive autoimmune encephalitis that developed in the setting of COVID-19 in a patient with thymomatous myasthenia gravis.

Purpose

The purpose of this article is to review the recent literature on central apnea. Sleep disordered breathing (SDB) is characterized by apneas (cessation in breathing), and hypopneas (reductions in breathing), that occur during sleep. Central sleep apnea (CSA) is sleep disordered breathing in which there is an absence or diminution of respiratory effort during breathing disturbances while asleep. In obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), on the other hand, there is an absence of flow despite ongoing ventilatory effort.

Recent findings

Central sleep apnea is a heterogeneous disease with multiple clinical manifestations. OSA is by far the more common condition; however, CSA is highly prevalent among certain patient groups. Complex sleep apnea (CompSA) is defined as the occurrence/emergence of CSA upon treatment of OSA. Similarly, there is considerable overlap between CSA and OSA in pathogenesis as well as impacts. Thus, understanding sleep disordered breathing is important for many practicing clinicians.

Purpose of review

This article introduces fundamental concepts in circadian biology and the neuroscience of sleep, reviews recent studies characterizing circadian rhythm and sleep disruption among critically ill patients and potentially links to functional outcomes, and draws upon existing literature to propose therapeutic strategies to mitigate those harms. Particular attention is given to patients with critical neurologic conditions and the unique environment of the neuro-intensive care unit.

Recent findings

Circadian rhythm disruption is widespread among critically ill patients and sleep time is reduced and abnormally fragmented. There is a strong association between the degree of arousal suppression observed at the bedside and the extent of circadian disruption at the system (e.g., melatonin concentration rhythms) and cellular levels (e.g., core clock gene transcription rhythms). There is a paucity of electrographically normal sleep, and rest-activity rhythms are severely disturbed. Common care interventions such as neurochecks introduce unique disruptions in neurologic patients. There are no pharmacologic interventions proven to normalize circadian rhythms or restore physiologically normal sleep. Instead, interventions are focused on reducing pharmacologic and environmental factors that perpetuate disruption.

Summary

The intensive care environment introduces numerous potent disruptors to sleep and circadian rhythms. Direct neurologic injury and neuro-monitoring practices likely compound those factors to further derange circadian and sleep functions. In the absence of direct interventions to induce normalized rhythms and sleep, current therapy depends upon normalizing external stimuli.

Background

Following acute brain injury, patients in the intensive care unit often undergo hourly or every-other-hour exams ("neurochecks") to monitor for neurodeterioration. We assessed health care provider attitudes towards neurocheck frequency and evaluated providers' ideal neurocheck frequency.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional, online survey distributed in Spring 2021 at a tertiary care academic medical center. Providers from multiple intensive care unit and neuroscience clinical specialties including attending faculty, medical trainees, advanced practice providers, and bedside nurses were invited to participate.

Results

Among 177 participants, 61 (34%) and 116 (66%) were self-identified as ordering and performing providers, respectively. The survey response rate was 58% among physicians and 51% among bedside nurses with neurological expertise. The most common medical and non-medical reasons for ordering hourly neurochecks were "a specific diagnosis with anticipated course" and "standard of care," respectively. Compared with ordering providers, performing providers felt guidelines regarding neurocheck frequency ( P <0.01) and duration ( P <0.01) should be proscriptive. Conversely, ordering providers felt hourly neurochecks were detrimental to patients with acute brain injury ( P =0.02) and believed they would not utilize hourly neurochecks if there was another mode of monitoring available ( P =0.03). Performing providers identified multiple patient-related factors impacting the difficulty of and their willingness to perform frequent neurochecks, and only 70% of neurochecks were perceived to be performed as ordered. Both ordering and performing providers preferred every-other-hour neurochecks following acute brain injury.

Conclusions

This survey revealed clinically relevant differences in ordering versus performing provider attitudes about frequent neurochecks. Providers preferred every-other-hour rather than hourly neurochecks.

Although delirium detection and prevention practices are recommended in critical care guidelines, there remains a persistent lack of effective delirium education for ICU providers. To address this knowledge-practice gap, we developed an "ICU Delirium Playbook" to educate providers on delirium detection (using the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU) and prevention.

Design

Building on our previous ICU Delirium Video Series, our interdisciplinary team developed a corresponding quiz to form a digital "ICU Delirium Playbook." Playbook content validity was evaluated by delirium experts, and face validity by an ICU nurse focus group. Additionally, focus group participants completed the quiz before and after video viewing. Remaining focus group concerns were evaluated in semi-structured follow-up interviews.

Setting

Online validation survey, virtual focus group, and virtual interviews.

Subjects

The validation group included six delirium experts in the fields of critical care, geriatrics, nursing, and ICU education. The face validation group included nine ICU nurses, three of whom participated in the semi-structured feedback interviews.

Interventions

None.

Measurements and main results

The 44-question quiz had excellent content validity (average scale-level content validity index [S-CVI] of individual items = 0.99, universal agreement S-CVI = 0.93, agreement κ ≥ 0.75, and clarity p ≥ 0.8). The focus group participants completed the Playbook in an average (sd) time of 53 (14) minutes, demonstrating significant improvements in pre-post quiz scores (74% vs 86%; p = 0.0009). Verbal feedback highlighted the conciseness, utility, and relevance of the Playbook, with all participants agreeing to deploy the digital education module in their ICUs.

Conclusions

The ICU Delirium Playbook is a novel, first-of-its-kind asynchronous digital education tool aimed to standardize delirium detection and prevention practices. After a rigorous content and face validation process, the Playbook is now available for widespread use.