• Patrini Silveira Vesz, Rafael Viegas Cremonese, Regis Goulart Rosa, Juçara Gasparetto Maccari, and Cassiano Teixeira.
• PT, McS, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Rehabilitation Sciences Graduate, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
• Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2018 Jan 1; 64 (1): 47-53.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) and its duration throughout ICU stay on the quality of life (QoL) and physical functional status (PFS) after the immediate ICU discharge.MethodThis was a cross-sectional study including all subjects consecutively discharged from the ICU during 1-year period. During the first week after ICU discharge, QoL was assessed through WHOQoL-Bref questionnaire and PFS through the Karnofsky Performance Status and modified-Barthel index, and retrospectively compared with the pre-admission status (variation [Δ] of indexes).ResultsDuring the study, 160 subjects met the inclusion criteria. Subjects receiving MV presented PFS impairment (Δ Karnofsky Performance Status [-19.7 ± 20.0 vs. -14.9 ± 18.2; p=0.04] and Δ modified-Barthel index [-17.4 ± 12.8 vs. -13.2 ± 12.9; p=0.05]) compared with those who did not receive MV. Duration of MV was a good predictor of PFS (Δ Karnofsky Performance Status [-14.6-1.12 * total days of MV; p=0.01] and Δ modified-Barthel index [-14.2-0.74 * total days of MV; p=0.01]). QoL, assessed by WHOQoL-Bref, showed no difference between groups (14.0 ± 1.8 vs. 14.5 ± 1.9; p=0.14), and the duration of MV did not influence QoL (WHOQoL-Bref scale [14.2-0.05* total days of MV; p=0.43]).ConclusionNeed for MV and duration of MV decrease patient PFS after ICU discharge.

18 keywords...

hide…