PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in the mixed intensive care unit (ICU) of two university-affiliated hospitals in Malaysia. Consecutive elderly patients (aged above or equal to 60 years) admitted to the ICU, who underwent simultaneous measurement of plasma IL-6 and serum ALB, were recruited. The prognostic value of the IL-6-to-albumin ratio was assessed by analysis of the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
RESULTS: A total of 112 critically ill elderly patients were recruited. The outcome of all-cause ICU mortality was 22.3%. The calculated IL-6-to-albumin ratio was significantly higher in the non-survivors compared to the survivors {14.1 [interquartile range (IQR), 6.5-26.7] vs 2.5 [(IQR, 0.6-9.2) pg/mL, p <0.001]}. The area under the curve (AUC) of IL-6-to-albumin ratio for discrimination of ICU mortality was 0.766 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.667-0.865, p <0.001] which was slightly higher than that of IL-6 and albumin alone. The ideal cut-off value of the IL-6-to-albumin ratio was above 5.7 with a sensitivity of 80.0% and specificity of 64.4%. After adjusting for severity of illness, the IL-6-to-albumin ratio remained as an independent predictor of ICU mortality with an adjusted odd ratio of 0.975 (95% CI, 0.952-0.999, p = 0.039).
CONCLUSION: The IL-6-to-albumin ratio offers a slight improvement in mortality prediction than either of its constituent individual biomarkers and as such, it may be a potential tool to aid in the prognostication of critically ill elderly patients although this requires further validation in a larger prospective study.
HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Lim KY, Shukeri WFWM, Hassan WMNW, Mat-Nor MB, Hanafi MH. The Combined Use of Interleukin-6 with Serum Albumin for Mortality Prediction in Critically Ill Elderly Patients: The Interleukin-6-to-albumin Ratio. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(10):1126-1130.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13205-023-03479-1.
DESIGN: Using a complex sampling design, a two-stage stratified cluster sampling was performed to recruit MOH nurses between August and November 2019.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2428 nurses from 32 hospitals and 28 district health offices answered the questionnaires based on Maslach Burnout Inventory for Human Services and Brief COPE. Complex sampling analysis was applied.
OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome of interest was the prevalence of burnout and its three domains of emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalisation (DP) and low personal accomplishment. ORs using 95% CIs were calculated. Significant factors at the univariate level were entered into the multivariate logistic regression to identify independent predictors of burnout.
RESULTS: One in four (24.4%) nurses experienced burnout. Younger, single, and childless nurses had a higher prevalence of burnout. Shift working nurses were 1.6 times more likely to develop burnout. Those who performed >6 night shifts per month were 1.5 times more predisposed to burnout (95% CI 1.01 to 2.36; p<0.05). While encountering traumatic events at work led to 4.2 times (95% CI 2.31, 7.63; p<0.05) higher risk of burnout, those who received post-traumatic psychological support were better protected. The use of dysfunctional coping strategies was detrimental as it was positively correlated with EE and DP.
CONCLUSION: Addressing modifiable stressors of burnout at individual and institutional levels identified in this study can be potentially beneficial in reducing burnout and its undesirable effects among nurses. Interventions that promote positive coping strategies should be implemented. Organisational-driven efforts must target the improvement of work schedules for nurses and the establishment of a structured debriefing service for post-trauma counselling.
METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted between May and June 2021 involving adults ≥ 18 years old. Data on the self-reported use of HDS for COVID-19 prevention were collected. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the predictors of HDS use.
RESULTS: Overall, 41.9 % (168/401) reported using HDS to prevent COVID-19. Multivariate analysis showed that HDS users were more likely to be individuals ≥ 40 years old (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.774, 95 % confidence interval [CI] = 1.016 - 3.098), and to have had a history of HDS use prior to the pandemic (aOR = 19.378, 95 % CI = 5.901 - 63.639). Most HDS users referred to social media or websites (66.7 %, 112/168) for HDS information. Approximately half of them had consulted either pharmacists or doctors about their HDS use.
CONCLUSION: HDS use to prevent COVID-19 was common among the respondents. Several issues - such as the concurrent use of HDS with conventional medications, the use of unreliable sources of information, and the lack of consultation with healthcare providers (HCPs) - indicate that HCPs should be more proactive in their consultative and information-providing roles regarding HDS use.