Person:
González Seguel, Felipe

Loading...
Profile Picture

Email Address

Birth Date

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Job Title

Last Name

González Seguel

First Name

Felipe

Name

Felipe Andrés González Seguel

¿Qué estás buscando?



Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Publication
    Six-month post-intensive care outcomes during high and low bed occupancy due to the COVID-19 pandemic: A multicenter prospective cohort study
    (2023) Castro-Avila, Ana Cristina; Merino, Catalina; González Seguel, Felipe; Camus, Agustín; Muñoz, Felipe; Leppe Zamora, Jaime; IMPACCT COVID-19 study group
    Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic can be seen as a natural experiment to test how bed occupancy affects post-intensive care unit (ICU) patient's functional outcomes. To compare by bed occupancy the frequency of mental, physical, and cognitive impairments in patients admitted to ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Prospective cohort of adults mechanically ventilated >48 hours in 19 ICUs from seven Chilean public and private hospitals. Ninety percent of nationwide beds occupied was the cut-off for low versus high bed occupancy. At ICU discharge, 3- and 6-month follow-up, we assessed disability using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Quality of life, mental, physical, and cognitive outcomes were also evaluated following the core outcome set for acute respiratory failure. Results: We enrolled 252 participants, 103 (41%) during low and 149 (59%) during high bed occupancy. Patients treated during high occupancy were younger (P50 [P25-P75]: 55 [44-63] vs 61 [51-71]; p<0.001), more likely to be admitted due to COVID-19 (126 [85%] vs 65 [63%]; p<0.001), and have higher education qualification (94 [63%] vs 48 [47%]; p = 0.03). No differences were found in the frequency of at least one mental, physical or cognitive impairment by bed occupancy at ICU discharge (low vs high: 93% vs 91%; p = 0.6), 3-month (74% vs 63%; p = 0.2) and 6-month (57% vs 57%; p = 0.9) follow-up. Conclusions: There were no differences in post-ICU outcomes between high and low bed occupancy. Most patients (>90%) had at least one mental, physical or cognitive impairment at ICU discharge, which remained high at 6-month follow-up (57%).
  • Publication
    Evaluación del funcionamiento físico en cuidados críticos: encuesta nacional en más de 90 centros chilenos durante la pandemia por COVID-19
    (2022) González Seguel, Felipe; Cáceres-Parra, Camilo
    Background: Physical functioning evaluation in intensive care units (ICUs) identifies rehabilitation requirements and response to interventions. Aim: To identify the usage rate of physical functioning measurement instruments in ICUs during the COVID-19 pandemic in Chile. Material and Methods: Lead physiotherapists representing different national ICUs were invited to answer a National online survey at the onset (T1) and at the first year of COVID-19 pandemic (T2). The usage rate (defined as “always”/“almost always”/“almost never”/“never”) of instruments assessing muscle strength, muscle mass, mobility, and physical performance was surveyed. Also, the reasons for selecting these instruments were requested. Results: We received responses from 94 and 93 ICUs at T1 and T2, respectively, of 111 eligible ICUs (55% public). Compared with T2, the usage rate of instruments was lower at T1, and significant only for Medical Research Sum-Score (MRC-SS) (p = 0.04) and handgrip dynamometry (p = 0.05). Considering the answers “always”, “almost always” and “almost never”, between 89% and 91% of the ICUs reported the use of the MRC-SS; between 70% and 73% reported the use of the Functional Status Score for the Intensive Care Unit; between 5% and 35% of the ICUs reported the use of the rest of mobility scales; and between 44%-45% of ICUs reported that muscle ultrasound was “almost never” used. The main reasons reported for selecting instruments were quick use and clinimetric properties. Conclusions: The usage rate of muscle strength assessments was frequent, while the use of mobility and muscle mass instruments recommended by the literature was poorly reported, which was lower at the onset of the pandemic.