Original Article | Open Access
The Association between Obesity and Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients
BACKGROUND: Obesity rates are increasing worldwide, particularly in North America. The impact of obesity on the outcome of critically ill patients is unclear.METHODS: A prospective observational cohort study of consecutive patients admitted to a tertiary critical care unit in Canada between January 10, 2008 and March 31, 2009 was conducted. Exclusion criteria were age <18 years, admission <24 h, planned cardiac surgery, pregnancy, significant ascites, unclosed surgical abdomen and brain death on admission. Height, weight and abdominal circumference were measured at the time of intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Coprimary end points were ICU mortality and a composite of ICU mortality, reintubation, ventilator-associated pneumonia, line sepsis and ICU readmission. Subjects were stratified as obese or nonobese, using two separate metrics: body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 and a novel measurement of 75th percentile for waist-to-height ratio (WHR).RESULTS: Among 449 subjects with a BMI ≥18.5 kg/m2, both BMI and WHR were available for comparative analysis in 348 (77.5%). Neither measure of obesity was associated with the primary end points. BMI ≥30 kg/m2 was associated with a lower odds of six-month mortality than the BMI <30 kg/m2 group (adjusted OR 0.59 [95% CI 0.36 to 0.97]; P=0.04) but longer intubation times (adjusted RR 1.56 [95% CI 1.17 to 2.07]; P=0.003) and longer ICU length of stay (adjusted RR 1.67 [95% CI 1.21 to 2.31]; P=0.002). Conversely, measurement of 75th percentile for WHR was associated only with decreased ICU readmission (OR 0.23 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.79]; P=0.02).CONCLUSIONS: Obesity was not necessarily associated with worse outcomes in critically ill patients.
Copyright © 2015 Hindawi Publishing Corporation. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.