Feasibility and Acceptability of an INtervention TO Increase MOBility in Older Hospitalized Medical Patients (INTOMOB): A Mixed-Methods Pilot Study.

Background: To reduce adverse outcomes of low hospital mobility, we need interventions that are scalable in everyday practice. This study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of the INTOMOB multilevel intervention addressing barriers to hospital mobility without requiring unavailable resources. Methods: The INTOMOB intervention, targeting older patients, healthcare professionals (HCPs) and the hospital environment, was implemented on acute general internal medicine wards of three hospitals (12/2022-03/2023). Feasibility and acceptability of the intervention were assessed and two types of accelerometers compared in a mixed methods study (patient and HCP surveys and interviews). Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively and qualitative data using a deductive approach. Results were integrated through meta-inferences. Results: Of 20 patients (mean age 74.1 years), 90% found the intervention helpful and 82% said the environment intervention (posters) stimulated mobility. The majority of 44 HCPs described the intervention as clear and helpful. There was no major implementation or technical issue. About 60% of patients and HCPs preferred a wrist-worn over an ankle-worn accelerometer. Conclusions: The INTOMOB intervention is feasible and well accepted. Patients' and HCPs' feedback allowed to further improve the intervention that will be tested in a cluster randomized trial and provides useful information for future mobility-fostering interventions.

Effect of goal-directed mobilisation intervention compared with standard care on physical activity among medical inpatients: protocol for the GoMob-in randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the fact that immobilisation is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality, patients hospitalised in general internal medicine (GIM) wards spend up to 50% of time in bed. Previous studies in selected patient populations showed increased mobility after implementation of goal-directed mobilisation (GDM). Due to the study design used so far, the degree of evidence is generally low. The effect of GDM on clinical outcomes and economically relevant indicators in patients hospitalised in GIM wards is currently unknown. This study aims to evaluate a GDM intervention compared to standard care on physical activity (de Morton Mobility Index, DEMMI) in medical inpatients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: GoMob-in is a randomised, controlled, open-label study with blinded outcome assessment. We plan to enrol 160 inpatients with indication for physiotherapy on GIM wards of a tertiary hospital in Bern, Switzerland. Adult patients newly hospitalised on GIM wards will be included in the study. The primary outcome will be the change in the DEMMI score between baseline and 5 days. Secondary outcomes are change of DEMMI (inclusion to hospital discharge), mobilisation time (inclusion to day 5, inclusion to discharge), in-hospital delirium episodes, number of in-hospital falls, length of stay, number of falls within 3 months, number of re-hospitalisations and all-cause mortality within 3 months, change in independence during activities of daily living, concerns of falling, and quality of life within 3 months and destination after 3 months. Patients in the intervention group will be attributed a regularly updated individual mobility goal level made visible for all stakeholders and get a short educational intervention on GDM. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the responsible Ethics Board (Ethikkommission Bern/2020-02305). Written informed consent will be obtained from participants before study inclusion. Results will be published in open access policy peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04760392.

Early Assessment and Management of Dysphagia After Lung Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Aspiration resulting from oropharyngeal dysphagia has been recognized as a serious complication after lung resection. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether early detection of postoperative dysphagia would reduce pneumonia among these patients. The median length of hospital stay was assessed. METHODS: In this single-center, randomized controlled trial, the experimental group underwent clinical assessment of dysphagia before the initiation of oral intake after surgery. Therapeutic interventions were implemented immediately for patients diagnosed with dysphagia. The risk of pneumonia and the median length of hospital stay were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Between February 2014 and May 2016, 438 patients were randomized. Complete data from all randomized patients were analyzed. Eight cases out of 219 (3.7%) with postoperative dysphagia were detected in the experimental group. Pneumonia occurred in 14 cases out of 219 (6.4 %) in the experimental group and in 27 cases out of 219 (12.3 %) in the control group. The resulting risk reduction for pneumonia was 5.9% in the experimental group (95% confidence interval, 0.44-11.56; P = .033). The median length of hospital stay was 6 (5-8 [25th-75th percentile]) days in the experimental group and 7 (5-10 [25th-75th percentile]) days in the control group (P = .083). CONCLUSIONS: Early detection of postoperative dysphagia can significantly decrease the risk of postoperative pneumonia in patients undergoing lung resection.