Intensive versus standard physical rehabilitation therapy in the critically ill (EPICC): a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Early physical rehabilitation in the intensive care unit (ICU) has been shown to improve short-term clinical outcomes but long-term benefit has not been proven and the optimum intensity of rehabilitation is not known. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, parallel-group, allocation-concealed, assessor-blinded, controlled trial in patients who had received at least 48 hours of invasive or non-invasive ventilation. Participants were randomised in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by admitting ICU, admission type and level of independence. The intervention group had a target of 90 min physical rehabilitation per day, the control group a target of 30 min per day (both Monday to Friday). The primary outcome was the Physical Component Summary (PCS) measure of SF-36 at 6 months. RESULTS: We recruited 308 participants over 34 months: 150 assigned to the intervention and 158 to the control group. The intervention group received a median (IQR) of 161 (67-273) min of physical rehabilitation on ICU compared with 86 (31-139) min in the control group. At 6 months, 62 participants in the intervention group and 54 participants in the control group contributed primary outcome data. In the intervention group, 43 had died, 11 had withdrawn and 34 were lost to follow-up, while in the control group, 56 had died, 5 had withdrawn and 43 were lost to follow-up. There was no difference in the primary outcome at 6 months, mean (SD) PCS 37 (12.2) in the intervention group and 37 (11.3) in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, ICU-based physical rehabilitation did not appear to improve physical outcomes at 6 months compared with standard physical rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 20436833.

MiniMovers: An Initial Pilot and Feasibility Study to Investigate the Impact of a Mobile Application on Children's Motor Skills and Parent Support for Physical Development.

The MiniMovers (MM) APP combines motor development theory with creativity expertise and has been designed to provide parents with developmentally appropriate activities to support children's motor skills. This study investigates how MiniMovers activities enabled parents to support their children's physical development. Families participated in an 8-week MM programme of activities from the MM APP (Mini, Mighty and Mega levels), with pre- and post-intervention data collected using multiple tools (e.g., motion capture system, force plate, eye-tracking glasses, and videos). Mixed research methods were applied among children (N = 8; aged 21-79 months) and their parents, providing quantitative analysis on children's performance (running, throwing, jumping, kicking, balancing and catching), as well as qualitative analysis on parents' attitude and behaviour (two-weekly feedback surveys and interviews). Lab-based measures showed significant improvements in run time, underarm throwing distance, and horizontal jump distance. Test of Gross Motor Development-3 showed a significant gain in running, underarm and overarm throwing, horizontal jump and kicking. Further, developmental stages indicated significant improvements in running, kicking and catching. Parents reported increased enjoyment and knowledge, children's enjoyment, independence and confidence. This pilot study provides support for the research and development of the MM App and suggests more research into the use of APPs to support home activities among families with young children.

Extra Physiotherapy in Critical Care (EPICC) Trial Protocol: a randomised controlled trial of intensive versus standard physical rehabilitation therapy in the critically ill.

INTRODUCTION: Patients discharged from Critical Care suffer from excessive longer term morbidity and mortality. Physical and mental health measures of quality of life show a marked and immediate fall after admission to Critical Care with some recovery over time. However, physical function is still significantly reduced at 6 months. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guideline on rehabilitation after critical illness, identified the need for high-quality randomised controlled trials to determine the most effective rehabilitation strategy for critically ill patients at risk of critical illness-associated physical morbidity. In response to this, we will conduct a randomised controlled trial, comparing physiotherapy aimed at early and intensive patient mobilisation with routine care. We hypothesise that this intervention will improve physical outcomes and the mental health and functional well-being of survivors of critical illness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 308 adult patients who have received more than 48 h of non-invasive or invasive ventilation in Critical Care will be recruited to a patient-randomised, parallel group, controlled trial, comparing two intensities of physiotherapy. Participants will be randomised to receive either standard or intensive physiotherapy for the duration of their Critical Care admission. Outcomes will be recorded on Critical Care discharge, at 3 and 6 months following initial recruitment to the study. The primary outcome measure is physical health at 6 months, as measured by the SF-36 Physical Component Summary. Secondary outcomes include assessment of mental health, activities of daily living, delirium and ventilator-free days. We will also include a health economic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has ethical approval from Newcastle and North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (11/NE/0206). There is a Trial Oversight Committee including an independent chair. The results of the study will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN20436833.

Changes in stroke care at Auckland Hospital between 1996 and 2001.

AIMS: In 1996, we performed a descriptive audit of stroke care in Auckland Hospital. Since then, a mobile stroke team has been established. We have repeated the 1996 audit to assess changes in stroke management. METHODS: From 1 June to 30 September 2001, information was prospectively recorded for all patients with stroke. RESULTS: There were 177 strokes in 175 patients (92 men, mean age 70.9, standard deviation [SD] 14.9 years). Ninety-seven percent of patients had cerebral imaging (median 4.5 hours; interquartile range [IQR] 2.7-11.6). Acute aspirin was given to 78% of patients in 2001 and 40% in 1996 (p <0.001). Twenty-four percent of patients were kept 'nil by mouth' for at least 24 hours (46% in 1996, p <0.001). At discharge, 73% of patients were taking antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy (61% in 1996, p <0.001). Only 50% of the patients with elevated discharge blood pressures were taking antihypertensives. There had been a reduction in the mean length of hospital stay to 16 days (21 days in 1996) but no significant change in mortality (14% compared with 17% in 1996). CONCLUSION: A stroke service may increase the attention to the 'processes' of stroke care and use of therapies, which are shown to be of benefit in randomised controlled trials.