Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Structured Mobilization for Critically Ill Patients: A Pragmatic Cluster-randomized Trial.
Schweickert, William D; Jablonski, Julianne; Bayes, Brian; Chowdhury, Marzana; Whitman, Casey; Tian, Jenny; Blette, Bryan; Tran, Teresa; Halpern, Scott D.
Afiliación
  • Schweickert WD; Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine.
  • Jablonski J; Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • Bayes B; Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • Chowdhury M; Palliative and Advanced Illness Research Center.
  • Whitman C; Palliative and Advanced Illness Research Center.
  • Tian J; Palliative and Advanced Illness Research Center.
  • Blette B; Palliative and Advanced Illness Research Center.
  • Tran T; Palliative and Advanced Illness Research Center.
  • Halpern SD; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, and.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 208(1): 49-58, 2023 07 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36996413
ABSTRACT
Rationale Small trials and professional recommendations support mobilization interventions to improve recovery among critically ill patients, but their real-world effectiveness is unknown.

Objective:

To evaluate a low-cost, multifaceted mobilization intervention.

Methods:

We conducted a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial across 12 ICUs with diverse case mixes. The primary and secondary samples included patients mechanically ventilated for ⩾48 hours who were ambulatory before admission, and all patients with ICU stays ⩾48 hours, respectively. The mobilization intervention included 1) designation and posting of daily mobilization goals; 2) interprofessional closed-loop communication coordinated by each ICU's facilitator; and 3) performance feedback. Measurements and Main

Results:

From March 4, 2019 through March 15, 2020, 848 and 1,069 patients were enrolled in the usual care and intervention phases in the primary sample, respectively. The intervention did not increase the primary outcome, patient's maximal Intensive Care Mobility Scale (range, 0-10) score within 48 hours before ICU discharge (estimated mean difference, 0.16; 95% confidence interval, -0.31 to 0.63; P = 0.51). More patients in the intervention (37.2%) than usual care (30.7%) groups achieved the prespecified secondary outcome of ability to stand before ICU discharge (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 2.15; P = 0.04). Similar results were observed among the 7,115 patients in the secondary sample. The percentage of days on which patients received physical therapy mediated 90.1% of the intervention effect on standing. ICU mortality (31.5% vs. 29.0%), falls (0.7% vs. 0.4%), and unplanned extubations (2.0% vs. 1.8%) were similar between groups (all P > 0.3).

Conclusions:

A low-cost, multifaceted mobilization intervention did not improve overall mobility but improved patients' odds of standing and was safe. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03863470).
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Enfermedad Crítica / Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Guideline Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Asunto de la revista: TERAPIA INTENSIVA Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Enfermedad Crítica / Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Guideline Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Asunto de la revista: TERAPIA INTENSIVA Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article