Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effect of neuromuscular electrical stimulation in critically ill adults with mechanical ventilation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Xu, Cuiping; Yang, Feng; Wang, Qimin; Gao, Wei.
Afiliación
  • Xu C; Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, China Rehabilitation Research Center, Rehabilitation School of Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. xucuipingwh@126.com.
  • Yang F; Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, China Rehabilitation Research Center, Rehabilitation School of Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Wang Q; Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, China Rehabilitation Research Center, Rehabilitation School of Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
  • Gao W; Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, China Rehabilitation Research Center, Rehabilitation School of Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. rhhuxi@163.com.
BMC Pulm Med ; 24(1): 56, 2024 Jan 25.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38273243
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is widely used as a rehabilitation methods to restore muscle mass and function in prolonged immobilization individuals. However, its effect in mechanically ventilated patients to improve clinical outcomes remains unclear.

METHODS:

A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PEDro, and the Cochrane Library from their inception until December 24th, 2023. The search targeted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing NMES with physical therapy (PT) or usual ICU care (CG), for improving clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients. We performed a network meta-analysis utilizing Stata version 14.0 and R 4.3.1.

RESULTS:

We included 23 RCTs comprising 1312 mechanically ventilated adults. The treatments analyzed were NMES, PT, NMES combined with PT (NMES+PT), and CG. Network meta-analyses revealed that NMES or NMES+PT significantly improved extubation success rate compared to CG, with ORs of 1.85 (95% CI 1.11, 3.08) and 5.89 (95% CI 1.77, 19.65), respectively. Additionally, NMES exhibited a slight decrease in extubation success rate compared with NMES+PT, with OR of 0.31 (95% CI 0.11, 0.93). Nevertheless, neither NMES nor NMES+PT showed any significant improvement in ICU length of stay (LOS), ventilation duration, or mortality when compared with PT or CG. NMES+PT emerged as the most effective strategy for all considered clinical outcomes according to the ranking probabilities. The evidence quality ranged from "low" to "very low" in this network meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS:

NMES appears to be a straightforward and safe modality for critically ill, mechanically ventilated patients. When combined with PT, it significantly improved the extubation success rate against standard ICU care and NMES alone, and showed a better ranking over PT or NMES alone for clinical outcomes. Therefore, NMES combined with PT may be a superior rehabilitation strategy for this patient group.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Respiración Artificial / Enfermedad Crítica Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Límite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Pulm Med Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Respiración Artificial / Enfermedad Crítica Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Límite: Adult / Humans Idioma: En Revista: BMC Pulm Med Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: China