Early Active Mobilization during Mechanical Ventilation in the ICU.

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired weakness often develops in patients who are undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation. Early active mobilization may mitigate ICU-acquired weakness, increase survival, and reduce disability. METHODS: We randomly assigned 750 adult patients in the ICU who were undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation to receive increased early mobilization (sedation minimization and daily physiotherapy) or usual care (the level of mobilization that was normally provided in each ICU). The primary outcome was the number of days that the patients were alive and out of the hospital at 180 days after randomization. RESULTS: The median number of days that patients were alive and out of the hospital was 143 (interquartile range, 21 to 161) in the early-mobilization group and 145 days (interquartile range, 51 to 164) in the usual-care group (absolute difference, -2.0 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10 to 6; P = 0.62). The mean (±SD) daily duration of active mobilization was 20.8±14.6 minutes and 8.8±9.0 minutes in the two groups, respectively (difference, 12.0 minutes per day; 95% CI, 10.4 to 13.6). A total of 77% of the patients in both groups were able to stand by a median interval of 3 days and 5 days, respectively (difference, -2 days; 95% CI, -3.4 to -0.6). By day 180, death had occurred in 22.5% of the patients in the early-mobilization group and in 19.5% of those in the usual-care group (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.65). Among survivors, quality of life, activities of daily living, disability, cognitive function, and psychological function were similar in the two groups. Serious adverse events were reported in 7 patients in the early-mobilization group and in 1 patient in the usual-care group. Adverse events that were potentially due to mobilization (arrhythmias, altered blood pressure, and desaturation) were reported in 34 of 371 patients (9.2%) in the early-mobilization group and in 15 of 370 patients (4.1%) in the usual-care group (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Among adults undergoing mechanical ventilation in the ICU, an increase in early active mobilization did not result in a significantly greater number of days that patients were alive and out of the hospital than did the usual level of mobilization in the ICU. The intervention was associated with increased adverse events. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the Health Research Council of New Zealand; TEAM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03133377.).

Impact of High Dose Early Mobilization on Outcomes for Patients with Diabetes: A Secondary Analysis of the TEAM Trial.

RATIONALE: Patients with diabetes represent almost 20% of all ICU admissions and might respond differently to high dose early active mobilization. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether diabetes modified the relationship between the dose of early mobilization on clinical outcomes in the TEAM trial. METHODS: All TEAM trial patients were included. The primary outcome was days alive and out of hospital at day 180. Secondary outcomes included 180-day mortality and long-term functional outcomes at day 180. Logistic and median regression models were used to explore the effect of high dose early mobilization on outcomes by diabetes status. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All 741 patients from the original trial were included. Of these, 159 patients (21.4%) had diabetes. Patients with diabetes had a lower number of days alive and out of hospital at day 180 (124 [0-153] vs. 147 [82-164], p = 0.013), and higher 180-day mortality (30% vs. 18%, p = 0.044). In patients receiving high dose early mobilization, days alive and out of hospital at day 180 was 73.0 (0.0 - 144.5) in patients with diabetes and 146.5 (95.8 - 163.0) in patients without diabetes (p for interaction = 0.108). However, in patients with diabetes, high dose early mobilization increased the odds of mortality at 180 days (adjusted odds ratio 3.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.67-7.61, p value for interaction, 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this secondary analysis of the TEAM trial, in patients with diabetes, a high dose early mobilization strategy did not significantly decrease the number of days alive and out of hospital at day 180 but it increased 180-day mortality.

Goal-directed Perioperative Albumin Substitution Versus Standard of Care to Reduce Postoperative Complications: A Randomized Clinical Trial (SuperAdd Trial).

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether goal-directed albumin substitution during surgery and postanesthesia care to maintain a serum albumin concentration >30 g/L can reduce postoperative complications. BACKGROUND: Hypoalbuminemia is associated with numerous postoperative complications. Since albumin has important physiological functions, substitution of patients with hypoalbuminemia is worth considering. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, randomized, controlled, outcome assessor-blinded clinical trial in adult patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification 3 to 4 or undergoing high-risk surgery. Patients, whose serum albumin concentration dropped <30 g/L were randomly assigned to goal-directed albumin substitution maintaining serum concentration >30 g/L or to standard care until discharge from the postanesthesia intermediate care unit. Standard of care allowed albumin substitution in hemodynamic instable patients with serum concentration <20 g/L, only. Primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative complications ≥2 according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification in at least 1 of 9 domains (pulmonary, infectious, cardiovascular, neurological, renal, gastrointestinal, wound, pain, and hematological) until postoperative day 15. RESULTS: Of 2509 included patients, 600 (23.9%) developed serum albumin concentrations <30 g/L. Human albumin 60 g (40-80 g) was substituted to 299 (99.7%) patients in the intervention group and to 54 (18.0%) in the standard care group. At least 1 postoperative complication classified as Clavien-Dindo Classification ≥2 occurred in 254 of 300 patients (84.7%) in the intervention group and in 262 of 300 (87.3%) in the standard treatment group (risk difference -2.7%, 95% CI, -8.3% to 2.9%). CONCLUSION: Maintaining serum albumin concentration of >30 g/L perioperatively cannot generally be recommended in high-risk noncardiac surgery patients.

Robotic-Assisted In-Bed Mobilization in Ventilated ICU Patients With COVID-19: An Interventional, Randomized, Controlled Pilot Study (ROBEM II Study).

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted global healthcare systems, particularly in managing critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. This study aims to assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted mobilization in COVID-19 patients. DESIGN: Randomized controlled pilot study. SETTING: Four COVID-19 specialized ICUs at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin (March 2021 to February 2022). PATIENTS: Twenty critically ill COVID-19 patients expected to require greater than 24 hours of ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: A 5-day intervention phase with bid robotic-assisted mobilization greater than or equal to 20 minutes and follow-up at day 180, compared with standard care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intervention sessions were conducted in 98.9% according to protocol, with one session missing due to staff shortage. Primary outcome was the mobilization level measured with the ICU Mobility Scale (IMS) and Surgical ICU Optimal Mobilization Score (SOMS), assessed until day 5 or extubation. Safety events were recorded during mobilization. The median IMS and SOMS were 0 (0-0.16) and 1 (1-1.03) in the intervention group, and 0 (0-0.15) ( p = 0.77) and 0.8 (0.65-1.20) ( p = 0.08) in the standard care group, respectively. Significant secondary outcomes included average number of mobilization sessions (intervention: 8.5 [7.75-10] vs. standard care: 4.5 [3.5-5]; p = 0.001), total mobilization time (intervention: 232.5 min [187.25-266.5 min] vs. standard care: 147.5 min [107.5-167.5 min]; p = 0.011), and healthcare providers per session (intervention: 2 [2-2] vs. standard care: 1 [1-1.4]; p = 0.001) during intervention. Four safety events (hypertension and agitation, n = 2 each) in the intervention group and none in the standard care group were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted mobilization in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients appears to be safe and feasible.

Functional outcome after interdisciplinary, acute rehabilitation in COVID-19 patients: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of severe COVID-19 often exhibit a variety of sequelae including loss of mobility and ADL (activities of daily living) capacity. Acute rehabilitation (AR) is an interdisciplinary rehabilitation intervention applied early while still in a hospital setting. The goal of AR is to improve functional limitations and to increase functional independence at discharge. It is established in the treatment of patients with other severe diseases such as sepsis, polytrauma, or stroke. Data concerning AR in COVID-19 are sparse. AIM: To evaluate the changes in physical function during AR in patients after severe COVID-19. METHODS: This monocentric, retrospective observational study examined the functional outcomes of a sample of COVID-19-patients who received interdisciplinary AR at a university hospital. Inclusion criteria were a positive SARS-CoV-2 test in 05/2020-01/2022 and transfer to AR after intensive care treatment. 87 patients were elegible for evaluation, 3 of whom were excluded because of death during AR. Data were extracted from the hospital information system. In a pre-post analysis, mobility (Charité Mobility Index), ADL (Barthel Index), and oxygen demand were assessed. In addition, discharge location after AR, factors associated with AR unit length of stay, and functional improvements were analyzed. RESULTS: Data of 84 patients were analyzed. Mobility increased significantly from a median of 4 [1.25-6] CHARMI points at admission to a median of 9 [8.25-9] at discharge (p < 0.001). ADL increased significantly from a median of 52.5 [35.0-68.75] Barthel Index points at admission to a median of 92.5 [85-95] at discharge (p < 0.001). Oxygen demand decreased from 80.7 to 30.5% of patients. The majority (55.9%) of patients were discharged home, while 36.9% received direct follow-up rehabilitation. Older age correlated significantly with lower scores on the discharge assessment for mobility (Spearman's ϱ = -0.285, p = 0.009) and ADL (Spearman's ϱ = -0.297, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Acute rehabilitation is a viable option for COVID-19 patients with severe functional deficits after ICU treatment to achieve functional progress in mobility and ADL, reduce oxygen requirements and enable follow-up rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION FOR PROSPECTIVELY REGISTERED TRIALS: Trial registration number: DRKS00025239. Date of registration: 08 Sep 2021.

Facilitators and barriers to the implementation of prehabilitation for frail patients into routine health care: a realist review.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence supporting the effectiveness of prehabilitation as a new preoperative care pathway to optimise perioperative outcomes, its implementation into routine health care is widely pending. Frail patients might particularly benefit from prehabilitation interventions, but facilitating and hindering factors need to be considered in the implementation process. Thus, our aim was to derive a programme theory on what prehabilitation programmes work for frail patients in what circumstances and why. METHODS: Following Pawson's realist review approach, preliminary programme theories on facilitators and barriers were established. General and topic-specific databases were searched systematically for facilitators and barriers to the implementation of prehabilitation for frail patients. Articles were included if they dealt with multimodal prehabilitation programmes prior to surgery in a frail population and if they contained information on facilitators and barriers during the implementation process in the full text. Based on these articles, refined programme theories were generated. RESULTS: From 2,609 unique titles, 34 were retained for the realist synthesis. Facilitating factors included the individualisation of prehabilitation programmes to meet the patients' needs and abilities, multimodality, adaption to the local setting and health care system, endorsement by an ambassador and sharing of responsibilities among a multidisciplinary team. Central barriers for frail patients were transportation, lack of social support, and inadequate, overwhelming information provision. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing prehabilitation as a new care pathway for frail patients requires organisational readiness and adaptability to the local setting. On an individual level, a clear understanding of responsibilities and of the intervention's goal among patients and providers are necessary. Added attention must be paid to the individualisation to fit the needs and restrictions of frail patients. This makes prehabilitation a resource-intense, but promising intervention for frail surgery patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42022335282).

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of prehabilitation for elderly frail patients prior to elective surgery: a qualitative study with healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Prehabilitation aims to enhance functional capacity before surgery, minimise complications and achieve a better postoperative outcome. This can be particularly useful for older, frail patients to better tolerate surgery. The aim of this study was to identify what barriers and facilitators healthcare professionals in Germany experienced in the implementation and delivery of the multimodal prehabilitation programme "PRAEP-GO" for (pre-)frail adults aged 70 years and older to inform the implementation of prehabilitation into standard care. METHODS: A nested descriptive qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured face-to-face interviews with healthcare professionals involved in the PRAEP-GO trial from the Berlin and Brandenburg region in Germany. Transcripts were analysed using Kuckartz' qualitative content analysis. Results were interpreted and synthesised using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, a theoretical framework to allow their application to a more general context. RESULTS: A total of 14 interviews were conducted. Seven therapists (physio-, ergo-, sports therapy), five physicians and two employees from other professions with mainly administrative and organisational tasks in the project. All identified barriers and facilitating factors could be assigned to the themes of organisation, prehabilitation, cooperation and communication between healthcare professionals and with patients. Much optimisation potential was found regarding organisational aspects, e.g. addressing perceived staff shortages and optimising the patient pathway. Furthermore, it became apparent that communication and cooperation between professionals but also with patients need to be improved. More evidence regarding prehabilitation should be provided to convince professionals more. Prehabilitation should be multimodal and individualised, including the programme duration. Officially introducing prehabilitation into standard care would facilitate its delivery. DISCUSSION: These findings underscore the fact that successful implementation of prehabilitation programmes, such as PRAEP-GO, requires sufficient organisational infrastructure, human resources, access to knowledge, an adaptable and individualised programme design as well as good communication among professionals and with patients. The transferability of the findings is limited by the absence of nutritionists and resulting overrepresentation of other therapists in the sample. To further convince professionals and patients of the concept of prehabilitation, more research is needed to build a solid evidence base that will ensure greater awareness and, thus, more motivation and cooperation among professionals and patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (osf.io/ksfgj).

The rate and assessment of muscle wasting during critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with critical illness can lose more than 15% of muscle mass in one week, and this can have long-term detrimental effects. However, there is currently no synthesis of the data of intensive care unit (ICU) muscle wasting studies, so the true mean rate of muscle loss across all studies is unknown. The aim of this project was therefore to systematically synthetise data on the rate of muscle loss and to identify the methods used to measure muscle size and to synthetise data on the prevalence of ICU-acquired weakness in critically ill patients. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, PubMed, AMED, BNI, CINAHL, and EMCARE until January 2022 (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews [PROSPERO] registration: CRD420222989540. We included studies with at least 20 adult critically ill patients where the investigators measured a muscle mass-related variable at two time points during the ICU stay. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and assessed the study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies that included 3251 patients fulfilled the selection criteria. These studies investigated the rate of muscle wasting in 1773 (55%) patients and assessed ICU-acquired muscle weakness in 1478 (45%) patients. The methods used to assess muscle mass were ultrasound in 85% (n = 28/33) of the studies and computed tomography in the rest 15% (n = 5/33). During the first week of critical illness, patients lost every day -1.75% (95% CI -2.05, -1.45) of their rectus femoris thickness or -2.10% (95% CI -3.17, -1.02) of rectus femoris cross-sectional area. The overall prevalence of ICU-acquired weakness was 48% (95% CI 39%, 56%). CONCLUSION: On average, critically ill patients lose nearly 2% of skeletal muscle per day during the first week of ICU admission.

Clustering of critically ill patients using an individualized learning approach enables dose optimization of mobilization in the ICU.

BACKGROUND: While early mobilization is commonly implemented in intensive care unit treatment guidelines to improve functional outcome, the characterization of the optimal individual dosage (frequency, level or duration) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that artificial intelligence-based clustering of a large ICU cohort can provide individualized mobilization recommendations that have a positive impact on the likelihood of being discharged home. METHODS: This study is an analysis of a prospective observational database of two interdisciplinary intensive care units in Munich, Germany. Dosage of mobilization is determined by sessions per day, mean duration, early mobilization as well as average and maximum level achieved. A k-means cluster analysis was conducted including collected parameters at ICU admission to generate clinically definable clusters. RESULTS: Between April 2017 and May 2019, 948 patients were included. Four different clusters were identified, comprising "Young Trauma," "Severely ill & Frail," "Old non-frail" and "Middle-aged" patients. Early mobilization (< 72 h) was the most important factor to be discharged home in "Young Trauma" patients (ORadj 10.0 [2.8 to 44.0], p < 0.001). In the cluster of "Middle-aged" patients, the likelihood to be discharged home increased with each mobilization level, to a maximum 24-fold increased likelihood for ambulating (ORadj 24.0 [7.4 to 86.1], p < 0.001). The likelihood increased significantly when standing or ambulating was achieved in the older, non-frail cluster (ORadj 4.7 [1.2 to 23.2], p = 0.035 and ORadj 8.1 [1.8 to 45.8], p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: An artificial intelligence-based learning approach was able to divide a heterogeneous critical care cohort into four clusters, which differed significantly in their clinical characteristics and in their mobilization parameters. Depending on the cluster, different mobilization strategies supported the likelihood of being discharged home enabling an individualized and resource-optimized mobilization approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT03666286, retrospectively registered 04 September 2018.

Comparison of Different Ultrasound Methods to Assess Changes in Muscle Mass in Critically ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: Muscle ultrasound represents a promising approach to aid diagnoses of neuromuscular diseases in critically ill patients. Unfortunately, standardization of ultrasound measurements in clinical research is lacking, making direct comparisons between studies difficult. Protocols are required to assess qualitative muscle changes during an ICU stay in patients at high risk for the development of neuromuscular acquired weakness (ICUAW). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational analysis comprised of three prospective observational studies with the aim of diagnosing muscle changes by ultrasound measurement of the quadriceps muscle. Different protocols were used in each of the three studies. In total, 62 surgical, neurocritical care and trauma intensive care patients were serially assessed by different ultrasound protocols during the first week of critical illness. The relative change in ultrasound measurements was calculated for all possible locations, methods and sides. Comparison was obtained using mixed effect models with the location, the height and the side as influencing variables and patients as fixed effect. The relationship between variables and outcomes was assessed by multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Ultrasound methods and measurement sites of the quadriceps muscles from all protocols were equally effective in detecting muscle changes. During the first week of an ICU stay, two groups were identified: patients with decreased muscle mass on ultrasound (n = 42) and a cohort with enlargement (n = 23). Hospital mortality was significantly increased in the cohort with muscle swelling (8 (19%) versus 12 (52%), p = .013). CONCLUSIONS: Different approaches of ultrasound measurement during critical-illness are equally able to detect muscle changes. While some patients have a decrease in muscle mass, others show swelling, which may result in a reduced probability of surviving the hospital stay. Causative reasons for these results still remain unclear.

Mobilisation of critically ill patients receiving norepinephrine: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Mobilisation and exercise intervention in general are safe and feasible in critically ill patients. For patients requiring catecholamines, however, doses of norepinephrine safe for mobilisation in the intensive care unit (ICU) are not defined. This study aimed to describe mobilisation practice in our hospital and identify doses of norepinephrine that allowed a safe mobilisation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-centre cohort study of 16 ICUs at a university hospital in Germany with patients admitted between March 2018 and November 2021. Data were collected from our patient data management system. We analysed the effect of norepinephrine on level (ICU Mobility Scale) and frequency (units per day) of mobilisation, early mobilisation (within 72 h of ICU admission), mortality, and rate of adverse events. Data were extracted from free-text mobilisation entries using supervised machine learning (support vector machine). Statistical analyses were done using (generalised) linear (mixed-effect) models, as well as chi-square tests and ANOVAs. RESULTS: A total of 12,462 patients were analysed in this study. They received a total of 59,415 mobilisation units. Of these patients, 842 (6.8%) received mobilisation under continuous norepinephrine administration. Norepinephrine administration was negatively associated with the frequency of mobilisation (adjusted difference -0.07 mobilisations per day; 95% CI - 0.09, - 0.05; p ≤ 0.001) and early mobilisation (adjusted OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.76, 0.90; p ≤ 0.001), while a higher norepinephrine dose corresponded to a lower chance to be mobilised out-of-bed (adjusted OR 0.01; 95% CI 0.00, 0.04; p ≤ 0.001). Mobilisation with norepinephrine did not significantly affect mortality (p > 0.1). Higher compared to lower doses of norepinephrine did not lead to a significant increase in adverse events in our practice (p > 0.1). We identified that mobilisation was safe with up to 0.20 µg/kg/min norepinephrine for out-of-bed (IMS ≥ 2) and 0.33 µg/kg/min for in-bed (IMS 0-1) mobilisation. CONCLUSIONS: Mobilisation with norepinephrine can be done safely when considering the status of the patient and safety guidelines. We demonstrated that safe mobilisation was possible with norepinephrine doses up to 0.20 µg/kg/min for out-of-bed (IMS ≥ 2) and 0.33 µg/kg/min for in-bed (IMS 0-1) mobilisation.

Muscular myostatin gene expression and plasma concentrations are decreased in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: The objective was to investigate the role of gene expression and plasma levels of the muscular protein myostatin in intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICUAW). This was performed to evaluate a potential clinical and/or pathophysiological rationale of therapeutic myostatin inhibition. METHODS: A retrospective analysis from pooled data of two prospective studies to assess the dynamics of myostatin plasma concentrations (day 4, 8 and 14) and myostatin gene (MSTN) expression levels in skeletal muscle (day 15) was performed. Associations of myostatin to clinical and electrophysiological outcomes, muscular metabolism and muscular atrophy pathways were investigated. RESULTS: MSTN gene expression (median [IQR] fold change: 1.00 [0.68-1.54] vs. 0.26 [0.11-0.80]; p = 0.004) and myostatin plasma concentrations were significantly reduced in all critically ill patients when compared to healthy controls. In critically ill patients, myostatin plasma concentrations increased over time (median [IQR] fold change: day 4: 0.13 [0.08/0.21] vs. day 8: 0.23 [0.10/0.43] vs. day 14: 0.40 [0.26/0.61]; p < 0.001). Patients with ICUAW versus without ICUAW showed significantly lower MSTN gene expression levels (median [IQR] fold change: 0.17 [0.10/0.33] and 0.51 [0.20/0.86]; p = 0.047). Myostatin levels were directly correlated with muscle strength (correlation coefficient 0.339; p = 0.020) and insulin sensitivity index (correlation coefficient 0.357; p = 0.015). No association was observed between myostatin plasma concentrations as well as MSTN expression levels and levels of mobilization, electrophysiological variables, or markers of atrophy pathways. CONCLUSION: Muscular gene expression and systemic protein levels of myostatin are downregulated during critical illness. The previously proposed therapeutic inhibition of myostatin does therefore not seem to have a pathophysiological rationale to improve muscle quality in critically ill patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN77569430 -13th of February 2008 and ISRCTN19392591 17th of February 2011.

Attenuating Muscle Mass Loss in Critical Illness: the Role of Nutrition and Exercise.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Impaired recovery following an intensive care unit (ICU) admission is thought related to muscle wasting. Nutrition and physical activity are considered potential avenues to attenuate muscle wasting. The aim of this review was to present evidence for these interventions in attenuating muscle loss or improving strength and function. RECENT FINDINGS: Randomised controlled trials on the impact of nutrition or physical activity interventions in critically ill adult patients on muscle mass, strength or function are presented. No nutrition intervention has shown an effect on strength or function, and the effect on muscle mass is conflicting. RCTs on the effect of physical activity demonstrate conflicting results; yet, there is a signal for improved strength and function with higher levels of physical activity, particularly when commenced early. Further research is needed to elucidate the impact of nutrition and physical activity on muscle mass, strength and function, particularly in combination.

Detection of delirium by family members in the intensive care unit: Translation, Cross-Cultural adaptation and validation of the Family Confusion Assessment Method for the German-Speaking area.

AIM: The aim of this study was the translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Family Confusion Assessment Method in critically ill patients. BACKGROUND: Delirium is a frequently unrecognized disorder in critically ill patients. Visiting family members might be the first to notice subtle changes in a patient's cognition and behaviour. The Family Confusion Assessment Method was developed to detect delirium by family members, but has not been available for the German-speaking area yet. DESIGN: A prospective validation study was conducted between January 2020 and October 2020. METHODS: The Family Confusion Assessment Method was translated into German according to the Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes. Subsequently, we compared the Family Confusion Assessment Method with the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit in critically ill patients and their family members in a medical intensive care unit in Germany. RESULTS: We included 50 dyads of critically ill patients and their family members. The prevalence of delirium measured by Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit was 44%. Cohen's kappa coefficient was 0.84. The German Family Confusion Assessment Method had a high sensitivity of 95.5% and specificity of 89.3%. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 87.5% and 96.2% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the German Family Confusion Assessment Method is an accurate assessment tool for delirium detection in the intensive care unit by family members. Furthermore, the results indicate that family members may identify delirium by the Family Confusion Assessment Method without prior training. IMPACT: Collaborating medical staff with patients' family members to detect delirium in the intensive care unit may lead to early recognition of delirium.

[Mobilization of Intensive Care Unit Patients: How Can the ICU Rooms and Modern Medical Equipment Help?] / Mobilisation auf Intensivstationen: Intensivpflegezimmer und Medizintechnik können helfen.

Intensive Care Unit patients frequently develop physical impairments, mainly weakness, during their ICU stay. Early mobilization is a central therapeutic element in patients on an intensive care unit to prevent and treat these physical sequelae to conserve independence. Different barriers such as lacking patient motivation, insufficient staffing and fear of dislocating vascular access or the airway led to insufficient implementation of current guideline recommendation. Integration of modern medical equipment as well as the adequate ICU room concepts is a promising option to overcome those barriers.Allowing for sufficient free floor area when planning an ICU - maybe through the integration of mobile elements - is likely to ease early mobilization and should be thoroughly considered when building or remodeling an ICU. Furthermore, wireless monitoring has been deemed necessary and could potentially decrease the fear regarding dislocation due to less cable or lines that need to be managed during mobilization.Virtual reality is a rapidly evolving field and while in ICU patients it could so far only show to reduce stress level it has been shown to improve rehabilitation in stroke patients. It is imaginable that its integration in mobilization on the ICU will boost patients' motivation. Trials are still outstanding.Robotics integrated in the ICU bed or in form of exoskeletons are currently being piloted in critically ill patients with many expected benefits due to the ability to support patients tailored to their individual needs, reduce staff requirements as the robotics will cover support function and improved duration and intensity of mobilization as for example the patient can be ambulated without ever leaving the bed, which also translates into potentially reduced fear regarding dislocation of the airway or vascular access.Currently, evidence on the benefits regarding the integration of ICU rooms as well as modern medical technology into the process of (early) mobilization is lacking but especially in the sector of robotics a huge potential is to be suspected.

[The Frail Patient in a Fictitious Case Study]. / Der fraile Patient: fiktives Fallbeispiel.

Various limitations in everyday life can indicate a frailty syndrome. These limitations are not always directly visible and result from a wide variety of domains. Fried et al. described these limitations of different domains as frailty syndrome. This syndrome can be acutely worsened by different influencing factors. One major risk factor is an upcoming anesthesia and surgery. Frailty is associated with a significantly increased risk of peri- and postoperative complications. To avoid acute deterioration due to anesthesia and surgery, the concept of prehabilitation was developed. The aim is to specifically address the respective deficits and to develop an individual training concept together with the patient. Prehabilitation can significantly improve the risk of complications and the outcome of frail patients. In this context, it is important to establish routine screening in order to detect a frailty syndrome in everyday clinical practice and to create opportunities for prehabilitation.

[Prehabilitation for Preparing Older People with Frailty for Surgery]. / Prähabilitation als OP-Vorbereitung bei Patienten mit Frailty.

Older people demonstrate a higher risk for the occurrence of peri- and postsurgical complications. A frequent risk factor for this is the prevalence of a status called "frailty". In general, this status can be reversed by adequate therapeutic and medical interventions. More, current evidence suggests that these measures, as part of a so-called prehabilitation, can reduce the risk for experiencing peri- and postsurgical complications and thus assist the rehabilitation process, increase quality of life, and avoid care dependency and a loss of autonomy of these patients. In this article, we describe the concept of prehabilitation, its options to adapt and design this new form of intervention, as well as presenting current evidence. An actual project and a case example on prehabilitation provide an example and outlook.

A Global Survey on Diagnostic, Therapeutic and Preventive Strategies in Intensive Care Unit-Acquired Weakness.

Background and Objectives: Intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) is one of the most frequent neuromuscular complications in critically ill patients. We conducted a global survey to evaluate the current practices of diagnostics, treatment and prevention in patients with ICU-AW. Materials and Methods: A pre-survey was created with international experts. After revision, the final survey was endorsed by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) using the online platform SurveyMonkey®. In 27 items, we addressed strategies of diagnostics, therapy and prevention. An invitation link was sent by email to all ESICM members. Furthermore, the survey was available on the ESICM homepage. Results: A total of 154 healthcare professionals from 39 countries participated in the survey. An ICU-AW screening protocol was used by 20% (28/140) of participants. Forty-four percent (62/141) of all participants reported performing routine screening for ICU-AW, using clinical examination as the method of choice (124/141, 87.9%). Almost 63% (84/134) of the participants reported using current treatment strategies for patients with ICU-AW. The use of treatment and prevention strategies differed between intensivists and non-intensivists regarding the reduction in sedatives (80.0% vs. 52.6%, p = 0.002), neuromuscular blocking agents (76.4% vs. 50%, p = 0.004), corticosteroids (69.1% vs. 37.2%, p < 0.001) and glycemic control regimes (50.9% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.002). Mobilization and physical activity are the most frequently reported treatment strategies for ICU-AW (111/134, 82.9%). The availability of physiotherapists (92/134, 68.7%) and the lack of knowledge about ICU-AW within the medical team (83/134, 61.9%) were the main obstacles to the implementation of the strategies. The necessity to develop guidelines for the screening, diagnosing, treatment and prevention of ICU-AW was recognized by 95% (127/133) of participants. Conclusions: A great heterogeneity regarding diagnostics, treatment and prevention of ICU-AW was reported internationally. Comprehensive guidelines with evidence-based recommendations for ICU-AW management are needed.

Effects of the Level and Duration of Mobilization Therapy in the Surgical ICU on the Loss of the Ability to Live Independently: An International Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: It is unclear whether early mobilization in the surgical ICU helps improve patients' functional recovery to a level that enables independent living. We assessed dose of mobilization (level + duration). We tested the research hypotheses that dose of mobilization predicts adverse discharge and that both duration of mobilization and maximum mobilization level predict adverse discharge. DESIGN: International, prospective cohort study. SETTING: Study conducted in five surgical ICUs at four different institutions. PATIENTS: One hundred fifty patients who were functionally independent before admission (Barthel Index ≥ 70) and who were expected to stay in the ICU for greater than or equal to 72 hours. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mobilization was quantified daily, and treatments from all healthcare providers were included. We developed and used the Mobilization Quantification Score that quantifies both level and duration of mobilization. We assessed the association between the dose of mobilization (level + duration; exposure) and adverse discharge disposition (loss of the ability to live independently; primary outcome). There was wide variability in the dose of mobilization across centers and patients, which could not be explained by patients' comorbidity or disease severity. Dose of mobilization was associated with reduced risk of adverse discharge (adjusted odds ratio, 0.21; 95%CI, 0.09-0.50; p < 0.001). Both level and duration explained variance of adverse discharge (adjusted odds ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12-0.65; p = 0.003; adjusted odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06-0.36; p < 0.001, respectively). Duration compared with the level of mobilization tended to explain more variance in adverse discharge (area under the curve duration 0.73; 95% CI, 0.64-0.82; area under the curve mobilization level 0.68; 95% CI, 0.58-0.77; p = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: We observed wide variability in dose of mobilization treatment applied, which could not be explained by patients' comorbidity or disease severity. High dose of mobilization is an independent predictor of patients' ability to live independently after discharge. Duration of mobilization sessions should be taken into account in future quality improvement and research projects.

International variation in the management of severe COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence to support the management of severe COVID-19 patients. METHODS: To document this variation in practices, we performed an online survey (April 30-May 25, 2020) on behalf of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). A case vignette was sent to ESICM members. Questions investigated practices for a previously healthy 39-year-old patient presenting with severe hypoxemia from COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: A total of 1132 ICU specialists (response rate 20%) from 85 countries (12 regions) responded to the survey. The survey provides information on the heterogeneity in patient's management, more particularly regarding the timing of ICU admission, the first line oxygenation strategy, optimization of management, and ventilatory settings in case of refractory hypoxemia. Practices related to antibacterial, antiviral, and anti-inflammatory therapies are also investigated. CONCLUSIONS: There are important practice variations in the management of severe COVID-19 patients, including differences at regional and individual levels. Large outcome studies based on multinational registries are warranted.