Rehabilitation for adult patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Current information on the latest rehabilitative practices is limited, with previous reviews only covering data up to October 2021, and some considering only patients on awake ECMO or with COVID-19. This review aims to present a concise overview of the latest findings on rehabilitation and highlight emerging trends for patients undergoing ECMO support. METHODS: This integrative review was conducted by searching the National Library of Medicine - PubMed database. Two different search strings "extracorporeal membrane oxygenation" AND "rehabilitation" and "extracorporeal membrane oxygenation" AND "physiotherapy" were used to search the published literature. Articles that did not describe rehabilitation techniques, editorials, conference proceedings, letters to editor, reviews and research protocols were excluded. Studies conducted on pediatric populations were also excluded. The search process was completed in December 2023. RESULTS: Thirteen articles were included in the final analysis. Eight hundred and thirty-nine patients aged between 27 and 63 years were included; 428 were men (51%). In 31% of the included studies, patients had COVID-19; nevertheless, rehabilitative activities did not differ from non-COVID-19 patients. In most studies, rehabilitation commenced within the first 48-96 h and consisted of progressive exercise and out-of-bed activities such as sitting, standing and walking. CONCLUSION: Current practice focuses on rehabilitative protocols that incorporate exercise routines with progressive intensity, greater emphasis on out-of-bed activities, and a multidisciplinary approach to patient mobilization.

Feasibility of mobilisation in ICU: a multi-centre point prevalence study of mobility practices in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilisation in critical care is recommended within clinical guidance; however, mobilisation prevalence across the UK is unknown. The study aimed to determine the proportion of patients mobilised out of bed within 48-72 h, to describe their physiological status, and to compare this to published consensus safety recommendations for out-of-bed activity. METHODS: A UK cross-sectional, multi-centre, observational study of adult critical care mobility practices was conducted. Demographic, physiological and organ support data, mobility level, and rationale for not mobilising out of bed, were collected for all patients on 3rd March 2022. Patients were categorised as: Group 1-mobilised ICU Mobility Scale (IMS) ≥ 3; Group 2-not-mobilised IMS < 3 with physiological reasons; or Group 3-not-mobilised IMS < 3 with non-physiological barriers to mobilisation. Rationale for the decision to not mobilise was collected qualitatively. Regression analysis was used to compare the physiological parameters of Group 1 (mobilised) versus Group 2 (not-mobilised with physiological reasons). Patients were stratified as 'low-risk', 'potential-risk' or 'high-risk' using published risk of adverse event ratings. RESULTS: Data were collected for 960 patients across 84 UK critical care units. Of these 393 (41%) mobilised, 416 (43%) were not-mobilised due to physiological reasons and 151 (16%) were not mobilised with non-physiological reasons. A total of 371 patients had been admitted for ≤ 3 days, of whom 180 (48%) were mobilised, 140 (38%) were not mobilised with physiological reasons, and 51 (14%) were not mobilised with non-physiological reasons. Of the 809 without non-physiological barriers to mobilisation, 367 (45%) had a low risk of adverse event rating and 120 (15%) a potential risk, of whom 309 (84%) and 78 (65%) mobilised, respectively. Mobility was associated with a Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale of - 1 to + 1, lower doses of vasoactive agents, a lower inspired oxygen requirement. CONCLUSION: Although only 40% of patients mobilised out of bed, 89% of those defined 'low-risk' did so. There is significant overlap in physiological parameters for mobilisation versus non-mobilisation groups, suggesting a comprehensive physiological assessment is vital in decision making rather than relying on arbitrary time points. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT05281705 Registered March 16, 2022. Retrospectively registered.

Physiotherapy for patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support: How, When, and Who. An international EuroELSO survey.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) continues to play an essential role in organ support in cardiogenic shock or acute respiratory distress syndrome and bridging to transplantation. The main purpose of the present survey was to define which clinical and organizational practices are adopted for the administration of physiotherapy in adult patients undergoing ECMO support worldwide. METHODS: This international survey was conceived in November 2021. The survey launch was announced at the 10th EuroELSO (European ELSO chapter) Congress, London, May 2022. RESULTS: The survey returned 32 questionnaires from 29 centers across 14 countries. 17 centers (53.1%) had more than 30 intensive care unit beds available and most (46.8%) were able to care for five to 10 patients on extracorporeal life support simultaneously. The predominant physiotherapist-to-patient ratio was 1:>5 (37.5%); physiotherapy was available 5/7 days and 7/7 days by 31.2% and 25% respectively. Respiratory physiotherapy was not defined by a specific protocol in most centers (46.8%) while 31.2% declared that the treatment commences less than 12 h after sedation is stopped/reduced. Mostly, early physiotherapy in non-cooperative ventilated patients was provided within the first 48 h (68.6%) and consisted of as passive range of motion, in-bed positioning, and splinting. Postural passages and sitting were provided to patients and walking was included in those advanced motor activities which are part of the treatment. CONCLUSION: Physiotherapy in patients on ECLS is feasible, however substantial variability exists between centers with a trend of delivering not protocolized and understaffed rehabilitation practices.

Does Preoperative Rehabilitation Influence the Quality of Life in Patients Who Are Candidates for Lung Transplant?

OBJECTIVES: Lung transplant is an excellent therapeutic option for patients with advanced/end-stage pulmonary disease. The purpose of this review was to define whether preoperative rehabilitation influences quality of life in patients who are candidates for lung transplant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a scoping review conducted by searching 4 primary databases from inception until January 2022. Three keywords, "lung transplantation," "preoperative rehabilitation," and "quality of life," were matched using the Boolean operator AND. In each database, the following fields were searched: PubMed (all fields), Scopus (title, abstract, keywords), Cochrane Library (title, abstract, keywords), and Web of Science (topic). Filters were applied for age (adult only) and language (English only). No filters were applied for gender, publication date, and subject. The search process was completed in January 2022. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We retrieved 57 citations from these databases. After removal of duplicates, 41 documents were screened for eligibility. Two articles were included in the final analysis: 1 was a systematic review, and 1 was an observational prospective study. The rehabilitative interventions were mainly focused on motor and breathing exercises and were integrated by education programs. Preoperative rehabilitation was effective atimproving quality of life and mood status and reducing dyspnea in patients waiting for lung transplant. In addition, the 6-minute walking distance increased after patients participated in preoperative rehabilitation. Preoperative rehabilitation was composed of different types of exercise with variable duration (3-20 weeks) and frequency (3-6 times per week). Patients on the active wait list for lung transplant should be encouraged to attend preoperative rehabilitation in order to preserve and improve their quality of life.

A case study of a collaborative allied health and nursing crisis response.

The COVID-19 pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization on 11 March 2020. The rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 required an equally rapid response from health-care organizations to find innovative ways to utilize the existing workforce to care for people with COVID-19. Using an evaluative case study, a unique insight into the collaborative allied health and nursing professions' response to COVID-19 at a specialist cardiothoracic hospital in the United Kingdom is presented. The aim of the case study was to evaluate how an interprofessional workforce from the wider organization could be supported to work in critical care as part of a crisis response. In identifying the key enablers to setting up an interprofessional Essential Care Team and learning from the lived experiences of those involved, this case study has demonstrated that, in supported, interprofessional teams the wider organizational workforce can be facilitated to effectively and safely provide critical care services. The lessons learned from this study will support future pandemic responses and aid the identification of further opportunities for interprofessional learning and practice. Ultimately, the study highlights that by identifying and investing in the key enablers, health-care organizations can be better prepared to respond to a global crisis.

In-patient physiotherapy for adults on veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation - United Kingdom ECMO Physiotherapy Network: A consensus agreement for best practice.

Clinical specialist physiotherapists from the five severe respiratory failure centres in England where respiratory extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is practiced have established this consensus agreement for physiotherapy best practice. The severe respiratory failure centres are Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester; Glenfield Hospital, Leicester; Papworth Hospital, Cambridge; Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital, London and The Royal Brompton Hospital, London. Although research into physiotherapy and ECMO is increasing, there is not a sufficient amount to write evidence-based guidelines; hence the development of a consensus document, using knowledge and experience of the specialist physiotherapists working with patients receiving ECMO. The document outlines safety aspects, practicalities and additional treatment considerations for physiotherapists conducting respiratory care and physical rehabilitation.

Use of a Structured Mirrors Intervention Does Not Reduce Delirium Incidence But May Improve Factual Memory Encoding in Cardiac Surgical ICU Patients Aged Over 70 Years: A Pilot Time-Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

Introduction: Post-operative delirium remains a significant problem, particularly in the older surgical patient. Previous evidence suggests that the provision of supplementary visual feedback about ones environment via the use of a mirror may positively impact on mental status and attention (core delirium diagnostic domains). We aimed to explore whether use of an evidence-based mirrors intervention could be effective in reducing delirium and improving post-operative outcomes such as factual memory encoding of the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) environment in older cardiac surgical patients. Methods: This was a pilot time-cluster randomized controlled trial at a 32-bed ICU, enrolling 223 patients aged 70 years and over, admitted to ICU after elective or urgent cardiac surgery from October 29, 2012 to June 23, 2013. The Mirrors Group received a structured mirrors intervention at set times (e.g., following change in mental status). The Usual Care Group received the standard care without mirrors. Primary outcome was ICU delirium incidence; secondary outcomes were ICU delirium days, ICU days with altered mental status or inattention, total length of ICU stay, physical mobilization (balance confidence) at ICU discharge, recall of factual and delusional ICU memories at 12 weeks, Health-Related Quality of Life at 12 weeks, and acceptability of the intervention. Results: The intervention was not associated with a significant reduction in ICU delirium incidence [Mirrors: 20/115 (17%); Usual Care: 17/108 (16%)] or duration [Mirrors: 1 (1-3); Usual Care: 2 (1-8)]. Use of the intervention on ICU was predictive of significantly higher recall of factual (but not delusional) items at 12 weeks after surgery (p = 0.003) and acceptability was high, with clinicians using mirrors at 86% of all recorded hourly observations. The intervention did not significantly impact on other secondary outcomes. Conclusion: Use of a structured mirrors intervention on the post-operative ICU does not reduce delirium, but may result in improved factual memory encoding in older cardiac surgical patients. This effect may occur via mechanisms unrelated to delirium, altered mental status, or inattention. The intervention may provide a new means of improving outcomes in patients at risk of post-ICU anxiety and/or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01599689.