Effects of robotic-assisted early mobilization versus conventional mobilization in intensive care unit patients: prospective interventional cohort study with retrospective control group analysis.

BACKGROUND: Approximately one in three survivors of critical illness suffers from intensive-care-unit-acquired weakness, which increases mortality and impairs quality of life. By counteracting immobilization, a known risk factor, active mobilization may mitigate its negative effects on patients. In this single-center trial, the effect of robotic-assisted early mobilization in the intensive care unit (ICU) on patients' outcomes was investigated. METHODS: We enrolled 16 adults scheduled for lung transplantation to receive 20 min of robotic-assisted mobilization and verticalization twice daily during their first week in the ICU (intervention group: IG). A control group (CG) of 13 conventionally mobilized patients after lung transplantation was recruited retrospectively. Outcome measures included the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, muscle parameters evaluated by ultrasound, and quality of life after three months. RESULTS: During the first week in the ICU, the intervention group received a median of 6 (interquartile range 3-8) robotic-assisted sessions of early mobilization and verticalization. There were no statistically significant differences in the duration of mechanical ventilation (IG: median 126 vs. CG: 78 h), length of ICU stay, muscle parameters evaluated by ultrasound, and quality of life after three months between the IG and CG. CONCLUSION: In this study, robotic-assisted mobilization was successfully implemented in the ICU setting. No significant differences in patients' outcomes were observed between conventional and robotic-assisted mobilization. However, randomized and larger studies are necessary to validate the adequacy of robotic mobilization in other cohorts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This single-center interventional trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov as NCT05071248 on 27/08/2021.

Robot-assisted early mobilization for intensive care unit patients: Feasibility and first-time clinical use.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilization is only carried out to a limited extent in the intensive care unit. To address this issue, the robotic assistance system VEMOTION® was developed to facilitate (early) mobilization measures more easily. This paper describes the first integration of robotic assistance systems in acute clinical intensive care units. OBJECTIVE: Feasibility test of robotic assistance in early mobilization of intensive care patients in routine clinical practice. SETTING: Two intensive care units guided by anesthesiology at a German university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who underwent elective surgery with postoperative treatment in the intensive care unit and had an estimated ventilation time over 48 h. METHODS: Participants underwent robot-assisted mobilization, scheduled for twenty-minute sessions twice a day, ten times or one week, conducted by nursing staff under actual operational conditions on the units. No randomization or blinding took place. We assessed data regarding feasible cutoff points (in brackets): the possibility of enrollment (x ≥ 50 %), duration (pre- and post-setup (x ≤ 25 min), therapy duration (x = 20 min), and intervention-related parameters (number of mobilizing professionals (x ≤ 2), intensity of training, events that led to adverse events, errors or discontinuation). Mobilizing professionals rated each mobilization regarding their physical stress (x ≤ 3) and feasibility (x ≥ 4) on a 7 Point Likert Scale. An estimated sample size of at least twenty patients was calculated. We analyzed the data descriptively. RESULTS: Within 6 months, we screened thirty-two patients for enrollment. 23 patients were included in the study and 16 underwent mobilization using robotic assistance, 7 dropped out (enrollment eligibility = 69 %). On average, 1.9 nurses were involved per therapy unit. Participants received 5.6 robot-assisted mobilizations in mean. Pre- and post-setup had a mean duration of 18 min, therapy a mean of 21 min. The robot-assisted mobilization was started after a median of 18 h after admission to the intensive care unit. We documented two adverse events (pain), twelve errors in handling, and seven unexpected events that led to interruptions or discontinuation. No serious adverse events occurred. The mobilizing nurses rated their physical stress as low (mean 2.0 ±â€¯1.3) and the intervention as feasible (mean 5.3 ±â€¯1.6). CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted mobilization was feasible, but specific safety measures should be implemented to prevent errors. Robotic-assisted mobilization requires process adjustments and consideration of unit staffing levels, as the intervention does not save staff resources or time. REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.org TRN: NCT05071248; Date: 2021/10/08; URL https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05071248. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Robot-assisted early mobilization in intensive care patients is feasible and no adverse event occurred.

Quantitative computed tomography has higher sensitivity detecting critical bone mineral density compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in postmenopausal women and elderly men with osteoporotic fractures: a real-life study.

INTRODUCTION: Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk despite proven limitations. Quantitative computed tomography (QCT) is regarded as a sensitive method for diagnosis and follow-up. Pathologic fractures are classified as the main clinical manifestation of osteoporosis. The objective of the study was to compare DXA and QCT to determine their sensitivity and discriminatory power. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients aged 50 years and older were included who had DXA of the lumbar spine and femur and additional QCT of the lumbar spine within 365 days. Fractures and bone mineral density (BMD) were retrospectively examined. BMD measurements were analyzed for the detection of osteoporotic fractures. Sensitivity and receiver operating characteristic curve were used for calculations. As an indication for a second radiological examination was given, the results were compared with control groups receiving exclusively DXA or QCT for diagnosis or follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, BMD measurements of 404 subjects were analyzed. DXA detected 15 (13.2%) patients having pathologic fractures (n = 114) with normal bone density, 66 (57.9%) with osteopenia, and 33 (28.9%) with osteoporosis. QCT categorized no patients having pathologic fractures with healthy bone density, 14 (12.3%) with osteopenia, and 100 (87.7%) with osteoporosis. T-score DXA, trabecular BMD QCT, and cortical BMD QCT correlated weakly. Trabecular BMD QCT and cortical BMD QCT classified osteoporosis with decreased bone mineral density (AUC 0.680; 95% CI 0.618-0.743 and AUC 0.617; 95% CI 0.553-0.682, respectively). T-score DXA could not predict prevalent pathologic fractures. In control groups, each consisting of 50 patients, DXA and QCT were significant classifiers to predict prevalent pathologic fractures. CONCLUSION: Our results support that volumetric measurements by QCT in preselected subjects represent a more sensitive method for the diagnosis of osteoporosis and prediction of fractures compared to DXA.

Virtual reality in managing Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS): a scoping review.

Background: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a severe pain disorder that does not yet have a specific treatment. Patients with CRPS not only suffer from a wide range of symptoms that affect their quality of life but also present psychological affections to the way they see their body and specifically their affected limb. Virtual Reality (VR) modalities have become a targeted treatment for chronic pain and in the case of CRPS, may be a valuable approach to the mechanisms that affect these patients. Objectives: Using the PRISMA Scoping Review guidelines, we intend to uncover the key information from the studies available about VR modalities in the treatment of CRPS. We focus on the improvement of pain levels, body perception disturbances (BPD), and limb movement/daily function. Results: Our search strategy resulted in 217 articles from PubMed. Twenty were assessed for eligibility and seven were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Of these seven articles, we included a clinical trial, three pilot studies, a blinded randomized controlled trial, a crossover double-blind trial, and a randomized controlled trial. These studies provide important subjective patient findings, along with some statistically significant results in the experiences of VR therapies modulating pain, BPD, and improving limb movement/daily function. However, not all the studies included statistical analysis, and there are contradicting data found from some patients that did not perceive any improvement from VR therapies. Conclusions: We describe the results found in 7 articles that focus on the treatment of CRPS with VR modalities. Overall, the articles have various limitations, but the strategies related to immersive virtual reality, cardiac signaling, body switching and limb modulation have shown the most promising results for pain reduction and BPD improvement. These strategies reflect on pathophysiological mechanisms that are hypothesized to be affected in CRPS patients leading to the chronic pain and BPD that they experience. Not much evidence was found for improvement in limb movement and daily function. This review is a pathway for future studies on this topic and a more extensive data synthesis when more information is available.

Barriers and facilitators in the implementation of mobilization robots in hospitals from the perspective of clinical experts and developers.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilization can help reduce severe side effects such as muscle atrophy that occur during hospitalization. However, due to time and staff shortages in intensive and critical care as well as safety risks for patients, it is often difficult to adhere to the recommended therapy time of twenty minutes twice a day. New robotic technologies might be one approach to achieve early mobilization effectively for patients and also relieve users from physical effort. Nevertheless, currently there is a lack of knowledge regarding the factors that are important for integrating of these technologies into complex treatment settings like intensive care units or rehabilitation units. METHODS: European experts from science, technical development and end-users of robotic systems (n = 13) were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guideline to identify barriers and facilitating factors for the integration of robotic systems into daily clinical practice. They were asked about structural, personnel and environmental factors that had an impact on integration and how they had solved challenges. A latent content analysis was performed regarding the COREQ criteria. RESULTS: We found relevant factors regarding the development, introduction, and routine of the robotic system. In this context, costs, process adjustments, a lack of exemptions, and a lack of support from the manufacturers/developers were identified as challenges. Easy handling, joint decision making between the end-users and the decision makers in the hospital, an accurate process design and the joint development of the robotic system of end-users and technical experts were found to be facilitating factors. CONCLUSION: The integration and preparation for the integration of robotic assistance systems into the inpatient setting is a complex intervention that involves many parties. This study provides evidence for hospitals or manufacturers to simplify the planning of integrations for permanent use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS-ID: DRKS00023848; registered 10/12/2020.

Robot-assisted early mobilization of intensive care patients: a feasibility study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Early mobilization positively influences the outcome of critically ill patients, yet in clinical practice, the implementation is sometimes challenging. In this study, an adaptive robotic assistance system will be used for early mobilization in intensive care units. The study aims to evaluate the experience of the mobilizing professionals and the general feasibility of implementing robotic assistance for mobilization in intensive care as well as the effects on patient outcomes as a secondary outcome. METHODS: The study is single-centric, prospective, and interventional and follows a longitudinal study design. To evaluate the feasibility of robotic-assisted early mobilization, the number of patients included, the number of performed VEM (very early mobilization) sessions, and the number and type of adverse events will be collected. The behavior and experience of mobilizing professionals will be evaluated using standardized observations (n > 90) and episodic interviews (n > 36) before implementation, shortly after, and in routine. Patient outcomes such as duration of mechanical ventilation, loss of muscle mass, and physical activity will be measured and compared with a historical patient population. Approximately 30 patients will be included. DISCUSSION: The study will provide information about patient outcomes, feasibility, and the experience of mobilizing professionals. It will show whether robotic systems can increase the early mobilization frequency of critically ill patients. Within ICU structures, early mobilization as therapy could become more of a focus. Effects on the mobilizing professionals such as increased motivation, physical relief, or stress will be evaluated. In addition, this study will focus on whether current structures allow following the recommendation of mobilizing patients twice a day for at least 20 min. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05071248 . Date: 2021/10/21.

Resistance Training Combined with Balance or Gait Training for Patients with Parkinson's Disease: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

Background: Gait and balance disorders in patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) lead to major mobility limitations. To counteract this, physical therapy such as gait, balance, or resistance training is applied. Integrative training methods, which combine these elements, could be particularly effective. Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the effects of two integrative interventions on gait and balance of patients with PD. Methods: Twenty-six patients with PD received either resistance training in combination with gait training (gait resistance training, GRT) or resistance training in combination with balance training (stability resistance training, SRT) for six weeks. Gait and balance outcome parameters were assessed before, immediately after, and six weeks after the interventions. The primary outcome parameters were the functional reach test to evaluate balance and stride length to evaluate gait. Secondary outcomes included further gait analysis parameters, knee extension strength, the timed up and go test, and the six-minute walk test. Results: The functional reach test results were significantly better after the intervention in both groups. Stride length increased significantly only in the GRT group. Several further gait parameters and the six-minute walk test improved in the GRT group, and the increase in gait speed was significantly higher than in the SRT group. The SRT group performed better after the intervention regarding the timed up and go test and knee extension strength, the latter being significantly more improved than in the SRT group. At six-week follow-up, the improvement in functional reach was maintained in the SRT group. Conclusions: Integrative therapies, combining gait or balance training with resistance training, have specific positive effects in PD rehabilitation. More pronounced effects on gait parameters are achieved by GRT, while SRT has more impact on balance. Thus, the combination of both training methods might be particularly efficient in improving the mobility of PD patients.

[Early mobilization in the intensive care unit-Are robot-assisted systems the future?] / Frühmobilisation auf der Intensivstation ­ Sind robotergestützte Systeme die Zukunft?

BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit (ICU) acquired weakness is associated with reduced physical function, increased mortality and reduced quality of life, and affects about 43% of survivors of critical illness. Lacking therapeutic options, the prevention of known risk factors and implementation of early mobilization is essential. Robotic assistance devices are increasingly being studied in mobilization. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative review synthesizes the evidence of early mobilization in the ICU and focuses on the advantages of robotic assistance devices. RESULTS: Active mobilization should begin early during critical care. Interventions commencing 72 h after admission to the ICU are considered early. Mobilization interventions during critical care have been shown to be safe and reduce the time on mechanical ventilation in the ICU and the length of delirious episodes. Protocolized early mobilization interventions led to more active mobilization and increased functional independence and mobility at hospital discharge. In rehabilitation after stroke, robot-assisted training increases the chance of regaining independent walking ability, especially in more severely impaired patients, seems to be safe and increases muscle strength and quality of life in small trials. CONCLUSION: Early mobilization improves the outcome of the critically ill. Robotic devices support the gait training after stroke and are the subject of ongoing studies on early mobilization and verticalization in the intensive care setting.

App-Based Feedback for Rehabilitation Exercise Correction in Patients With Knee or Hip Osteoarthritis: Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of digital therapeutic solutions for rehabilitation of conditions such as osteoarthritis provides scalable access to rehabilitation. Few validated technological solutions exist to ensure supervision of users while they exercise at home. Motion Coach (Kaia Health GmbH) provides audiovisual feedback on exercise execution in real time on conventional smartphones. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that the interrater agreement between physiotherapists and Motion Coach would be noninferior to physiotherapists' interrater agreement for exercise evaluations in a cohort with osteoarthritis. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip were recruited at a university hospital to perform a set of 6 exercises. Agreement between Motion Coach and 2 physiotherapists' corrections for segments of the exercises were compared using Cohen κ and percent agreement. RESULTS: Participants (n=24) were enrolled and evaluated. There were no significant differences between interrater agreements (Motion Coach app vs physiotherapists: percent agreement 0.828; physiotherapist 1 vs physiotherapist 2: percent agreement 0.833; P<.001). Age (70 years or under, older than 70 years), gender (male, female), or BMI (30 kg/m2 or under, greater than 30 kg/m2) subgroup analysis revealed no detectable difference in interrater agreement. There was no detectable difference in levels of interrater agreement between Motion Coach vs physiotherapists and between physiotherapists in any of the 6 exercises. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated that Motion Coach is noninferior to physiotherapist evaluations. Interrater agreement did not differ between 2 physiotherapists or between physiotherapists and the Motion Coach app. This finding was valid for all investigated exercises and subgroups. These results confirm the ability of Motion Coach to detect user form during exercise and provide valid feedback to users with musculoskeletal disorders.

Attitudes and Expectations of Health Care Professionals Toward App-Based Therapy in Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Hip or Knee: Questionnaire Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of mobile health (mHealth) apps is becoming increasingly widespread. However, little is known about the attitudes, expectations, and basic acceptance of health care professionals toward such treatment options. As physical activity and behavior modification are crucial in osteoarthritis management, app-based therapy could be particularly useful for the self-management of this condition. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to determine the expectations and attitudes of medical professionals toward app-based therapy for osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. METHODS: Health care professionals attending a rehabilitation congress and employees of a university hospital were asked to fill out a questionnaire consisting of 16 items. A total of 240 questionnaires were distributed. RESULTS: A total of 127 participants completed the questionnaire. At 95.3% (121/127), the approval rate for app-based therapy for patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee was very high. Regarding possible concerns, aspects related to data protection and privacy were primarily mentioned (41/127, 32.3%). Regarding potential content, educational units, physiotherapeutic exercise modules, and practices based on motivation psychology were all met with broad approval. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed a high acceptance of app-based therapy for osteoarthritis, indicating a huge potential of this form of treatment to be applied, prescribed, and recommended by medical professionals. It was widely accepted that the content should reflect a multimodal therapy approach.