Application of the Perme Score to assess mobility in patients with COVID-19 in inpatient units.

Objective: To evaluate the ability of the Perme Score to detect changes in the level of mobility of patients with COVID-19 outside the intensive care unit. Method: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in inpatient units of a private hospital. Patients older than 18, diagnosed with COVID-19, who were discharged from the intensive care unit and remained in the inpatient units were included. The variables collected included demographic characterization data, length of hospital stay, respiratory support, Perme Score values at admission to the inpatient unit and at hospital discharge and the mobilization phases performed during physical therapy. Result: A total of 69 patients were included, 80% male and with a mean age of 61.9 years (SD=12.5 years). The comparison of the Perme Score between the times of admission to the inpatient unit and at hospital discharge shows significant variation, with a mean increase of 7.3 points (95%CI:5.7-8.8; p<0.001), with estimated mean values of Perme Score at admission of 17.5 (15.8; 19.3) and hospital discharge of 24.8 (23.3; 26.3). There was no association between Perme Score values and length of hospital stay (measure of effect and 95%CI 0.929 (0.861; 1.002; p=0.058)). Conclusion: The Perme Score proved effective for assessing mobility in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 with prolonged hospitalization outside the intensive care setting. In addition, we demonstrated by the value of the Perme Score that the level of mobility increases significantly from the time of admission to inpatient units until hospital discharge. There was no association between the Perme Score value and length of hospital stay.

Mobilization practices in the ICU: A nationwide 1-day point- prevalence study in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: Mobilization of critically ill patients is safe and may improve functional outcomes. However, the prevalence of mobilization activities of ICU patients in Brazil is unknown. METHODS: A one-day point prevalence prospective study with a 24-hour follow-up period was conducted in Brazil. Demographic data, ICU characteristics, prevalence of mobilization activities, level of patients' mobilization, and main reasons for not mobilizing patients were collected for all adult patients with more than 24hs of ICU stay in the 26 participating ICUs. Mobilization activity was defined as any exercise performed during ICU stay. RESULTS: In total, 358 patients were included in this study. Mobilization activities were performed in 87.4% of patients. Patients received mobilization activities while under invasive mechanical ventilation (44.1%), noninvasive ventilation (11.7%), or without any ventilatory support (44.2%). Passive exercises were more frequently performed [46.5% in all patients; 82.3% in mechanically ventilated patients]. Mobilization activities included in-bed exercise regimen (72.2%). Out-of-bed mobility was reported in 39.9% of mobilized patients, and in 16.3% of patients under invasive mechanical ventilation. The presence of an institutional early mobility protocol was associated with early mobilization (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 1.23 to 8.22; p = 0.016), and with out-of-bed exercise (OR, 5.80; 95% CI, 1.33 to 25.30; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Mobilization activities in critically ill patients in Brazil was highly prevalent, although there was almost no active mobilization in the mechanically ventilated patients. Moreover, the presence of an institutional early mobility protocol was associated with a threefold higher chance of ICU mobilization during that day.

Low mechanical ventilation times and reintubation rates associated with a specific weaning protocol in an intensive care unit setting: a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: A number of complications exist with invasive mechanical ventilation and with the use of and withdrawal from prolonged ventilator support. The use of protocols that enable the systematic identification of patients eligible for an interruption in mechanical ventilation can significantly reduce the number of complications. This study describes the application of a weaning protocol and its results. METHODS: Patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were included and assessed daily to identify individuals who were ready to begin the weaning process. RESULTS: We studied 252 patients with a median mechanical ventilation time of 3.7 days (interquartile range of 1 to 23 days), a rapid shallow breathing index value of 48 (median), a maximum inspiratory pressure of 40 cmH(2)0, and a maximum expiratory pressure of 40 cm H(2)0 (median). Of these 252 patients, 32 (12.7%) had to be reintubated, which represented weaning failure. Noninvasive ventilation was used postextubation in 170 (73%) patients, and 15% of these patients were reintubated, which also represented weaning failure. The mortality rate of the 252 patients studied was 8.73% (22), and there was no significant difference in the age, gender, mechanical ventilation time, and maximum inspiratory pressure between the survivors and nonsurvivors. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a specific weaning protocol resulted in a lower mechanical ventilation time and an acceptable reintubation rate. This protocol can be used as a comparative index in hospitals to improve the weaning system, its monitoring and the informative reporting of patient outcomes and may represent a future tool and source of quality markers for patient care.

Low mechanical ventilation times and reintubation rates associated with a specific weaning protocol in an intensive care unit setting: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVES: A number of complications exist with invasive mechanical ventilation and with the use of and withdrawal from prolonged ventilator support. The use of protocols that enable the systematic identification of patients eligible for an interruption in mechanical ventilation can significantly reduce the number of complications. This study describes the application of a weaning protocol and its results. METHODS: Patients who required invasive mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were included and assessed daily to identify individuals who were ready to begin the weaning process. RESULTS: We studied 252 patients with a median mechanical ventilation time of 3.7 days (interquartile range of 1 to 23 days), a rapid shallow breathing index value of 48 (median), a maximum inspiratory pressure of 40 cmH(2)0, and a maximum expiratory pressure of 40 cm H(2)0 (median). Of these 252 patients, 32 (12.7%) had to be reintubated, which represented weaning failure. Noninvasive ventilation was used postextubation in 170 (73%) patients, and 15% of these patients were reintubated, which also represented weaning failure. The mortality rate of the 252 patients studied was 8.73% (22), and there was no significant difference in the age, gender, mechanical ventilation time, and maximum inspiratory pressure between the survivors and nonsurvivors. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a specific weaning protocol resulted in a lower mechanical ventilation time and an acceptable reintubation rate. This protocol can be used as a comparative index in hospitals to improve the weaning system, its monitoring and the informative reporting of patient outcomes and may represent a future tool and source of quality markers for patient care.