Effects of the High-Intensity Early Mobilization on Long-Term Functional Status of Patients with Mechanical Ventilation in the Intensive Care Unit

Zhang, Chuanlin; Wang, Xueqin; Mi, Jie; Zhang, Zeju; Luo, Xinyi; Gan, Ruiying; Mu, Shaoyu

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/4118896

Critical Care Research and Practice

On this page

Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Conclusions Data Availability Ethical Approval Consent Conflicts of Interest Authors’ Contributions Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2024 | Article ID 4118896 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/4118896

Effects of the High-Intensity Early Mobilization on Long-Term Functional Status of Patients with Mechanical Ventilation in the Intensive Care Unit

Chuanlin Zhang,¹Xueqin Wang,¹Jie Mi,^1,2Zeju Zhang,³Xinyi Luo,¹Ruiying Gan,¹and Shaoyu Mu²

Academic Editor: Thomas Spentzas

Received29 Nov 2023

Revised08 Mar 2024

Accepted18 Mar 2024

Published22 Mar 2024

Abstract

Objective. Intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired weakness often occurs in patients with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Early active mobility may reduce ICU-acquired weakness, improve functional status, and reduce disability. The aim of this study was to investigate whether high-intensity early mobility improves post-ICU discharge functional status of IMV patients. Methods. 132 adult patients in the ICU who were undergoing IMV were randomly assigned into two groups with a ratio of 1 : 1, with one group received high-intensity early mobility (intervention group, IG), while the other group received conventional treatment (control group, CG). The functional status (Barthel Index (BI)), capacity of mobility (Perme score and ICU Mobility Scale (IMS)), muscle strength (Medical Research Council sum scores (MRC-SS)), mortality, complication, length of ICU stay, and duration of IMV were evaluated at ICU discharge or after 3-month of ICU discharge. Results. The patient’s functional status was improved (BI scores 90.6 ± 18.0 in IG vs. 77.7 ± 27.9 in CG; ), and capacity of mobility was increased (Perme score 17.6 ± 7.1 in IG vs. 12.2 ± 8.5 in CG, ; IMS 4.7 ± 2.6 in IG vs. 3.0 ± 2.6 in CG, ). The IG had a higher muscle strength and lower incidence of ICU-acquired weakness (ICUAW) than that in the CG. The incidence of mortality and delirium was also lower than CG at ICU discharge. However, there were no differences in terms of length of ICU stay, duration of IMV, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and venous thrombosis. Conclusions. High-intensity early mobility improved the patient’s functional status and increased capacity of mobility with IMV. The benefits to functional status remained after 3 month of ICU discharge. Other benefits included higher muscle strength, lower incidence of ICUAW, mortality, and delirium in IG.

1. Introduction

Patients with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) in the intensive care unit (ICU) are generally treated with sedation, so their activities are limited, and they often receive passive position changes by nurses and physiotherapists [1–4]. A cross-sectional survey involving 444 ICUs showed that only 57% of ICUs implemented early mobilization and 24.9% would evaluate and carry out it within 48 h after ICU admission [5]. Prolonged bed rest and immobilization may lead to complications such as muscular wasting, delirium, and ICU-acquired weakness (ICUAW) [6–8]. Previous studies had shown that more than 50% of patients with ICUAW were mechanically ventilated, and the incidence of ICUAW in patients with mechanical ventilation (MV) for 5 to 7 days was 25% to 65% [9], and that in patients with long-term MV (≥10 days), the incidence of ICUAW was over 67% [10]. In addition, ICUAW is associated with an increased risk of prolonged hospitalization, impaired recovery, and death [11]. Even among surviving discharged patients, the health-related quality of life is poor [12]. Several guidelines or expert consensus indicate that it is safe and feasible to initiate early activity in patients receiving IMV [1, 13–15]. Moreover, early mobilization should be implemented with daily goal planning by a multidisciplinary team [16]. However, translating research into clinical practice is challenging, especially for early activity in patients with IMV. There have been several studies of patients with IMV in the ICU, most of which report inactivity or more passive activity, and one study shows that half of the patients engaged in ambulation [17–20].

There have been conflicting results in studies examining the effects of early mobility on functional status and quality of life in the ICU [21–29]. Studies have focused more on the effect of early activity on reducing ICUAW than on short- and long-term functional status after ICU discharge [30–34]. If the patients have good physical function after ICU discharge, it may reduce the care burden of the family members. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the impact of early activities on the physical function postdischarge of patients. An international prospective cohort study reports that high-intensity early mobilization is an independent predictor of patient’s independent living ability after ICU discharge [35]. Other studies have also suggested that the intensity of early mobilization may influence outcomes, but further high-quality research is needed [36, 37]. Moreover, few randomized controlled studies were conducted to detect the effects of high-intensity early mobilization to improve the patient’s physical functional and independent living ability in IMV patients in the ICU.

The aim of this study was to investigate whether high-intensity early mobility improves the patient’s functional status compared to conventional treatment at 3 months of ICU discharge. The secondary objectives were to investigate the effects of high-intensity early mobilization on the capacity of mobility, muscle strength, ICUAW, delirium, in-ICU mortality, 3-month mortality, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), venous thrombosis (VTE), length of ICU stay, and duration of MV.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design

This study was a parallel randomized controlled trial to investigate the effects of the high-intensity early mobility on the patient’s functional status. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants or their responsible family member. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (Document No. 2018-015). A CONSORT checklist was used to guide the reporting of the research.

2.2. Setting and Participants

Patients eligible for recruitment were aged 18 years or older that were expected to be on IMV for >24 hours at the time of screening. The Barthel score at two weeks before ICU admission was estimated from the patient’s family members, and patients were included if they had an independent functional status with a Barthel index (BI) [38] of 100 points. Patients were excluded if (1) cognitive impaired with an inability to understand command and mobility; (2) contraindications for mobilization [1]; (3) death within 48 hours of admission to ICU; (4) ICU admission for the second time in the last month; (5) MV time >48 hours in the outside hospital before ICU admission; and (6) lower limb mobility disorder.

2.3. Study Procedure

In accordance with the principle of 1 : 1, the computer randomly generated 132 random numbers, which were written on paper blocks and placed in an envelope. Patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to the IG or CG according to the numbers selected from a paper block by the investigator. In this study, the group assignment, patients, and outcomes assessors were blinded. A data collection form was developed, and only the random number was displayed. The outcomes assessors were unaware that the patients were in the experimental or control group and recorded the results in the specific worksheet. The assessor of the main outcomes was the same individual. However, due to the characteristics of the intervention measures, intervention implementers could not be blinded. The research team included ICU trained doctors, nurses, and physiotherapists. The CG received conventional treatment performed by physiotherapists, including position changes, passive range of motion, cycle, and physiotherapy (bed mobility, transfer training, and balance training). The start time and level of mobility for each patient were decided by physiotherapists. The IG received the same level of clinical care as CG except for the high-intensity early mobility program after enrolment within up to 48 hours of ICU admission. Schujmann et al.’s research content was taken into consideration when we made the high-intensity early mobility program [21]. Each morning, the research team assessed the patients and set a target activity level for the day. The intensive activity level included exercise and posture changes: level 1 (passive activity), level 2 (sitting in bed, responsive to instruction and muscle strength ≤2), level 3 (sitting in chair, responsive to instruction and muscle strength ≥3), level 4 (standing), and level 5 (ambulation). The details of the activities are shown in Table 1. Both groups underwent conventional physical therapy in the morning. The CG patients also received an afternoon conventional therapy session, and IG patients underwent high-intensity early mobility in the afternoon, five times a week (Monday through Friday). The variance between groups was just the intensity of the early mobility program (i.e., the IG did high-intensity early mobility, while the CG did early mobility at an intensity as per the treating therapist discretion). For patients with sedative agents, the goal is adjusting to reach the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale score of −1 to +1. The maximum activity level would be recorded by researchers every day.

The criteria for initiation and continuation of the high-intensity early mobility program follow the safety index described in the expert consensus [1], and some points were as follows: respiratory rate (RR) ≤30 breaths per minute, no arrhythmias or acute ischemia, heart rate (HR) between 60 and 120 beats per minute, no use or increased dose of vascular drugs, mean arterial pressure (MAP) between 65 and 120 mmHg, no active bleeding, and no prescription of bed rest. When patients were treated with IMV, respiratory oxygen inspiratory fraction (FiO₂) ≤60% and positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) ≤10 cmH₂O [39]. Adverse events were recorded during early mobility including falls, unplanned extubation or any invasive tube shedding, and cardiac arrest.

2.4. Outcomes

The primary outcome was the patient’s functional status evaluated by BI after ICU discharge. The BI score was followed up by telephone 3 months after ICU discharge. Patients were divided into two groups by functional status based on whether BI score ≥85 [40, 41]. The secondary outcome included capacity of mobility and muscle strength. The capacity of mobility was assessed by the Perme score [42], and ICU Mobility Scale (IMS) [43]. The score of the Perme score and IMS were collected and documented at ICU discharge. Muscle strength was evaluated by the Medical Research Council sum scores (MRC-SS) at enrolment and discharge from ICU, and MRC-SS ≤48 was defined ICUAW [44, 45]. Other secondary outcomes including the patient’s ICU length of stay, in-ICU mortality, 3-month mortality, the incidence of complication (VAP, VTE, and delirium), and duration of IMV were also recorded. Delirium incidence was evaluated three times a day (morning, midday, and evening) with the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) [46]. Although our data collection window was during the global coronavirus pandemic, our hospital was not a designated hospital for treating COVID-19 patients, so the ICU services were minimally impacted by the workload, and not altered work practices associated with the pandemic response. There were few potential limitations or implications for the study findings.

2.5. Sample Size

The sample size calculation was based on Schujmann et al. [21]. The difference in the means of the primary outcome (BI score) was expected to be 13 points, with a standard deviation of 22 points. The Power software [47] (Version 3.1.9.4) (RRID: SCR_013726; https://www.gpower.hhu.de/) was used to calculate the number of subjects as 48 per group for a total of 96 patients in this study, using a statistical power of 80% and an α error of 0.05.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

All data were analyzed using SPSS (version 21; IBM Corp, Armonk, New York, USA). General data were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation, percentage, or median (quartile). Intention-to-treat analysis was performed for all enrolled patients. General data comparisons between the two groups were performed using Student’s t-test, a Mann–Whitney nonparametric test, and a chi-square test as appropriate. The comparisons of intensity of physiotherapy, functional status, MRC-SS, length of ICU stay, and duration of MV between groups were conducted by Student’s t-test or Mann–Whitney nonparametric test. Difference of mortality, delirium, VAP, VTE, and ICUAW rate were compared using a chi-square test.

3. Results

3.1. Demographics

As shown in Figure 1, 372 patients with IMV were screened from November 1, 2020, to February 28, 2023, and 132 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to two groups (IG = 66 and CG = 66). The enrolled 132 patients (84 males and 48 females) aged 18 to 95 years older (60.4 ± 17.8 years). The mean body mass index was 22.1 ± 2.7, and APACHE II was 22.1 ± 6.8. There was no statistical difference in baseline data between the two groups except for type 2 diabetes (Table 2).

3.2. Primary Outcome Analysis

There were two deaths in the IG and nine deaths in the CG at ICU discharge. As a result, only 121 patients were included in the discharge phase data analysis. The BI scores in the IG were higher than those in CG at 3-month post-ICU discharge (90.6 ± 18.0 vs. 77.7 ± 27.9; ). According to BI scores, patients were divided into two groups, and it was found that the number of patients with functional independence (with BI scores ≥85) in the IG was higher than that in the CG (76.3% vs. 56.3%; ) (Table 3).

3.3. Secondary Outcome Comparison between Two Groups

The intensity of physiotherapy in the CG group accounted for 50% at level 1∼level 2, while the percentage in the IG group was superior at level 4∼level 5 (62.1% vs. 24.2%). There were significant differences between the mean intensity of physiotherapy received between the two groups (3.7 ± 1.1 vs. 2.6 ± 1.2; ). Patients in the IG had a higher Perme score (17.6 ± 7.1 vs. 12.2 ± 8.5; ), IMS (4.7 ± 2.6 vs. 3.0 ± 2.6; ), and MRC-SS (50.3 ± 11.7 vs. 37.3 ± 18.6; ), respectively. The incidence of ICUAW was lower in IG than that in CG (17.2% vs. 54.4%; ). The incidence of delirium and in-ICU mortality was lower in IG than that in CG (18.2% vs. 36.4% ; 3.0% vs. 13.6% ) (Table 4). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, VTE, VAP, and in 3-month mortality (Tables 3 and 4). No adverse events which required additional treatment were reported between the two groups.

4. Discussion

This randomized controlled trial investigated the effects of high-intensity early mobility on patients with IMV in the ICU. The current study results showed that compared with the CG, high-intensity early mobility improved functional status and the functional independence after 3 months of ICU discharge, the capacity of mobility, and increased muscle strength at ICU discharge. The incidence of ICUAW, delirium, and in-ICU mortality was lower than that in the CG.

Compared to previous studies, the novelty in this present study was that our patients enrolled were sicker patients (higher APACHE II score 22.1 ± 6.8) and all were on IMV. High-intensity early mobility is a known difficult procedure to perform in the ICU, thus necessitating this study to be conducted to ascertain the benefit of a difficult intervention [22–24, 48]. Moreover, early implementation of mobilization was one of the key factors for success, in addition to goal-directed and gradual administration of highly intensive early mobility. In this study, patients were screened and enrolled 24 hours after ICU admission, and the high-intensity early mobilization was conducted based on the status of patients. Similarly, Liu et al. [49] and Ding et al. [50] found that patients with sepsis may benefit most from early activity starting from 2 to 4 days. A systematic review and meta-analysis showed that systematic early mobilization within 7 days of admission to ICU improved physical function, functional status, and walking ability compared with late mobilization [51].

In this study, the primary outcome BI scores were higher in the IG than those in the CG, and the proportion of patients with functional independence was also higher. The findings from this present study prove that, despite high-intensity early mobility being a difficult procedure to perform, it will be a worthwhile clinical intervention to significantly improve functional independence without significant risk of harm to the patients. Indeed, the present study data showed that half of the patients in the CG performed intensity of physiotherapy at level 1∼level 2, and only 24.2% performed out of bed activity (level 4∼level 5), compared to 62.1% in the IG. Similarly, in a multicentre, parallel-group randomized controlled trial including 308 patients, more than 98% were on IMV and those who received intensive physical rehabilitation therapy had an improved functional independence after 3 months [22]. In addition, Watanabe and colleagues [37] found high-dose early rehabilitation can improve the daily activity ability of patients with mechanical ventilation in ICU.

This study also found that the MRC-SS in both groups was improved compared with those at ICU admission, and the improvement was more obvious in the IG at ICU discharge. A higher level of mobility in IG may change the course of function loss. As a result, ICUAW was only 17.2% in the IG and 54.4% in the CG. The present study findings corroborated with a previous systematic review and meta-analysis [52]. ICU-acquired weakness is a common complication of critical illness, with an estimated incidence of 25∼50% [53, 54]. Sidiras et al. [55] found that the quality of life and functional independence of patients with ICUAW at 3 and 6-month post-ICU discharge were worse than those without ICUAW, but at 6 months, there was no significant difference in muscle strength between the two groups. This present study followed up 42 patients with ICUAW at ICU discharge for 3 months and found that both the IG and CG had a lower BI score. Therefore, attention should be paid to the patients with ICUAW at ICU discharge (Table 5).

For short and long-term mortality, the results varied from studies [23, 35, 52, 56]. The present study results were similar to Zayed et al. [56] and Scheffenbichler et al. [35] that the high-intensity early activity reduced short-term mortality, but there was no difference in 3-month mortality or longer after discharge. Hodgson and colleagues [26] also found that an increase in early active mobilization in patients with IMV in the ICU did not change the median alive time at 180 days. Delirium is a common complication in the ICU, especially in patients with MV, and inactivity is a known risk factor [57]. Two systematic review and meta-analysis studies have shown that early mobilization or physical activity interventions can reduce the incidence or duration of delirium [58, 59]. Similar to outcomes in other studies [23, 29, 60], the incidence of delirium was lower in IG patients who received high-intensity early mobilization than in CG patients who received conventional treatment. In addition, implementation of early mobilization can reduce the incidence of delirium, which may be related to the intervention time. Nydahl et al. [46] found that activity in the evening could not reduce the incidence of delirium for ICU patients.

The findings of this present study have several implications for clinical practice. First, the high-intensity early mobility is safe and feasible for patients with IMV and can improve the patient’s functional status, capacity of mobility, and muscle strength. Second, multidisciplinary teamwork at least including ICU physicians, nurses, and physiotherapists is needed in high-intensity early mobility. Third, this present study suggests early mobilization should be evaluated and performed as early as 24 hours after ICU admission for those without contraindication, including different intensive activities, especially early active mobility and out-of-bed activity. Finally, the findings of the present study also suggest whether in ICU or post-ICU discharge active and passive activities should be carried out early for patients with ICUAW.

This study has several limitations. First, the functional recovery measurement of alive at ICU discharge was limited to BI scores, and the indicators of return to work, cognitive function, and health-related quality of life were not included. The main consideration is that patients with IMV have more serious diseases, fewer patients may return to work 3 months after ICU discharge, and the average age of this study population was 60.4 years, so the indicators of return to work are of little significance. More insights are wanted to be known about patients’ daily living ability and whether they could live independently, so as to reduce the burden of family care. Second, patients in the CG have a higher mortality rate before ICU discharge, which may lead to information bias in the analysis of patients’ functional status. However, when both groups of patients who died before ICU discharge were included in intention-to-treat analysis, similar results for the primary outcome were still found. Third, only the maximum intensity of early mobility achieved by patients was recorded but not the duration of activity. Because the main purpose is to understand whether high-intensity early mobility improves post-ICU discharge functional status of IMV patients. The effect of early mobility dose (both intensity and duration) on the primary outcome of IMV patients was not investigated in the present study.

5. Conclusions

In summary, the high-intensity early mobility in patients with IMV is safe and feasible, which improves the patient’s functional status and the number of patients with functional independence at 3-month post-ICU discharge. Meanwhile, it improves the capacity of mobility and muscle strength and decreases the incidence of ICUAW, delirium, and mortality during ICU stay. For patients with ICUAW, active and passive activities should be carried out as early as possible, mainly active mobility.

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Ethical Approval

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (Document No. 2018- 015).

The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

MI J and ZHANG CL were involved in the study design and critical revision of the manuscript. WANG XQ, ZHANG ZJ, GAN RY, LUO XY, and MU SY were involved in drafting of the manuscript. All the authors approved the final version of the manuscript, including the authorship list.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Grant/Award Numbers: PYJJ2019-228 and HLJJ2022-08, and the Program for Youth Innovation in Future Medicine, Chongqing Medical University, Grant/Award Number: W0009, and the Medical Research Project of Chongqing Health Commission Grant/Award Number: 2024WSJK029.

References

C. L. Hodgson, K. Stiller, D. M. Needham et al., “Expert consensus and recommendations on safety criteria for active mobilization of mechanically ventilated critically ill adults,” Critical Care, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 658–676, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. J. Dos Santos, F. de Aguiar Lemos, T. Bianchi et al., “Early rehabilitation using a passive cycle ergometer on muscle morphology in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients in the Intensive Care Unit (MoVe-ICU study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial,” Trials, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 383–388, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. T. Wang, J. K. Lang, K. J. Haines, E. H. Skinner, and T. P. Haines, “Physical rehabilitation in the ICU: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 375–388, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Popoola, M. Dingle, J. MacLaren, and J. Dyson, “What are the barriers to nurses mobilising adult patients in intensive care units? An integrative review,” Australian Critical Care, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 595–603, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Liu, Y. Tian, B. Jiang, Y. Song, A. Du, and S. Ji, “Early mobilisation practice in intensive care units: a large‐scale cross‐sectional survey in China,” Nursing in Critical Care, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 510–518, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. A. Puthucheary, J. Rawal, M. McPhail et al., “Acute skeletal muscle wasting in critical illness,” Survey of Anesthesiology, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 159-160, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. W. Devlin, Y. Skrobik, C. Gélinas et al., “Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of pain, agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption in adult patients in the ICU,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 46, no. 9, pp. e825–e873, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. E. Anekwe, S. Biswas, A. Bussières, and J. Spahija, “Early rehabilitation reduces the likelihood of developing intensive care unit-acquired weakness: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Physiotherapy, vol. 107, pp. 1–10, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. A. Ali, J. M. O'Brien Jr., S. P. Hoffmann et al., “Acquired weakness, handgrip strength, and mortality in critically ill patients,” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, vol. 178, no. 3, pp. 261–268, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Mirzakhani, J. N. Williams, J. Mello et al., “Muscle weakness predicts pharyngeal dysfunction and symptomatic aspiration in long-term ventilated patients,” Anesthesiology, vol. 119, no. 2, pp. 389–397, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Van Aerde, P. Meersseman, Y. Debaveye et al., “Five-year impact of ICU-acquired neuromuscular complications: a prospective, observational study,” Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 1184–1193, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. D. Hill, R. A. Fowler, R. Pinto, M. S. Herridge, B. H. Cuthbertson, and D. C. Scales, “Long-term outcomes and healthcare utilization following critical illness-a population-based study,” Critical Care, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 76–85, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. K. Lang, M. S. Paykel, K. J. Haines, and C. L. Hodgson, “Clinical practice guidelines for early mobilization in the ICU: a systematic review,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 48, no. 11, pp. e1121–e1128, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Sommers, R. H. Engelbert, D. Dettling-Ihnenfeldt et al., “Physiotherapy in the intensive care unit: an evidence-based, expert driven, practical statement and rehabilitation recommendations,” Clinical Rehabilitation, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 1051–1063, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Gosselink, J. Bott, M. Johnson et al., “Physiotherapy for adult patients with critical illness: recommendations of the European Respiratory Society and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Task Force on physiotherapy for critically ill patients,” Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 1188–1199, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Sakai, C. Hoshino, A. Okawa, K. Wakabayashi, and H. Shigemitsu, “The safety and effect of early mobilization in the intensive care unit according to cancellation criteria,” Progress in Rehabilitation Medicine, vol. 5, no. 0, pp. 20200016–20200027, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Hodgson, R. Bellomo, S. Berney et al., “Early mobilization and recovery in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU: a bi-national, multi-centre, prospective cohort study,” Critical Care, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 81–90, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. T. Timenetsky, A. S. Neto, M. S. C. Assunção, L. Taniguchi, R. A. C. Eid, and T. D. Corrêa, “Mobilization practices in the ICU: a nationwide 1-day point- prevalence study in Brazil,” PLoS One, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. e0230971–e0230982, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Sibilla, P. Nydahl, N. Greco et al., “Mobilization of mechanically ventilated patients in Switzerland,” Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 55–62, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Taito, N. Shime, H. Yasuda et al., “Out-of-bed mobilization of patients undergoing mechanical ventilation with orotracheal tubes: a survey study,” Journal of Critical Care, vol. 47, pp. 173–177, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. S. Schujmann, T. Teixeira Gomes, A. C. Lunardi et al., “Impact of a progressive mobility program on the functional status, respiratory, and muscular systems of ICU patients: a randomized and controlled trial,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 491–497, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. E. Wright, K. Thomas, G. Watson et al., “Intensive versus standard physical rehabilitation therapy in the critically ill (EPICC): a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial,” Thorax, vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 213–221, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. J. Schaller, M. Anstey, M. Blobner et al., “Early, goal-directed mobilisation in the surgical intensive care unit: a randomised controlled trial,” The Lancet, vol. 388, no. 10052, pp. 1377–1388, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Moss, A. Nordon-Craft, D. Malone et al., “A randomized trial of an intensive physical therapy program for patients with acute respiratory failure,” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, vol. 193, no. 10, pp. 1101–1110, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. K. Patel, K. S. Wolfe, S. B. Patel et al., “Effect of early mobilisation on long-term cognitive impairment in critical illness in the USA: a randomised controlled trial,” The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 563–572, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Bailey, R. Bellomo, K. Brickell et al., “Early active mobilization during mechanical ventilation in the ICU,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 387, no. 19, pp. 1747–1758, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. E. Morris, M. J. Berry, D. C. Files et al., “Standardized rehabilitation and hospital length of stay among patients with acute respiratory failure: a randomized clinical trial,” JAMA, vol. 315, no. 24, pp. 2694–2702, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. L. Hodgson, M. Bailey, R. Bellomo et al., “A binational multicenter pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial of early goal-directed mobilization in the ICU,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 1145–1152, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. D. Schweickert, M. C. Pohlman, A. S. Pohlman et al., “Early physical and occupational therapy in mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients: a randomised controlled trial,” The Lancet, vol. 373, no. 9678, pp. 1874–1882, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Raurell-Torredà, S. Arias-Rivera, J. D. Martí et al., “Care and treatments related to intensive care unit-acquired muscle weakness: a cohort study,” Australian Critical Care, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 435–445, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Witteveen, L. Wieske, J. Sommers et al., “Early prediction of intensive care unit–acquired weakness: a multicenter external validation study,” Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 595–605, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Chillura, A. Bramanti, F. Tartamella et al., “Advances in the rehabilitation of intensive care unit acquired weakness: a case report on the promising use of robotics and virtual reality coupled to physiotherapy,” Medicine (Baltimore), vol. 99, no. 28, pp. e20939–e20943, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. C. Verceles, C. L. Wells, J. D. Sorkin et al., “A multimodal rehabilitation program for patients with ICU acquired weakness improves ventilator weaning and discharge home,” Journal of Critical Care, vol. 47, pp. 204–210, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Zang, B. Chen, M. Wang et al., “The effect of early mobilization in critically ill patients: a meta-analysis,” Nursing in Critical Care, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 360–367, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. T. Scheffenbichler, B. Teja, K. Wongtangman et al., “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,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. e247–e257, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Yang, T. Zhang, L. Cao, L. Ye, and W. Song, “Early mobilization for critically ill patients,” Respiratory Care, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 781–795, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Watanabe, Y. Morita, S. Suzuki et al., “Effects of the intensity and activity time of early rehabilitation on activities of daily living dependence in mechanically ventilated patients,” Progress in Rehabilitation Medicine, vol. 6, no. 0, pp. 20210054–20210066, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. I. Mahoney and W. D, “Barthel, funcional evaluation: the barthel index,” Maryland State Medical Journal, vol. 14, pp. 61–65, 1965.
View at: Google Scholar
D. S. Schujmann, A. C. Lunardi, and C. Fu, “Progressive mobility program and technology to increase the level of physical activity and its benefits in respiratory, muscular system, and functionality of ICU patients: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial,” Trials, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 274–283, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Sulter, C. Steen, and J. De Keyser, “Use of the Barthel index and modified Rankin scale in acute stroke trials,” Stroke, vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 1538–1541, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. F. Dos Reis, F. Figueiredo, R. R. M. Biscaro, E. B. Lunardelli, and R. Maurici, “Psychometric properties of the Barthel Index used at intensive care unit discharge,” American Journal of Critical Care, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 65–72, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Perme and R. Chandrashekar, “Early mobility and walking program for patients in intensive care units: creating a standard of care,” American Journal of Critical Care, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 212–221, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Hodgson, D. Needham, K. Haines et al., “Feasibility and inter-rater reliability of the ICU mobility scale,” Heart & Lung, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 19–24, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Wieske, E. Witteveen, C. Verhamme et al., “Early prediction of intensive care unit-acquired weakness using easily available parameters: a prospective observational study,” PLoS One, vol. 9, no. 10, pp. e111259–e111266, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Fan, F. Cheek, L. Chlan et al., “An official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice guideline: the diagnosis of intensive care unit-acquired weakness in adults,” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, vol. 190, no. 12, pp. 1437–1446, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Nydahl, D. McWilliams, N. Weiler et al., “Mobilization in the evening to prevent delirium: a pilot randomized trial,” Nursing in Critical Care, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 519–527, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Faul, E. Erdfelder, A. Buchner, and A. G. Lang, “Statistical power analyses using G^∗Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses,” Behavior Research Methods, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 1149–1160, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. McWilliams, C. Jones, G. Atkins et al., “Earlier and enhanced rehabilitation of mechanically ventilated patients in critical care: a feasibility randomised controlled trial,” Journal of Critical Care, vol. 44, pp. 407–412, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Liu, J. Shibata, K. Fukuchi et al., “Optimal timing of introducing mobilization therapy for ICU patients with sepsis,” Journal of intensive care, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 22–32, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Ding, Z. Zhang, C. Zhang et al., “What is the optimum time for initiation of early mobilization in mechanically ventilated patients? A network meta-analysis,” PLoS One, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. e0223151–e0223162, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Menges, B. Seiler, Y. Tomonaga, M. Schwenkglenks, M. A. Puhan, and H. G. Yebyo, “Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysis,” Critical Care, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 16–39, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. J. Tipping, M. Harrold, A. Holland, L. Romero, T. Nisbet, and C. L. Hodgson, “The effects of active mobilisation and rehabilitation in ICU on mortality and function: a systematic review,” Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 171–183, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Nanas, K. Kritikos, E. Angelopoulos et al., “Predisposing factors for critical illness polyneuromyopathy in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit,” Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, vol. 118, no. 3, pp. 175–181, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. D. Stevens, D. W. Dowdy, R. K. Michaels, P. A. Mendez-Tellez, P. J. Pronovost, and D. M. Needham, “Neuromuscular dysfunction acquired in critical illness: a systematic review,” Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 33, no. 11, pp. 1876–1891, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Sidiras, I. Patsaki, E. Karatzanos et al., “Long term follow-up of quality of life and functional ability in patients with ICU acquired Weakness-A post hoc analysis,” Journal of Critical Care, vol. 53, pp. 223–230, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zayed, B. Kheiri, M. Barbarawi et al., “Effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials,” Australian Critical Care, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 203–210, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Mehta, D. Cook, J. W. Devlin et al., “Prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes of delirium in mechanically ventilated adults,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 557–566, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Nydahl, M.-M. Jeitziner, V. Vater et al., “Early mobilisation for prevention and treatment of delirium in critically ill patients: systematic review and meta-analysis,” Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, vol. 74, pp. 103334–103341, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Jarman, K. Chapman, S. Vollam, R. Stiger, M. Williams, and O. Gustafson, “Investigating the impact of physical activity interventions on delirium outcomes in intensive care unit patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Journal of the Intensive Care Society, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 85–95, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. L. Wu, T. T. Gu, M. Chen et al., “Effect of early off-bed mobility on delirium in mechanical ventilated patients in intensive care unit: a prospective randomized controlled study,” Zhonghua wei zhong bing ji jiu yi xue, vol. 33, no. 11, pp. 1353–1357, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2024 Chuanlin Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

264

Downloads

204

Citations