PROtocol-based MObilizaTION on intensive care units: stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized pilot study (Pro-Motion)

Preventive effects of early mobilisation on delirium incidence in critically ill patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether early mobilisation can reduce the incidence of delirium in critically ill patients and to assess the methodological quality of published studies.

METHODS

Three electronic databases, PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library, were searched for relevant studies published up to 2 March 2024. Articles were screened independently by two reviewers, based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, and a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software with a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies (intervention group: 1794 participants, control group: 2129 participants) were included in the systematic review, with 18 studies included in the meta-analysis. Early mobilisation was found to reduce the risk of delirium in critically ill populations, with a pooled odds ratio of 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.86; P = 0.003; I2 = 59%). Additionally, two studies found that early mobilisation did not change the duration of delirium in critically ill populations, with a pooled mean difference of -1.53 (95% CI -3.48 to 0.41; P = 0.12; I2 = 37%). Subgroup analysis revealed that early mobilisation maintained its preventive effect on delirium in the before/after intervention studies, studies published before 2018 and studies with a moderate methodological rating.

CONCLUSION

As a nonpharmacological intervention, early mobilisation may help reduce the risk of delirium and shorten its duration in critically ill patients compared with standard treatment and may potentially become a novel strategy for delirium prevention in future intensive care unit settings.

A Focused Update to the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Anxiety, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU

RATIONALE

Critically ill adults are at risk for a variety of distressing and consequential symptoms both during and after an ICU stay. Management of these symptoms can directly influence outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to update and expand the Society of Critical Care Medicine's 2018 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU.

PANEL DESIGN

The interprofessional inclusive guidelines task force was composed of 24 individuals including nurses, physicians, pharmacists, physiotherapists, psychologists, and ICU survivors. The task force developed evidence-based recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Conflict-of-interest policies were strictly followed in all phases of the guidelines, including task force selection and voting.

METHODS

The task force focused on five main content areas as they pertain to adult ICU patients: anxiety (new topic), agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption. Using the GRADE approach, we conducted a rigorous systematic review for each population, intervention, control, and outcome question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, assessed the quality of evidence, and then performed the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations.

RESULTS

The task force issued five statements related to the management of anxiety, agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption in adults admitted to the ICU. In adult patients admitted to the ICU, the task force issued conditional recommendations to use dexmedetomidine over propofol for sedation, provide enhanced mobilization/rehabilitation over usual mobilization/rehabilitation, and administer melatonin. The task force was unable to issue recommendations on the administration of benzodiazepines to treat anxiety, and the use of antipsychotics to treat delirium.

CONCLUSIONS

The guidelines task force provided recommendations for pharmacologic management of agitation/sedation and sleep, and nonpharmacologic management of immobility in critically ill adults. These recommendations are intended for consideration along with the patient's clinical status.

Nurse-involved early mobilization in the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early mobilization is one proposed strategy for reducing complications and optimizing patient outcomes. Nurses play an essential role in patient monitoring and co-ordination.

AIMS

To assess the effects of a nurse-involved early mobilization programme on muscle strength and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay and identify the components of an early mobilization programme.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane and CINAHL databases were searched. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of adult ICU patients undergoing early mobilization. The studies were appraised using RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools, and a meta-analysis was performed using Rstudio 2023.06.2.

RESULTS

Nine studies were selected from 943 studies. Four studies involved only ICU nurses, while five involved multidisciplinary teams. Concerns about bias were raised in four RCTs, and two non-randomized studies had moderate bias risk. Interventions involved progressive exercise steps, but none detailed the specific role of nurses. Early mobilization significantly decreased ICU length of stay (95% CI: -3.22, -0.11; p = .04), although it did not improve muscle strength (95% CI: -0.86, 0.99; p = .80).

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse-involved early mobilization was associated with a reduction in ICU stay, although it did not impact muscle strength. The nurses' roles were not specifically defined.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

An analysis of relevant tasks is necessary to clarify the role of nurses in early mobilization and to provide optimal care. Including these roles is crucial in the development of standardized early mobilization.

Effectiveness of nurse-led non-pharmacological interventions on outcomes of delirium in adults: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a common complication among adults. It is essential to improve the outcomes of delirium.

AIM

To systematically synthesize the evidence on the effectiveness of the nurse-led non-pharmacological interventions on outcomes of delirium in adults.

METHODS

Electronic databases including CINAHL, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Clinical Trial Registration were searched comprehensively by the authors. The authors reviewed the full text and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan and Stata software. The forest plots showed the overall effect of the included study and the I2 test was used to assess the degree of heterogeneity between studies. Random effects models were used to analyze studies with significant heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies (10,122 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. Nurse-led non-pharmacological interventions resulted in a significantly lower incidence of delirium compared with the usual care/control group (risk ratio = 0.74, p < .001) and reduced mortality in the hospital compared with usual care (risk ratio = 0.81, p = .04). However, the implementation of nurse-led, non-pharmacological interventions had no significant effect on the duration, severity of delirium, or length of hospital stay.

LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION

Our findings suggest that the nurse-led, non-pharmacological strategy was effective in reducing the incidence of delirium and mortality in the hospital. Multicomponent interventions were the most effective strategy for reducing the incidence of delirium in adults.

Guideline on positioning and early mobilisation in the critically ill by an expert panel

A scientific panel was created consisting of 23 interdisciplinary and interprofessional experts in intensive care medicine, physiotherapy, nursing care, surgery, rehabilitative medicine, and pneumology delegated from scientific societies together with a patient representative and a delegate from the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies who advised methodological implementation. The guideline was created according to the German Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF), based on The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II. The topics of (early) mobilisation, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, assist devices for mobilisation, and positioning, including prone positioning, were identified as areas to be addressed and assigned to specialist expert groups, taking conflicts of interest into account. The panel formulated PICO questions (addressing the population, intervention, comparison or control group as well as the resulting outcomes), conducted a systematic literature review with abstract screening and full-text analysis and created summary tables. This was followed by grading the evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence and a risk of bias assessment. The recommendations were finalized according to GRADE and voted using an online Delphi process followed by a final hybrid consensus conference. The German long version of the guideline was approved by the professional associations. For this English version an update of the systematic review was conducted until April 2024 and recommendation adapted based on new evidence in systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. In total, 46 recommendations were developed and research gaps addressed.

Assessing the safety of physical rehabilitation in critically ill patients: a Delphi study

BACKGROUND

Physical rehabilitation of critically ill patients is implemented to improve physical outcomes from an intensive care stay. However, before rehabilitation is implemented, a risk assessment is essential, based on robust safety data. To develop this information, a uniform definition of relevant adverse events is required. The assessment of cardiovascular stability is particularly relevant before physical activity as there is uncertainty over when it is safe to start rehabilitation with patients receiving vasoactive drugs.

METHODS

A three-stage Delphi study was carried out to (a) define adverse events for a general ICU cohort, and (b) to define which risks should be assessed before physical rehabilitation of patients receiving vasoactive drugs. An international group of intensive care clinicians and clinician researchers took part. Former ICU patients and their family members/carers were involved in generating consensus for the definition of adverse events. Round one was an open round where participants gave their suggestions of what to include. In round two, participants rated their agreements with these suggestions using a five-point Likert scale; a 70% consensus agreement threshold was used. Round three was used to re-rate suggestions that had not reached consensus, whilst viewing anonymous feedback of participant ratings from round two.

RESULTS

Twenty-four multi-professional ICU clinicians and clinician researchers from 10 countries across five continents were recruited. Average duration of ICU experience was 18 years (standard deviation 8) and 61% had publications related to ICU rehabilitation. For the adverse event definition, five former ICU patients and one patient relative were recruited. The Delphi process had a 97% response rate. Firstly, 54 adverse events reached consensus; an adverse event tool was created and informed by these events. Secondly, 50 risk factors requiring assessment before physical rehabilitation of patients receiving vasoactive drugs reached consensus. A second tool was created, informed by these suggestions.

CONCLUSIONS

The adverse event tool can be used in studies of physical rehabilitation to ensure uniform measurement of safety. The risk assessment tool can be used to inform clinical practise when risk assessing when to start rehabilitation with patients receiving vasoactive drugs. Trial registration This study protocol was retrospectively registered on https://www.researchregistry.com/ (researchregistry2991).

Mobilisation during mechanical ventilation: A qualitative study exploring the practice of conscious patients, nurses and physiotherapists in intensive care unit

AIM

To explore the practice of mobilisation of conscious and mechanically ventilated patients and the interaction between patients, nurses and physiotherapists.

BACKGROUND

Long-term consequences of critical illness can be reduced by mobilisation starting in Intensive Care Units, but implementation in clinical practice is presently sparse.

DESIGN

A qualitative study with a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach.

METHODS

Participant observations in three Intensive Care Units involved twelve conscious mechanically ventilated patients, thirty-one nurses and four physiotherapists. Additionally seven semi-structured patient interviews, respectively at the ward and after discharge and two focus group interviews with healthcare professionals were conducted. The data analysis was inspired by Ricoeur's interpretation theory. The study adhered to the COREQ checklist.

FINDINGS

Healthcare professionals performed a balance of support and guidance to promote mobilisation practice. The complexity of ICU mobilisation required a flexible mobility plan. Furthermore, interaction with feedback and humour was found to be 'a leverage' for patient's motivation to partake in mobilisation. The practice of mobilisation found patients striving to cope and healthcare professionals promoting a 'balanced standing by' and negotiating the flexible mobility plan to support mobilisation.

CONCLUSION

The study revealed a need to clarify interprofessional communication to align expectations towards mobilisation of conscious and mechanically ventilated patients.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The study demonstrated the important role of healthcare professionals to perform a stepwise and 'balanced standing by' in adequately supporting and challenging the mobilisation of mechanically ventilated patients. Furthermore, a synergy can arise when nurses and physiotherapists use supplementary feedback and humour, and cooperate based on a flexible situation-specific mobility plan in intensive care.

Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rehabilitation in Critically Ill Patients 2023 (J-ReCIP 2023)

Providing standardized, high-quality rehabilitation for critically ill patients is a crucial issue. In 2017, the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine (JSICM) promulgated the "Evidence-Based Expert Consensus for Early Rehabilitation in the Intensive Care Unit" to advocate for the early initiation of rehabilitations in Japanese intensive care settings. Building upon this seminal work, JSICM has recently conducted a rigorous systematic review utilizing the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. This endeavor resulted in the formulation of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), designed to elucidate best practices in early ICU rehabilitation. The primary objective of this guideline is to augment clinical understanding and thereby facilitate evidence-based decision-making, ultimately contributing to the enhancement of patient outcomes in critical care settings. No previous CPGs in the world has focused specifically on rehabilitation of critically ill patients, using the GRADE approach. Multidisciplinary collaboration is extremely important in rehabilitation. Thus, the CPGs were developed by 73 members of a Guideline Development Group consisting of a working group, a systematic review group, and an academic guideline promotion group, with the Committee for the Clinical Practice Guidelines of Early Mobilization and Rehabilitation in Intensive Care of the JSICM at its core. Many members contributed to the development of the guideline, including physicians and healthcare professionals with multiple and diverse specialties, as well as a person who had been patients in ICU. Based on discussions among the group members, eight important clinical areas of focus for this CPG were identified. Fourteen important clinical questions (CQs) were then developed for each area. The public was invited to comment twice, and the answers to the CQs were presented in the form of 10 GRADE recommendations and commentary on the four background questions. In addition, information for each CQ has been created as a visual clinical flow to ensure that the positioning of each CQ can be easily understood. We hope that the CPGs will be a useful tool in the rehabilitation of critically ill patients for multiple professions.

Getting the body back on track - Understanding the phenomenon of mobilisation when conscious and mechanically ventilated patients are mobilised in the intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

To gain an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon of mobilisation when conscious and mechanically ventilated patients are mobilised in the intensive care unit.

DESIGN

A qualitative study with a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach. Data were generated in three intensive care units from September 2019 to March 2020. Participant observations of twelve conscious mechanically ventilated patients, thirty-five nurses and four physiotherapists were performed. Furthermore, seven semi-structured patient interviews were conducted, both on the ward and after discharge.

FINDINGS

Mobilisation during mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit followed a trajectory from a failing body to a growing sense of independence in getting the body back on track. Three themes were revealed: 'Challenging to move a failing body', 'Ambiguity of both resistance and willingness in the process of strengthen the body', and 'An ongoing effort in getting the body back on track'.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobilisation when conscious and mechanically ventilated included support of the living body by physical prompts and ongoing bodily guidance. Resistance and willingness regarding mobilisation were found to be a way of coping with bodily reactions of comfort or discomfort, embedded in a need to feel bodily control. The trajectory of mobilisation promoted a sense of agency, as mobilisation activities at different stages during the intensive care unit stay supported the patients in becoming more active collaborators in getting the body back on track.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Ongoing bodily guidance provided by healthcare professionals can promote bodily control and support conscious and mechanically ventilated patients in active participation in mobilisation. Furthermore, understanding the ambiguity of patients' reactions caused by loss of bodily control provides a potential to prepare mechanically ventilated patients for and assist them with mobilisation. In particular, the first mobilisation in the intensive care unit seems to influence the success of future mobilisation, as the body remembers negative experiences.

Current Practice and Barriers to the Implementation of Mobilization in ICUs in Japan: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Background: Limited information is currently available on the barriers to implementing mobilization at the bedside for critically ill patients. Therefore, we investigated the current practice of and barriers to the implementation of mobilization in intensive care units (ICU). Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted at nine hospitals between June 2019 and December 2019. Consecutive patients admitted to the ICU for more than 48 h were enrolled. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively, and qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Results: The 203 patients enrolled in the present study were divided into 69 elective surgical patients and 134 unplanned admission patients. The mean periods of time until the initiation of rehabilitation programs after ICU admission were 2.9 ± 7.7 and 1.7 ± 2.0 days, respectively. Median ICU mobility scales were five (Interquartile range: three and eight) and six (Interquartile range: three and nine), respectively. The most common barriers to mobilization in the ICU were circulatory instability (29.9%) and a physician's order for postoperative bed rest (23.4%) in the unplanned admission and elective surgery groups, respectively. Conclusions: Rehabilitation programs were initiated later for unplanned admission patients and were less intense than those for elective surgical patients, irrespective of the time after ICU admission.

Investigating the impact of physical activity interventions on delirium outcomes in intensive care unit patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

To investigate the impact of physical activity interventions, including early mobilisation, on delirium outcomes in critically ill patients.

Methods

Electronic database literature searches were conducted, and studies were selected based on pre-specified eligibility criteria. Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions quality assessment tools were utilised. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations was used to assess levels of evidence for delirium outcomes. The study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020210872).

Results

Twelve studies were included; ten randomised controlled trials one observational case-matched study and one before-after quality improvement study. Only five of the included randomised controlled trial studies were judged to be at low risk of bias, with all others, including both non-randomised controlled trials deemed to be at high or moderate risk. The pooled relative risk for incidence was 0.85 (0.62-1.17) which was not statistically significant in favour of physical activity interventions. Narrative synthesis for effect on duration of delirium found favour towards physical activity interventions reducing delirium duration with median differences ranging from 0 to 2 days in three comparative studies. Studies comparing varying intervention intensities showed positive outcomes in favour of greater intensity. Overall levels of evidence were low quality.

Conclusions

Currently there is insufficient evidence to recommend physical activity as a stand-alone intervention to reduce delirium in Intensive Care Units. Physical activity intervention intensity may impact on delirium outcomes, but a lack of high-quality studies limits the current evidence base.

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.

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions to prevent delirium in critically ill patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of prevention interventions on delirium occurrence in critically ill adults.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Prospero, and WHO international clinical trial registry were searched from inception to April 8, 2021. Randomized controlled trials of pharmacological, sedation, non-pharmacological, and multi-component interventions enrolling adult critically ill patients were included. We performed conventional pairwise meta-analyses, NMA within Bayesian random effects modeling, and determined surface under the cumulative ranking curve values and mean rank. Reviewer pairs independently extracted data, assessed bias using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and evidence certainty with GRADE. The primary outcome was delirium occurrence; secondary outcomes were durations of delirium and mechanical ventilation, length of stay, mortality, and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Eighty trials met eligibility criteria: 67.5% pharmacological, 31.3% non-pharmacological and 1.2% mixed pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. For delirium occurrence, 11 pharmacological interventions (38 trials, N = 11,993) connected to the evidence network. Compared to placebo, only dexmedetomidine (21/22 alpha2 agonist trials were dexmedetomidine) probably reduces delirium occurrence (odds ratio (OR) 0.43, 95% Credible Interval (CrI) 0.21-0.85; moderate certainty). Compared to benzodiazepines, dexmedetomidine (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.08-0.51; low certainty), sedation interruption (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.06-0.69; very low certainty), opioid plus benzodiazepine (OR 0.27, 95% CrI 0.10-0.76; very low certainty), and protocolized sedation (OR 0.27, 95% CrI 0.09-0.80; very low certainty) may reduce delirium occurrence but the evidence is very uncertain. Dexmedetomidine probably reduces ICU length of stay compared to placebo (Ratio of Means (RoM) 0.78, CrI 0.64-0.95; moderate certainty) and compared to antipsychotics (RoM 0.76, CrI 0.61-0.98; low certainty). Sedative interruption, protocolized sedation and opioids may reduce hospital length of stay compared to placebo, but the evidence is very uncertain. No intervention influenced mechanical ventilation duration, mortality, or arrhythmia. Single and multi-component non-pharmacological interventions did not connect to any evidence networks to allow for ranking and comparisons as planned; pairwise comparisons did not detect differences compared to standard care.

CONCLUSION

Compared to placebo and benzodiazepines, we found dexmedetomidine likely reduced the occurrence of delirium in critically ill adults. Compared to benzodiazepines, sedation-minimization strategies may also reduce delirium occurrence, but the evidence is uncertain.

Nurses' Perceptions of Barriers to Out-of-Bed Activities Among Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation

BACKGROUND

Delays in early patient mobility are common in critical care areas. Oral intubation with mechanical ventilation is negatively associated with out-of-bed activities.

OBJECTIVES

To explore nurses' mobility practices for patients with oral intubation and mechanical ventilation and identify barriers related to patient, nurse, and environment-of-care factors specific to this population.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional, descriptive study in a medical intensive care unit, mobility was defined as standing, sitting in a chair, or walking. A total of 105 patients who met predefined mobility criteria and their 48 nurses were enrolled. Nurses were interviewed about mobility practices at the ends of shifts. Descriptive statistics summarized nurse and patient characteristics and mobility barriers.

RESULTS

Patients were deemed ready to begin mobility within a mean (SD) of 41.5 (34.8) hours after oral endotracheal intubation. Two-thirds of nurses reported that they never or rarely got these patients out of bed. Only 12.4% of patients had a clinician's activity order. Common patient-related barriers were uncooperative behavior (21.9%) and active medical issues (15%), even in patients who met mobility criteria. Nurse-related barriers were concerns for patient safety, specifically falls (14.3% of patients) and harm (9.5%). The environment of care posed very few barriers; nurses rarely mentioned that lack of help (13.3% of patients) or lack of clinician's activity order (5.7%) impeded mobility.

CONCLUSIONS

Mobility practices were nonexistent in these patients despite patients' being deemed ready to begin out-of-bed activities. Nurses must be attentive to their unit's mobility culture to overcome these barriers.

Mobilization in the evening to prevent delirium: A pilot randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a common complication in patients in Intensive Care Units (ICU). Interventions such as mobilization are effective in the prevention and treatment of delirium, although this is usually completed during the daytime.

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of mobilization in the evening to prevent and treat ICU patients from delirium by an additional mobility team over 2 weeks.

METHODS

The design was a pilot, multi-centre, randomized, controlled trial in four mixed ICUs over a period of 2 weeks. The mobility team consisted of trained nurses and physiotherapists. Patients in the intervention group were mobilized onto the edge of the bed or more between 21.00 and 23.00. Patients in the control group received usual care. The primary outcome parameter was the feasibility of the study, measured as recruitment rate, delivery rate, and safety. Secondary outcomes were duration and incidence of delirium, mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), and hospital length of stay for 28 days follow-up, and power calculation for a full trial.

RESULTS

Out of 185 patients present in the ICUs, 28.6% (n = 53) were eligible and could be recruited, of which 24.9% (n = 46, Intervention = 26, Control = 20) were included in the final analysis. In the intervention group, mobilization could be delivered in 75% (n = 54) of 72 possible occasions; mobilization-related safety events appeared in 16.7% (n = 9) without serious consequences. Secondary parameters were similar, with less delirium in the intervention group albeit not significant. With an association of Cramer's V = 0.237, a complete study reaching statistical significance would require at least 140 patients, last 6 weeks, and cost >30 000 €.

CONCLUSIONS

In a mixed ICU population, mobilization in the evening was feasible in one-quarter of patients with a low rate of safety events. Future trials seem to be feasible and worth conducting.

Rationale, Methodological Quality, and Reporting of Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trials in Critical Care Medicine: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Compared with individual-patient randomized controlled trials, cluster randomized controlled trials have unique methodological and ethical considerations. We evaluated the rationale, methodological quality, and reporting of cluster randomized controlled trials in critical care studies.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic searches of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register were performed.

STUDY SELECTION

We included all cluster randomized controlled trials conducted in adult, pediatric, or neonatal critical care units from January 2005 to September 2019.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently screened citations, reviewed full texts, protocols, and supplements of potentially eligible studies, abstracted data, and assessed methodology of included studies.

DATA SYNTHESIS

From 1,902 citations, 59 cluster randomized controlled trials met criteria. Most focused on quality improvement (24, 41%), antimicrobial therapy (9, 15%), or infection control (9, 15%) interventions. Designs included parallel-group (25, 42%), crossover (21, 36%), and stepped-wedge (13, 22%). Concealment of allocation was reported in 21 studies (36%). Thirteen studies (22%) reported at least one method of blinding. The median total sample size was 1,660 patients (interquartile range, 813-4,295); the median number of clusters was 12 (interquartile range, 5-24); and the median patients per cluster was 141 (interquartile range, 54-452). Sample size calculations were reported in 90% of trials, but only 54% met Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidance for sample size reporting. Twenty-seven of the studies (46%) identified a fixed number of available clusters prior to trial commencement, and only nine (15%) prespecified both the number of clusters and patients required to detect the expected effect size. Overall, 36 trials (68%) achieved the total prespecified sample size. When analyzing data, 44 studies (75%) appropriately adjusted for clustering when analyzing the primary outcome. Only 12 (20%) reported an intracluster coefficient (median 0.047 [interquartile range, 0.01-0.13]).

CONCLUSIONS

Cluster randomized controlled trials in critical care typically involve a small and fixed number of relatively large clusters. The reporting of key methodological aspects of these trials is often inadequate.

Design, rationale and analysis plan for the Stand Up for Health trial in contact centres: a stepped wedge feasibility study

Background

Contact centres are one of the most sedentary workplaces, with employees spending a very high proportion of their working day sitting down. About a quarter of contact centre staff regularly experience musculoskeletal health problems due to high levels of sedentary behaviour, including lower back pain. There have been no previous randomised studies specifically aiming to reduce sedentary behaviour in contact centre staff. To address this gap, the Stand Up for Health (SUH) study aims to test the feasibility and acceptability of a complex theory-based intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour in contact centres.

Methods

The Stand Up for Health study has a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial design, which is a pragmatic design whereby clusters (contact centres) are randomised to time points at which they will begin to receive the intervention. All contact centre staff have the opportunity to experience the intervention. To minimise the resource burden in this feasibility study, data collection is not continuous, but undertaken on a selective number of occasions, so the stepped wedge design is “incomplete”. Eleven contact centres in England and Scotland have been recruited, and the sample size is approximately 27 per centre (270 in total). The statistical analysis will predominantly focus on assessing feasibility, including the calculation of recruitment rates and rates of attrition. Exploratory analysis will be performed to compare objectively measured sedentary time in the workplace (measured using an activPAL™ device) between intervention and control conditions using a linear mixed effects regression model.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first stepped wedge feasibility study conducted in call centres. The rationale and justification of our novel staircase stepped wedge design has been presented, and we hope that by presenting our study design and statistical analysis plan, it will contribute to the literature on stepped wedge trials, and in particular feasibility stepped wedge trials. The findings of the study will also help inform whether this is a suitable design for other settings where data collection is challenging.

Trial registration

The trial has been registered on the ISRCTN database: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11580369

Effects of early mobilization on the prognosis of critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early mobilization is considered a safe and effective therapeutic strategy for accelerating the rehabilitation of patients admitted to the intensive care unit, with a proven benefit for critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of early mobilization on the prognosis of critically ill patients through a meta-analysis of data pooled from studies meeting the inclusion criteria.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCE

Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, ProQuest, Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Chinese BioMedical Literature Service System, WANFANG database, CNKI database, and Clinical Trial Register Platform were systematically searched from inception up to December 31, 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Study eligibility was independently evaluated by two researchers. The title and abstract of the studies were first screened, and full-text articles of the remaining studies were screened for verification. Methodologic quality and risk of bias of the included studies were evaluated, and data were extracted from eligible studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager v5.3 software. Key outcomes are presented as pooled risk ratio, weighted mean difference, and the corresponding 95% confidential interval .

RESULTS

A total of 39 articles were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that early mobilization improved ventilator-associated pneumonia patients' Medical Research Council score; reduced the incidence of intensive care unit-acquired weakness and intensive care unit-related complications such as ventilator-associated pneumonia, deep vein thrombosis, and pressure sores; and shortened the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit stay and hospital stay. However, there were no statistically significant differences in handgrip strength, delirium rate, intensive care unit mortality, hospital mortality, and physical function- and mental health-related quality of life at 2-3 months and 6 months post-hospital discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Early mobilization was effective in enhancing the recovery of critically ill patients, but more large-scale, multicenter randomized controlled trials are required to further confirm these findings.

[Study protocol to improve the quality of delirium management in intensive care]

BACKGROUND

Delirium in cardiac surgery patients is common and is associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation and hospital stay as well as higher mortality. Protocols may improve outcome. In our cardiac surgery intensive care unit (ICU), patients with delirium have not received standardized treatment so far.

HYPOTHESIS

In cardiac surgery ICU patients, standardized delirium management will lead after a 4‑week introduction, compared to nonstandardized treatment, to a reduction of delirium duration.

METHODS

Prospective before/after study to evaluate a quality improvement project for delirium management over 12 weeks including 140 patients.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

(a) ≥18 years, (b) consent for research with their data.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

(a) palliative status, (b) present during both the before/after phase, (c) pregnancy, (d) included in a competitive study, or (e) delirium not assessable. The implementation includes the introduction of a protocol with interprofessional training, bedside-teaching, pocket cards, posters, and reminders. The primary outcome is the duration of delirium, assessed four times a day with validated instruments. Secondary outcome measures include delirium incidence, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay in ICU and hospital, mortality, nursing/therapeutic interventions, cumulative doses of delirium-related drugs, and complications of delirium for a follow-up of 28 days. Empirical data will be analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study is a reduction of the duration and frequency of delirium in cardiac ICU patients and will provide evidence of the effect size of the introduction of a delirium management.

German Network for Early Mobilization: Impact for participants

Professional networks support health care providers in implementing evidence based knowledge. The German Network for Early Mobilization in Intensive Care Units (ICU) was founded in 2011 and serves for more than 300 critical care team members today. The mobilization network is connected to other professional networks and contributed to the development of national guidelines and quality indicators. Several research projects were conducted. Members of the mobilization network perceived benefits for themselves and their workplace. The network increased participants' knowledge and contributed to quality improvement projects on ICUs. Without having significant resources, this network development may serve as an example for other networks.

Caloric consumption during early mobilisation of mechanically ventilated patients in Intensive Care Units

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a) the magnitude of the increase in caloric consumption due to early mobilisation of patients with mechanical ventilation (MV) in Intensive Care Units (ICU) as part of routine care, b) whether there are differences in caloric consumption due to active or passive mobilisation, and c) whether early mobilisation in routine care would lead to additional nutritional requirements.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational, multi-centre study.

SETTING

Medical, surgical and neurological ICUs from three centres.

PATIENTS

Patients on MV in ICU who were mobilised out of bed as part of routine care.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Caloric consumption was assessed in 66 patients by indirect calorimetry at six time points: (1) lying in bed 5-10 min prior to mobilisation, (2) sitting on the edge of the bed, (3) standing beside the bed, (4) sitting in a chair, (5) lying in bed 5-10 min after mobilisation, and (6) 2 h after mobilisation. Differences in caloric consumption in every mobilisation level vs. the baseline of lying in bed were measured for 5 min and found to have increased significantly by: +0.4 (Standard Deviation (SD) 0.59) kcal while sitting on the edge of the bed, +1.5 (SD 1.26) kcal while standing in front of the bed, +0.7 (SD 0.63) kcal while sitting in a chair (all p < 0.001). Active vs. passive transfers showed a higher, but non-significant consumption. A typical sequence of mobilisation including sitting on edge of the bed, standing beside the bed, sitting in a chair (20 min) and transfer back into bed, would require an additional 4.56 kcal compared to caloric consumption without mobilisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this data, routine mobilisation of MV patients in ICU increases caloric consumption, especially in active mobilisation. Nevertheless, an additional caloric intake because of routine mobilisation does not seem to be necessary.