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

Task-oriented robotic rehabilitation for back mobility and functioning in a post-intensive care unit obese patient: A case report

BackgroundIntensive care unit (ICU) acquired weakness is a detrimental condition characterized by muscle weakness, difficulty in weaning from mechanical ventilation, impaired mobility, and functional limitations, severely affecting overall quality of life. Obese patients face additional challenges due to obesity-related factors that exacerbate the negative effects of immobilization. Rehabilitation interventions have emerged as a crucial component of post-ICU care, but the rehabilitation management of obese patients remains challenging.Objectiveto present the impact of implementing Walker View 3.0 SCX technology in post-intensive care unit rehabilitation of obese patient.MethodsA 69-year-old Caucasian man with a BMI of 44.8 kg/m2 was referred to the Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation Unit at Alessandria Hospital, Italy, following an ICU admission for pneumonia. After a comprehensive multidisciplinary evaluation, the patient underwent an intensive rehabilitation program including physical exercises and a personalized dietary plan. A task-oriented robotic rehabilitation was added, utilizing the Walker View 3.0 SCX, for 30 min/day, 5 days/week. The robotic rehabilitation program focused on sit-to-stand mobility with weight support initially and progressed to a weight-supported robotic treadmill.ResultsThe patient showed clear improvements in physical function, muscle strength, and independence in activity of daily living (Barthel Index improved from 15 to 70, De Morton Mobility Index improved from 8 to 39, Medical Research Council Strength improved from 17 to 40, Functional Ambulation Classification score improved from 0 to 3, Handgrip Strength Test improved from 8.8 kg to 39.4 kg). Managed by a single physiotherapist, this approach showed positive results in enhancing functional outcomes, with potential benefits in reducing operator time and assistance costs.ConclusionsIntegrating task-oriented robotic rehabilitation with Walker View 3.0 SCX showed promising outcomes for obese patients post-ICU. Personalized interventions with weight-bearing capabilities and real-time feedback optimized post-ICU care, enhancing functional outcomes, and potentially reducing operator time and assistance costs. Further research with larger samples is needed to validate the broader applicability and cost-effectiveness of robotic rehabilitation technologies in obese patients with ICU-acquired weakness.

Prioritisation of functional needs for ICU intelligent robots in China: a consensus study based on the national survey and nominal group technique

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to define the prioritisation of the needs for an intelligent robot's functions in the intensive care unit (ICU) from a clinical perspective.

DESIGN

This study introduces a nominal group technique.

SETTING

This study uses national setting.

PARTICIPANTS

This study includes a total of 851 respondents from 34 provinces in China who participated in the survey. A nominal group of 12 members was organised by the research group; there were seven experts with a background in critical care, two junior attending physicians with a background in critical care and three experienced nurses.

RESULTS

A total of 50 needed intelligent robot functions in ICUs were obtained from the questionnaire data. Through three rounds of nominal group voting and discussion, a consensus was reached on 44 items, which were categorised into 29 high-priority needs, 13 medium-priority needs and two low-priority needs. The functionalities in areas such as 'sleep and pain assessment,' 'monitoring of sedation, agitation, and delirium,' and 'robot-assisted rehabilitation and physical therapy' were particularly favoured by the ICU medical and nursing staff.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has defined the functional needs and priorities for ICU intelligent robots from the perspective of ICU clinical medical and nursing staff. It has been concluded that 'disease assessment function' and 'rehabilitation and physical therapy' are most needed by clinical doctors and nurses. The results presented in this study could serve as a useful reference for future research and development of medical robots.

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 ± 1.3) and the intervention as feasible (mean 5.3 ± 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.

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.