Functional outcomes in ICU – what should we be using? - an observational study

INTRODUCTION: With growing awareness of the importance of rehabilitation, new measures are being developed specifically for use in the intensive care unit (ICU). There are currently 26 measures reported to assess function in ICU survivors. The Physical Function in Intensive care Test scored (PFIT-s) has established clinimetric properties. It is unknown how other functional measures perform in comparison to the PFIT-s or which functional measure may be the most clinically applicable for use within the ICU. The aims of this study were to determine (1) the criterion validity of the Functional Status Score for the ICU (FSS-ICU), ICU Mobility Scale (IMS) and Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) against the PFIT-s; (2) the construct validity of these tests against muscle strength; (3) predictive utility of these tests to predict discharge to home; and (4) the clinical applicability. This was a nested study within an ongoing controlled study and an observational study. METHODS: Sixty-six individuals were assessed at awakening and ICU discharge. Measures included: PFIT-s, FSS-ICU, IMS and SPPB. Bivariate relationships (Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient) and predictive validity (logistic regression) were determined. Responsiveness (effect sizes); floor and ceiling effects; and minimal important differences were calculated. RESULTS: Mean ± SD PFIT-s at awakening was 4.7 ± 2.3 out of 10. On awakening a large positive relationship existed between PFIT-s and the other functional measures: FSS-ICU (rho = 0.87, p < 0.005), IMS (rho = 0.81, p < 0.005) and SPPB (rho = 0.70, p < 0.005). The PFIT-s had excellent construct validity (rho = 0.8, p < 0.005) and FSS-ICU (rho = 0.69, p < 0.005) and IMS (rho = 0.57, p < 0.005) had moderate construct validity with muscle strength. The PFIT-s and FSS-ICU had small floor/ceiling effects <11% at awakening and ICU discharge. The SPPB had a large floor effect at awakening (78%) and ICU discharge (56%). All tests demonstrated responsiveness; however highest effect size was seen in the PFIT-s (Cohen’s d = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: There is high criterion validity for other functional measures against the PFIT-s. The PFIT-s and FSS-ICU are promising functional measures and are recommended to measure function within the ICU. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02214823. Registered 7 August 2014). ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0829-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Response to physical rehabilitation and recovery trajectories following critical illness: individual participant data meta-analysis protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The number of inconclusive physical rehabilitation randomised controlled trials for patients with critical illness is increasing. Evidence suggests critical illness patient subgroups may exist that benefit from targeted physical rehabilitation interventions that could improve their recovery trajectory. We aim to identify critical illness patient subgroups that respond to physical rehabilitation and map recovery trajectories according to physical function and quality of life outcomes. Additionally, the utilisation of healthcare resources will be examined for subgroups identified. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an individual participant data meta-analysis protocol. A systematic literature review was conducted for randomised controlled trials that delivered additional physical rehabilitation for patients with critical illness during their acute hospital stay, assessed chronic disease burden, with a minimum follow-up period of 3 months measuring performance-based physical function and health-related quality of life outcomes. From 2178 records retrieved in the systematic literature review, four eligible trials were identified by two independent reviewers. Principal investigators of eligible trials were invited to contribute their data to this individual participant data meta-analysis. Risk of bias will be assessed (Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials). Participant and trial characteristics, interventions and outcomes data of included studies will be summarised. Meta-analyses will entail a one-stage model, which will account for the heterogeneity across and the clustering between studies. Multiple imputation using chained equations will be used to account for the missing data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This individual participant data meta-analysis does not require ethical review as anonymised participant data will be used and no new data collected. Additionally, eligible trials were granted approval by institutional review boards or research ethics committees and informed consent was provided for participants. Data sharing agreements are in place permitting contribution of data. The study findings will be disseminated at conferences and through peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019152526

Early mobilisation in mechanically ventilated patients:A systematic integrative review of definitions and activities

From PubMed via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2018-10-23, accepted 2018-12-11Publication status: epublishMechanically ventilated patients often develop muscle weakness post-intensive care admission. Current evidence suggests that early mobilisation of these patients can be an effective intervention in improving their outcomes. However, what constitutes early mobilisation in mechanically ventilated patients (EM-MV) remains unclear. We aimed to systematically explore the definitions and activity types of EM-MV in the literature. Whittemore and Knafl's framework guided this review. CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ASSIA, and Cochrane Library were searched to capture studies from 2000 to 2018, combined with hand search of grey literature and reference lists of included studies. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tools were used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. Data extraction and quality assessment of studies were performed independently by each reviewer before coming together in sub-groups for discussion and agreement. An inductive and data-driven thematic analysis was undertaken on verbatim extracts of EM-MV definitions and activities in included studies. Seventy-six studies were included from which four major themes were inferred: (1) , (2) , (3) and (4) . The first theme indicates that EM-MV is either not fully defined in studies or when a definition is provided this is not standardised across studies. The remaining themes reflect the diversity of EM-MV activities which depends on patients' characteristics and ICU settings; the negotiated decision-making process between patients and staff; and their interdependent relationship during the implementation. This review highlights the absence of an agreed definition and on what constitutes early mobilisation in mechanically ventilated patients. To advance research and practice an agreed and shared definition is a pre-requisite

The Physical Function Intensive Care Test: Implementation in Survivors of Critical Illness

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated safety, feasibility, and decreased hospital length of stay for patients with weakness acquired in the intensive care unit (ICU) who receive early physical rehabilitation. The scored Physical Function in Intensive Care Test (PFIT-s) was specifically designed for this population and demonstrated excellent psychometrics in an Australian ICU population. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the responsiveness and predictive capabilities of the PFIT-s in patients in the United States admitted to the ICU who required mechanical ventilation (MV) for 4 days or longer. METHODS: This nested study within a randomized trial administered the PFIT-s, Medical Research Council (MRC) sum score, and grip strength test at ICU recruitment and then weekly until hospital discharge, including at ICU discharge. Spearman rho was used to determine validity. The effect size index was used to calculate measurement responsiveness for the PFIT-s. The receiver operating characteristic curve was used in predicting participants' ability to perform functional components of the PFIT-s. RESULTS: From August 2009 to July 2012, 51 patients were recruited from 4 ICUs in the Denver, Colorado, metro area. At ICU discharge, PFIT-s scores were highly correlated to MRC sum scores (rho=.923) and grip strength (rho=.763) (P<.0005). Using baseline test with ICU discharge (26 pairs), test responsiveness was large (1.14). At ICU discharge, an MRC sum score cut-point of 41.5 predicted participants' ability to perform the standing components of the PFIT-s. LIMITATIONS: The small sample size was a limitation. However, the findings are consistent with those in a larger sample from Australia. CONCLUSIONS: The PFIT-s is a feasible and valid measure of function for individuals who require MV for 4 days or longer and who are alert, able to follow commands, and have sufficient strength to participate

Outcome measures report different aspects of patient function three months following critical care

BACKGROUND: Previous investigation of the relationship between physical performance and patient self-report physical function (PF) measures in intensive care unit (ICU) survivors have not been performed. OBJECTIVES: To (1) analyze the extent to which other activity-based measures of physical performance may serve as proxies for the 6-min walk test (6 MWT); (2) determine the extent to which the Short Form (SF) 36 domain of PF and physical component summary (PCS) score, reflect components of physical performance and (3) examine the relationship between demographic and ICU variables and the 6 MWT. DESIGN: Cross-sectional data from two clinical trials. SETTING: Two acute care hospitals (Melbourne, Australia and Denver, USA). PATIENTS: A total of 177 survivors of ICU. MEASUREMENTS: Were evaluated at 3 months. Performance-based measures were: 6 MWT, timed up and go test (TUG), the five times sit to stand test (5 × STS), the Berg balance scale (BBS) and two self-report measures: the SF-36 PF domain and the PCS score. MAIN RESULTS: 6 MWT showed excellent correlation with the TUG (rho = -0.79) and BBS (rho = 0.80); and good correlation with 5 × STS (rho = -0.69) and SF-36 PF scores (rho = 0.69). 6 MWT explained 54 and 33% of variance in SF-36 PF and PCS scores respectively. No variables were clinically important in predicting 6 MWT. CONCLUSIONS: The 6 MWT and TUG may both be acceptable measures of PF performance 3 months after ICU. Performance-based tests measure different constructs than self-report measures and choice of outcome variables should be aligned with study aims to ensure the most appropriate measure is used

Responsiveness of Critically Ill Adults With Multimorbidity to Rehabilitation Interventions: A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis Using Individual Pooled Data From Four Randomized Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To explore if patient characteristics (pre-existing comorbidity, age, sex, and illness severity) modify the effect of physical rehabilitation (intervention vs control) for the coprimary outcomes health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and objective physical performance using pooled individual patient data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: Data of individual patients from four critical care physical rehabilitation RCTs. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible trials were identified from a published systematic review. DATA EXTRACTION: Data sharing agreements were executed permitting transfer of anonymized data of individual patients from four trials to form one large, combined dataset. The pooled trial data were analyzed with linear mixed models fitted with fixed effects for treatment group, time, and trial. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four trials contributed data resulting in a combined total of 810 patients (intervention n = 403, control n = 407). After receiving trial rehabilitation interventions, patients with two or more comorbidities had HRQoL scores that were significantly higher and exceeded the minimal important difference at 3 and 6 months compared with the similarly comorbid control group (based on the Physical Component Summary score (Wald test p = 0.041). Patients with one or no comorbidities who received intervention had no HRQoL outcome differences at 3 and 6 months when compared with similarly comorbid control patients. No patient characteristic modified the physical performance outcome in patients who received physical rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of a target group with two or more comorbidities who derived benefits from the trial interventions is an important finding and provides direction for future investigations into the effect of rehabilitation. The multimorbid post-ICU population may be a select population for future prospective investigations into the effect of physical rehabilitation