Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26968024›Full record

Trial reportCritical care medicine2016

A Binational Multicenter Pilot Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial of Early Goal-Directed Mobilization in the ICU.

Carol L Hodgson, Michael Bailey, Rinaldo Bellomo, Susan Berney, Heidi Buhr, Linda Denehy, Belinda Gabbe, Megan Harrold, Alisa Higgins, Theodore J Iwashyna and 10 more

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 111 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
111citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
18.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01927510 phase1 / phase2completednot on this map

Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial of Early Mobilisation in Critically Ill Patients to Improve Functional Recovery and Quality of Life.

TypeinterventionalSponsorAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research CentreRan2013 to 2015Enrolled50ConditionsCritically IllArmsEarly mobilisation
NCT03133377 phase3completednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

A Prospective Multicentre Phase III Randomised Controlled Trial of Early Activity and Mobilisation Compared With Standard Care in Invasively Ventilated Patients in Intensive Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research CentreRan2018 to 2022Enrolled750ConditionsCritically Ill, Mechanically VentilatedArmsEarly activity and mobilisation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

111 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 258 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Guideline
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.

Carol L Hodgson1Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 2Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 3Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia. 4The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 5Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia. 6Monash University, Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 7Curtin University, Bentley, WA, Australia. 8University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 9Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Health System, Ann Arbor, MI. 10St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 11Auckland City Hospital/Cardiovascular Intensive Care Unit, Auckland City, New Zealand. 12Fremantle Hospital, Fremantle, WA, Australia. 13Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, Australia. 14The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 15Western Hospital, Footscray, VIC, Australia. 16Wellington Hospital, Wellington, New Zealand. 17Royal Perth Hospital, Subiaco WA, Australia.
Michael Bailey
Rinaldo Bellomo
Susan Berney
Heidi Buhr
Linda Denehy
Belinda Gabbe
Megan Harrold
Alisa Higgins
Theodore J Iwashyna
Rebecca Papworth
Rachael Parke
Shane Patman
Jeffrey Presneill
Manoj Saxena
Elizabeth Skinner
Claire Tipping
Paul Young
Steven Webb
Trial of Early Activity and Mobilization Study Investigators
Monash University · AURoyal Prince Alfred Hospital · AUThe George Institute for Global Health · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUAustin Health · AUFootscray Hospital · AUThe Alfred Hospital · AUWellington Hospital · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine if the early goal-directed mobilization intervention could be delivered to patients receiving mechanical ventilation with increased maximal levels of activity compared with standard care.

designA pilot randomized controlled trial.

settingFive ICUs in Australia and New Zealand.

participantsFifty critically ill adults mechanically ventilated for greater than 24 hours.

interventionPatients were randomly assigned to either early goal-directed mobilization (intervention) or to standard care (control). Early goal-directed mobilization comprised functional rehabilitation treatment conducted at the highest level of activity possible for that patient assessed by the ICU mobility scale while receiving mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsThe ICU mobility scale, strength, ventilation duration, ICU and hospital length of stay, and total inpatient (acute and rehabilitation) stay as well as 6-month post-ICU discharge health-related quality of life, activities of daily living, and anxiety and depression were recorded. The mean age was 61 years and 60% were men. The highest level of activity (ICU mobility scale) recorded during the ICU stay between the intervention and control groups was mean (95% CI) 7.3 (6.3-8.3) versus 5.9 (4.9-6.9), p = 0.05. The proportion of patients who walked in ICU was almost doubled with early goal-directed mobilization (intervention n = 19 [66%] vs control n = 8 [38%]; p = 0.05). There was no difference in total inpatient stay (d) between the intervention versus control groups (20 [15-35] vs 34 [18-43]; p = 0.37). There were no adverse events.

conclusionsKey Practice Points: Delivery of early goal-directed mobilization within a randomized controlled trial was feasible, safe and resulted in increased duration and level of active exercises.

Indexed as

Early AmbulationExercise TherapyIntensive Care UnitsRespiration, ArtificialActivities of Daily LivingAdultAgedAnxietyCritical IllnessDepressionFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID26968024
OpenAlexW2332235094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.