ArticleJournal of the Intensive Care Society2015
Benchmarking rehabilitation practice in the intensive care unit.
Article in Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Article
- A single center observational study of the incidence, frequency and timing of critical care physiotherapy intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2022Article
- Rehabilitation in critical care: Barrier, hurdle or brick wall?Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEarly rehabilitation in critically ill patients has been demonstrated to be safe and is associated with many positive outcomes. Despite this, there are inconsistencies in the early active rehabilitation that patients receive on intensive care units. The aims of this study were to quantify the amount of active rehabilitation provided for patients in a District General Hospital intensive care unit and to identify specific barriers encountered.
methodsData were collected over a six-week period during March and April 2013. All patients admitted to the intensive care unit at St Peter's Hospital for more than 48 h were included. For every treatment session, the treating physiotherapist recorded what type of treatment took place. Treatments were classified as either non-active or active rehabilitation. Non-active rehabilitation included chest physiotherapy, passive range of movement exercises and hoisting to a chair. Active rehabilitation was defined as any treatment including active/active-assisted exercises, sitting on the edge of the bed, sitting to standing, standing transfers, marching on the spot or ambulation. Classification of rehabilitation was based upon internationally agreed intensive care unit activity codes and definitions. All barriers to active rehabilitation were also recorded.
resultsThe study included 35 patients with a total of 194 physiotherapy treatment sessions. Active rehabilitation was included in 51% of all treatment sessions. The median time to commencing active rehabilitation from intensive care unit admission was 3 days (range 3-42 [IQR 3-7]). The most frequent barriers to active rehabilitation were sedation and endotracheal tubes, which together accounted for 50% of the total barriers.
conclusionThe study provides useful benchmarking of current rehabilitation activity in a District General Hospital intensive care unit and highlights the most common barriers encountered to active rehabilitation. Longer duration studies incorporating larger sample sizes are warranted. Future studies should utilise the internationally agreed intensive care unit activity codes to improve comparability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.