ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2019
[Early mobilisation on the intensive care unit : What we know].
Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early Mobilization for Critically Ill Patients.Respiratory care · 2023Review
- Clustering of critically ill patients using an individualized learning approach enables dose optimization of mobilization in the ICU.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Observational
- [Robotic-assisted mobilization for an effective mobilization in a COVID-19 patient with ECMO treatment].Procare : das forbildungsmagazin fur pflegeberufe · 2023Article
- [Robotic-assisted mobilization for an effective mobilization in a COVID-19 patient with ECMO treatment].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2022Review
- Mobilisation of critically ill patients receiving norepinephrine: a retrospective cohort study.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Article
- [Core curriculum Medical intensive care medicine of the German Society of Medical Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (DGIIN)].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly mobilization is defined as intervention within the first 72 h after intensive care unit (ICU) admission. According to the current state of relevant studies, evidence on early mobilization in critically ill patients is still inconsistent. This leads to insecurity in caretakers and subsequently to incomplete implementation in German ICUs.
objectivesWhat type of intervention is suitable for certain patient groups? Which issues remain unresolved?
resultsTo obtain best possible outcomes, early mobilization should be initiated during the first 72 h after ICU admission. Implementation of early mobilization improves clinical outcome and should be integrated in a patient-centered bundle (such as ABCDEF). Mechanical ventilation is not a contraindication to intervention. Evidence in neurocritical care as well as functionally dependent patients is still low. Mode of intervention and dosage of early mobilisation remain unclear.
conclusionEarly mobilization is safe and feasible, resulting in improved outcomes in surgical and medical ICU patients. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the optimal dosage and duration of intervention, especially in neurocritical care patients.
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.