ArticlePloS one2020
Assessment of mobilization capacity in 10 different ICU scenarios by different professions.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for early rehabilitation in critically ill patients: a systematic review of applied protocols.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- [S3 guideline on renal replacement therapy in intensive care medicine : Evidence-based implementation of renal replacement therapy in critically ill patients].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025Guideline
- [Intensive care of patients with [infarct-related] cardiogenic shock : Abridged version of the S1 guideline].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2022Guideline
- Key principles for rehabilitation of critically ill patients with obesity.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Rehabilitation and the post-intensive care syndrome across the recovery continuum: a narrative review.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Dose-response relationship of early out-of-bed mobilization with functional decline and adverse events in patients after cardiovascular surgery requiring prolonged intensive care: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of intensive care · 2026Article
- Development and evaluation of a simulation-based early-mobility curriculum for paediatric intensive care nurses.Nursing in critical care · 2025Article
- Mobilization in Neurocritical Care: Challenges and Opportunities.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024Review
- Feasibility and Inter-rater Reliability of the Japanese Version of the Intensive Care Unit Mobility Scale.Cureus · 2024Article
- Perceived Barriers of Clinical Roles Towards Intensive Care Unit Mobility.Rehabilitation research and practice · 2024Article
- The optimal dose of mobilisation therapy in the ICU: a prospective cohort study.Journal of intensive care · 2023Article
- Early mobilisation in critically ill COVID-19 patients: a subanalysis of the ESICM-initiated UNITE-COVID observational study.Annals of intensive care · 2023Article
- [Interprofessional curriculum for early mobilization : Developed by the nursing section of the DGIIN in close cooperation with the German early mobilization network].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2023Review
- Feasibility and Safety of Active Physiotherapy in the Intensive Care Unit for Intubated Patients with Malignancy.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2023Observational
- Mobilisation of critically ill patients receiving norepinephrine: a retrospective cohort study.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Article
- Attenuating Muscle Mass Loss in Critical Illness: the Role of Nutrition and Exercise.Current osteoporosis reports · 2022Review
- Correction: Assessment of mobilization capacity in 10 different ICU scenarios by different professions.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMobilization of intensive care patients is a multi-professional task. Aim of this study was to explore how different professions working at Intensive Care Units (ICU) estimate the mobility capacity using the ICU Mobility Score in 10 different scenarios.
methodsTen fictitious patient-scenarios and guideline-related knowledge were assessed using an online survey. Critical care team members in German-speaking countries were invited to participate. All datasets including professional data and at least one scenario were analyzed. Kruskal Wallis test was used for the individual scenarios, while a linear mixed-model was used over all responses.
resultsIn total, 515 of 788 (65%) participants could be evaluated. Physicians (p = 0.001) and nurses (p = 0.002) selected a lower ICU Mobility Score (-0.7 95% CI -1.1 to -0.3 and -0.4 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2, respectively) than physical therapists, while other specialists did not (p = 0.81). Participants who classified themselves as experts or could define early mobilization in accordance to the "S2e guideline: positioning and early mobilisation in prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary disorders" correctly selected higher mobilization levels (0.2 95% CI 0.0 to 0.4, p = 0.049 and 0.3 95% CI 0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.002, respectively).
conclusionDifferent professions scored the mobilization capacity of patients differently, with nurses and physicians estimating significantly lower capacity than physical therapists. The exact knowledge of guidelines and recommendations, such as the definition of early mobilization, independently lead to a higher score. Interprofessional education, interprofessional rounds and mobilization activities could further enhance knowledge and practice of mobilization in the critical care team.
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.