Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38787294›Full record

SynthesisCritical care explorations2024

Physical Rehabilitation and Mobilization in Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Life Support: A Systematic Review.

Julian D Rivera, Edward S Fox, Shannon M Fernando, Alexandre Tran, Daniel Brodie, Eddy Fan, Jo-Anne Fowles, Carol L Hodgson, Joseph E Tonna, Bram Rochwerg

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care explorations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Julian D RiveraFaculty of Medicine, University of Antioquia, Medellín, Antioquia, Colombia.
Edward S FoxSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Shannon M FernandoDepartment of Critical Care, Lakeridge Health Corporation, Oshawa, ON, Canada.
Alexandre TranClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Daniel BrodieDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Eddy FanInterdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine and Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jo-Anne FowlesDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Royal Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Carol L HodgsonAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Joseph E TonnaDivision of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery and Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT.
Bram RochwergDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Funding

Optimizing Selection and Management of Cardiac Arrest Patients Treated with ECMOK23HL141596 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI TONNA, JOSEPH EDWARD · 2018 to 2022
$945k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL141596
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe planned to synthesize evidence examining the potential efficacy and safety of performing physical rehabilitation and/or mobilization (PR&M) in adult patients receiving extracorporeal life support (ECLS). DATA SOURCES: We included any study that compared PR&M to no PR&M or among different PR&M strategies in adult patients receiving any ECLS for any indication and any cannulation. We searched seven electronic databases with no language limitations. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers, independently and in duplicate, screened all citations for eligibility. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 and Cochrane Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tools to assess individual study risk of bias. Although we had planned for meta-analysis, this was not possible due to insufficient data, so we used narrative and tabular data summaries for presenting results. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence for each outcome using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 17 studies that enrolled 996 patients. Most studies examined venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and/or venoarterial ECMO as a bridge to recovery in the ICU. We found an uncertain effect of high-intensity/active PR&M on mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, hospital length of stay, or quality of life compared with low-intensity/passive PR&M in patients receiving ECLS (very low certainty due to very serious imprecision). There was similarly an uncertain effect on safety events including clinically important bleeding, spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage, limb ischemia, accidental decannulation, or ECLS circuit dysfunction (very low certainty due to very serious risk of bias and imprecision).

conclusionsBased on the currently available summary of evidence, there is an uncertain effect of high-intensity/active PR&M on patient important outcomes or safety in patients receiving ECLS. Despite indirect data from other populations suggesting potential benefit of high-intensity PR&M in the ICU; further high-quality randomized trials evaluating the benefits and risks of physical therapy and/or mobilization in this population are needed.

Indexed as

Extracorporeal Membrane OxygenationEarly AmbulationHumansLength of StayPhysical Therapy Modalities

Identifiers

PMID38787294
PMCPMC11132346

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.