ArticleIntensive & critical care nursing2025
Using electronic health records to classify risk for adverse safety events with ICU patient Mobility: A Cross-Sectional study.
Article in Intensive & critical care nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntegrating early mobility (EM) expert consensus recommendations into an algorithm that uses electronic health record (EHR) data provides an opportunity for ICU nurse decision support.
objectiveThis study aimed to compare clinical differences in ICU EM algorithm domains among patients with and without documented EM and examine discordance between algorithm classification and documented EM.
methodsSecondary analysis of EHR data from adults admitted to the ICU from one health system's electronic data warehouse. We extracted demographic, clinical, and EM data for up to the first three days after ICU admission and applied the algorithm to classify patients as low/high-risk by clinical domain (respiratory, cardiovascular, neurological, activity order, overall) each day. We used the Wilcoxon rank sum test or Fisher's exact test to compare clinical criteria and algorithm classification between patients with and without documented EM.
resultsFrom a total of 4,088 patients, documented EM increased each ICU day. Patients with EM were more likely to be classified by the algorithm as low-risk than those who stayed in bed each day. While a large proportion of low-risk patients remained in bed each day (813 day 1; 920 day 2; 881 day 3), some patients classified as high-risk had documented EM.
conclusionsA significant portion of patients identified as overall low-risk by the algorithm remained in bed, while some high-risk patients achieved EM. Variability between risk definitions and documented patient activity exists and understanding additional factors that nurses use to support EM decision-making is needed. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: EHR data can be used with a mobility algorithm to classify patients at low and high-risk for ICU EM. In the future, with additional refinements, an algorithm may augment clinician decision-making.
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.