BACKGROUND: Patients who recover from critical illness may be left with significant limitations to their physical function that can have important consequences for their quality of life. Measures of physical function may be useful end points to consider in studies conducted in critically ill patients and are particularly attractive in studies investigating early mobilisation and rehabilitation. OBJECTIVE: To describe measurements of physical function used in studies investigating early mobilisation and rehabilitation in critically ill adults. METHODS: A systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PEDro was undertaken to identify studies investigating early mobilisation and rehabilitation in critically ill adults. Two researchers independently extracted data from identified studies that described measurements of physical function and that evaluated the available evidence for the measurement properties and risk of bias associated with the identified end points. RESULTS: We identified 11 studies of early mobilisation and rehabilitation in critically ill patients, involving 19 distinct measures of physical function. The ability to perform activities such as sitting and standing and the maximum distance ambulated were the most commonly used end points. Only one end point in the included studies, the Functional Status Score for the ICU (FSS-ICU), was designed for use in the ICU setting. Of the end points used, only the Short Form 36 (SF-36), the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale score and handheld dynamometers have proven interrater reliability and population validity in the ICU setting. CONCLUSION: A wide range of end points have been used to evaluate physical function in critically ill patients. However, further studies are needed to establish the measurement properties of the most commonly used end points in order to recommend their use in clinical trials.
BACKGROUND:Patients who recover from critical illness may be left with significant limitations to their physical function that can have important consequences for their quality of life. Measures of physical function may be useful end points to consider in studies conducted in critically ill patients and are particularly attractive in studies investigating early mobilisation and rehabilitation. OBJECTIVE: To describe measurements of physical function used in studies investigating early mobilisation and rehabilitation in critically ill adults. METHODS: A systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PEDro was undertaken to identify studies investigating early mobilisation and rehabilitation in critically ill adults. Two researchers independently extracted data from identified studies that described measurements of physical function and that evaluated the available evidence for the measurement properties and risk of bias associated with the identified end points. RESULTS: We identified 11 studies of early mobilisation and rehabilitation in critically ill patients, involving 19 distinct measures of physical function. The ability to perform activities such as sitting and standing and the maximum distance ambulated were the most commonly used end points. Only one end point in the included studies, the Functional Status Score for the ICU (FSS-ICU), was designed for use in the ICU setting. Of the end points used, only the Short Form 36 (SF-36), the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale score and handheld dynamometers have proven interrater reliability and population validity in the ICU setting. CONCLUSION: A wide range of end points have been used to evaluate physical function in critically ill patients. However, further studies are needed to establish the measurement properties of the most commonly used end points in order to recommend their use in clinical trials.
Authors: Selina M Parry; Catherine L Granger; Sue Berney; Jennifer Jones; Lisa Beach; Doa El-Ansary; René Koopman; Linda Denehy Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-02-05 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Carol L Hodgson; Alison E Turnbull; Theodore J Iwashyna; Ann Parker; Wesley Davis; Clifton O Bingham; Nicola R Watts; Simon Finfer; Dale M Needham Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2017-02-01
Authors: Minxuan Huang; Kitty S Chan; Jennifer M Zanni; Selina M Parry; Saint-Clair G B Neto; Jose A A Neto; Vinicius Z M da Silva; Michelle E Kho; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Michelle E Kho; Alexander D Truong; Jennifer M Zanni; Nancy D Ciesla; Roy G Brower; Jeffrey B Palmer; Dale M Needham Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2014-09-22 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Sarina A Fazio; Amy L Doroy; Nicholas R Anderson; Jason Y Adams; Heather M Young Journal: Intensive Crit Care Nurs Date: 2020-11-14 Impact factor: 3.072
Authors: Juultje Sommers; Raoul H H Engelbert; Daniela Dettling-Ihnenfeldt; Rik Gosselink; Peter E Spronk; Frans Nollet; Marike van der Schaaf Journal: Clin Rehabil Date: 2015-02-13 Impact factor: 3.477
Authors: Natália A Ferreira; Agnaldo José Lopes; Arthur S Ferreira; George Ntoumenopoulos; Jerffesson Dias; Fernando S Guimaraes Journal: World J Crit Care Med Date: 2016-11-04
Authors: Ralf Baron; Andreas Binder; Rolf Biniek; Stephan Braune; Hartmut Buerkle; Peter Dall; Sueha Demirakca; Rahel Eckardt; Verena Eggers; Ingolf Eichler; Ingo Fietze; Stephan Freys; Andreas Fründ; Lars Garten; Bernhard Gohrbandt; Irene Harth; Wolfgang Hartl; Hans-Jürgen Heppner; Johannes Horter; Ralf Huth; Uwe Janssens; Christine Jungk; Kristin Maria Kaeuper; Paul Kessler; Stefan Kleinschmidt; Matthias Kochanek; Matthias Kumpf; Andreas Meiser; Anika Mueller; Maritta Orth; Christian Putensen; Bernd Roth; Michael Schaefer; Rainhild Schaefers; Peter Schellongowski; Monika Schindler; Reinhard Schmitt; Jens Scholz; Stefan Schroeder; Gerhard Schwarzmann; Claudia Spies; Robert Stingele; Peter Tonner; Uwe Trieschmann; Michael Tryba; Frank Wappler; Christian Waydhas; Bjoern Weiss; Guido Weisshaar Journal: Ger Med Sci Date: 2015-11-12