Megan Moyer1, Bethany Young, Eileen Maloney Wilensky, Joseph Borst, William Pino, Marisa Hart, Jesse LoBreglio, Derek Zaleski, Isaira Leonor, David Kung, Michelle Smith, Eric Zager, M Sean Grady, Monisha Kumar. 1. Questions or comments about this article may be directed to Megan Moyer, MSN ACNP-BC CNRN, at megan.moyer@uphs.upenn.edu. She is an Inpatient Nurse Practitioner, Department of Neurosurgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Bethany Young, MSN RN AGCNS-BC, is Clinical Nurse Specialist, Neurointensive Care Unit, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Eileen Maloney Wilensky, MSN ACNP-BC, is Director of Clinical Research Division and Co-Director of Quality & Safety Program, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Joseph Borst, PT DPT, is Physical Therapist, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. William Pino, PT DPT, is Physical Therapist, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Marisa Hart, MS OTR/L, is Occupational Therapist, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Jesse LoBreglio, MOT OTR/L, is Occupational Therapist, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Derek Zaleski, PT DPT, is Physical Therapist, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Isaira Leonor, BSN RN, is Registered Nurse, Neurointensive Care Unit, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. David Kung, MD, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Michelle Smith, MD, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Eric Zager, MD, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. M. Sean Grady, MD, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Monisha Kumar, MD, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with an external ventricular drain (EVD) may not be readily mobilized because of concerns of catheter dislodgment and/or inappropriate cerebrospinal fluid drainage. Delayed mobilization may result in longer hospital stays and an increased risk for complications related to immobility. We aimed to determine the safety, feasibility, and outcome of an EVD mobilization protocol in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). METHODS: A multidisciplinary group developed a formal algorithm for the mobilization of patients with SAH with EVDs. Outcome measures included intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), day to first mobilization, and discharge disposition. Patients were prospectively enrolled during a 12-month period and compared with a historical control group of patients with SAH for the preceding 12-month period. RESULTS: Thirty-nine of 45 (86.7%) patients were women. Mean age did not differ significantly between the preintervention (n = 19) and postintervention (n = 26) groups (59.6 vs 55.7). Number of EVD device days did not differ significantly between groups (16.3 vs 15, P = .422]. Of 101 attempted postintervention mobilization sessions, six were aborted for increased lethargy (1), pain (1), elevated intracranial pressure (1), drain malfunction (1), and hypotension (2). Twenty-four sessions were attempted but never initiated because of worsening neurologic examination (10), pulmonary instability (2), hemodynamic instability (2), medical instability (3), and provider request (1). No patient experienced catheter dislodgment. Mean ICU LOS was not different between groups (20.7 vs 18.2, P = .262). The day of first mobilization was significantly earlier in the postintervention group (18.7 vs 6.5, P < .0001). The percentage of patients discharged home or to acute rehabilitation was higher in the postintervention group (63.2% vs 88.5%, P = .018], when accounting for Hunt and Hess grade. CONCLUSIONS: The mobilization of patients with EVDs is safe and feasible; it may be associated with earlier mobilization, reduced ICU LOS, and better discharge disposition. No major complications were attributable to early mobilization.
BACKGROUND:Patients with an external ventricular drain (EVD) may not be readily mobilized because of concerns of catheter dislodgment and/or inappropriate cerebrospinal fluid drainage. Delayed mobilization may result in longer hospital stays and an increased risk for complications related to immobility. We aimed to determine the safety, feasibility, and outcome of an EVD mobilization protocol in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). METHODS: A multidisciplinary group developed a formal algorithm for the mobilization of patients with SAH with EVDs. Outcome measures included intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), day to first mobilization, and discharge disposition. Patients were prospectively enrolled during a 12-month period and compared with a historical control group of patients with SAH for the preceding 12-month period. RESULTS: Thirty-nine of 45 (86.7%) patients were women. Mean age did not differ significantly between the preintervention (n = 19) and postintervention (n = 26) groups (59.6 vs 55.7). Number of EVD device days did not differ significantly between groups (16.3 vs 15, P = .422]. Of 101 attempted postintervention mobilization sessions, six were aborted for increased lethargy (1), pain (1), elevated intracranial pressure (1), drain malfunction (1), and hypotension (2). Twenty-four sessions were attempted but never initiated because of worsening neurologic examination (10), pulmonary instability (2), hemodynamic instability (2), medical instability (3), and provider request (1). No patient experienced catheter dislodgment. Mean ICU LOS was not different between groups (20.7 vs 18.2, P = .262). The day of first mobilization was significantly earlier in the postintervention group (18.7 vs 6.5, P < .0001). The percentage of patients discharged home or to acute rehabilitation was higher in the postintervention group (63.2% vs 88.5%, P = .018], when accounting for Hunt and Hess grade. CONCLUSIONS: The mobilization of patients with EVDs is safe and feasible; it may be associated with earlier mobilization, reduced ICU LOS, and better discharge disposition. No major complications were attributable to early mobilization.
Authors: Rebekah A Yataco; Scott M Arnold; Suzanne M Brown; W David Freeman; C Carmen Cononie; Michael G Heckman; Luke W Partridge; Craig M Stucky; Laurie N Mellon; Jennifer L Birst; Kristien L Daron; Martha H Zapata-Cooper; Danton M Schudlich Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Sebastian Arts; Erik J van Lindert; Rene Aquarius; Ronald H M A Bartels; Hieronymus D Boogaarts Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2021-01-02 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Elizabeth K Zink; Sowmya Kumble; Meghan Beier; Pravin George; Robert D Stevens; Mona N Bahouth Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2021-03-22 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Sebastian Arts; Martine van Bilsen; Erik J van Lindert; Ronald Hma Bartels; Rene Aquarius; Hieronymus D Boogaarts Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2021-05-22