Selina M Parry1, Swaroopa R Nalamalapu2, Krishidhar Nunna3, Anahita Rabiee4, Lisa Aronson Friedman5,6, Elizabeth Colantuoni5,7, Dale M Needham5,6,8, Victor D Dinglas5,6. 1. Department of Physiotherapy, 2281The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. 1499Greater Baltimore Medical Center, Towson, MD, USA. 3. 23303Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, 12228Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA. 5. Outcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery Group, 1466Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. 6. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, School of Medicine, 1466Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. 7. Department of Biostatistics, Bloomberg School of Public Health, 1466John Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. 8. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, 1466Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Impaired physical functioning is common and long lasting after an intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The 6-minute walk test (6MWT) is a validated and widely used test of functional capacity. This systematic review synthesizes existing data in order to: (1) evaluate 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) in meters over longitudinal follow-up after critical illness, (2) compare 6MWD between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) versus non-ARDS survivors, and (3) evaluate patient- and ICU-related factors associated with 6MWD. DATA SOURCES: Five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsychINFO, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry) were searched to identify studies reporting 6MWT after hospital discharge in survivors from general (ie, nonspeciality) ICUs. The last search was run on February 14, 2018. Databases were accessed via Johns Hopkins University Library. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Pooled mean 6MWD were reported, with separate linear random effects models used to evaluate associations of 6MWD with ARDS status, and patient- and ICU-related variables. Twenty-six eligible articles on 16 unique participant groups were included. The pooled mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) 6MWD results at 3- and 12-months post discharge were 361 (321-401) and 436 (391-481) meters, respectively. There was a significant increase in 6MWD at 12 months compared to 3 months (P = .017). In ARDS versus non-ARDS survivors, the mean (95% CI) 6MWD difference over 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up was 73 [13-133] meters lower. Female sex and preexisting comorbidity also were significantly associated with lower 6MWD, with ICU-related variables having no consistent associations. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to initial assessment at 3 months, significant improvement in 6MWD was reported at 12 months. Female sex, preexisting comorbidity, and ARDS (vs non-ARDS) were associated with lower 6MWT results. Such factors warrant consideration in the design of clinical research studies and in the interpretation of patient status using the 6MWT.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Impaired physical functioning is common and long lasting after an intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The 6-minute walk test (6MWT) is a validated and widely used test of functional capacity. This systematic review synthesizes existing data in order to: (1) evaluate 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) in meters over longitudinal follow-up after critical illness, (2) compare 6MWD between acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) versus non-ARDS survivors, and (3) evaluate patient- and ICU-related factors associated with 6MWD. DATA SOURCES: Five databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsychINFO, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry) were searched to identify studies reporting 6MWT after hospital discharge in survivors from general (ie, nonspeciality) ICUs. The last search was run on February 14, 2018. Databases were accessed via Johns Hopkins University Library. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Pooled mean 6MWD were reported, with separate linear random effects models used to evaluate associations of 6MWD with ARDS status, and patient- and ICU-related variables. Twenty-six eligible articles on 16 unique participant groups were included. The pooled mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) 6MWD results at 3- and 12-months post discharge were 361 (321-401) and 436 (391-481) meters, respectively. There was a significant increase in 6MWD at 12 months compared to 3 months (P = .017). In ARDS versus non-ARDS survivors, the mean (95% CI) 6MWD difference over 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up was 73 [13-133] meters lower. Female sex and preexisting comorbidity also were significantly associated with lower 6MWD, with ICU-related variables having no consistent associations. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to initial assessment at 3 months, significant improvement in 6MWD was reported at 12 months. Female sex, preexisting comorbidity, and ARDS (vs non-ARDS) were associated with lower 6MWT results. Such factors warrant consideration in the design of clinical research studies and in the interpretation of patient status using the 6MWT.
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: Linda Denehy; Amy Nordon-Craft; Lara Edbrooke; Daniel Malone; Sue Berney; Margaret Schenkman; Marc Moss Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Kitty S Chan; Elizabeth R Pfoh; Linda Denehy; Doug Elliott; Anne E Holland; Victor D Dinglas; Dale M Needham Journal: Chest Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Anna R Schandl; Olof R Brattström; Anna Svensson-Raskh; Elisabeth M Hellgren; Magnus D Falkenhav; Peter V Sackey Journal: Intensive Crit Care Nurs Date: 2011-02-21 Impact factor: 3.072
Authors: Alison E Turnbull; Anahita Rabiee; Wesley E Davis; Mohamed Farhan Nasser; Venkat Reddy Venna; Rohini Lolitha; Ramona O Hopkins; O Joseph Bienvenu; Karen A Robinson; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Lauren E Ferrante; Margaret A Pisani; Terrence E Murphy; Evelyne A Gahbauer; Linda S Leo-Summers; Thomas M Gill Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-08-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Rodrigo Núñez-Cortés; Constanza Malhue-Vidal; Florencia Gath; Gonzalo Valdivia-Lobos; Rodrigo Torres-Castro; Carlos Cruz-Montecinos; Francisco M Martinez-Arnau; Sofía Pérez-Alenda; Rubén López-Bueno; Joaquín Calatayud Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-18 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: María José Oliveros; Pamela Seron; Claudia Román; Manuel Gálvez; Rocío Navarro; Gonzalo Latin; Tania Marileo; Juan Pablo Molina; Pablo Sepúlveda; Gabriel Nasri Marzuca-Nassr; Sergio Muñoz Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-05-09
Authors: Heather K O'Grady; Lara Edbrooke; Christopher Farley; Sue Berney; Linda Denehy; Zudin Puthucheary; Michelle E Kho Journal: Crit Care Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 19.334
Authors: Kirby P Mayer; Victor M Ortiz-Soriano; Alborz Kalantar; Joshua Lambert; Peter E Morris; Javier A Neyra Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2022-04-07 Impact factor: 2.388
Authors: Ann M Parker; Narges Akhlaghi; Albahi M Malik; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Earl Mantheiy; Kelsey Albert; Mary Glover; Sherry Dong; Annette Lavezza; Jason Seltzer; Dale M Needham Journal: Aust Crit Care Date: 2021-06-18 Impact factor: 3.265