Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract Background This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effectiveness of systematic early mobilization in improving muscle strength and physical function in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods We conducted a two-stage systematic literature...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2021-01-01
|
| Series: | Critical Care |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-03446-9 |
| _version_ | 1818844862733090816 |
|---|---|
| author | Dominik Menges Bianca Seiler Yuki Tomonaga Matthias Schwenkglenks Milo A. Puhan Henock G. Yebyo |
| author_facet | Dominik Menges Bianca Seiler Yuki Tomonaga Matthias Schwenkglenks Milo A. Puhan Henock G. Yebyo |
| author_sort | Dominik Menges |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effectiveness of systematic early mobilization in improving muscle strength and physical function in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods We conducted a two-stage systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library until January 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effects of early mobilization initiated within 7 days after ICU admission compared with late mobilization, standard early mobilization or no mobilization. Priority outcomes were Medical Research Council Sum Score (MRC-SS), incidence of ICU-acquired weakness (ICUAW), 6-min walk test (6MWT), proportion of patients reaching independence, time needed until walking, SF-36 Physical Function Domain Score (PFS) and SF-36 Physical Health Component Score (PCS). Meta-analysis was conducted where sufficient comparable evidence was available. We evaluated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach. Results We identified 12 eligible RCTs contributing data from 1304 participants. Two RCTs were categorized as comparing systematic early with late mobilization, nine with standard early mobilization and one with no mobilization. We found evidence for a benefit of systematic early mobilization compared to late mobilization for SF-36 PFS (MD 12.3; 95% CI 3.9–20.8) and PCS (MD 3.4; 95% CI 0.01–6.8), as well as on the proportion of patients reaching independence and the time needed to walking, but not for incidence of ICUAW (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.38–1.03) or MRC-SS. For systematic early compared to standard early mobilization, we found no statistically significant benefit on MRC-SS (MD 5.8; 95% CI − 1.4 to 13.0), incidence of ICUAW (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.63–1.27), SF-36 PFS (MD 8.1; 95% CI − 15.3 to 31.4) or PCS (MD − 2.4; 95% CI − 6.1 to 1.3) or other priority outcomes except for change in 6MWT from baseline. Generally, effects appeared stronger for systematic early compared to late mobilization than to standard early mobilization. We judged the certainty of evidence for all outcomes as very low to low. Conclusion The evidence regarding a benefit of systematic early mobilization remained inconclusive. However, our findings indicate that the larger the difference in the timing between the intervention and the comparator, the more likely an RCT is to find a benefit for early mobilization. Study Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42019122555). |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-19T05:20:31Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0c1dfa9629944fde84a8f13e7d994e75 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1364-8535 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-19T05:20:31Z |
| publishDate | 2021-01-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Critical Care |
| spelling | doaj.art-0c1dfa9629944fde84a8f13e7d994e752022-12-21T20:34:30ZengBMCCritical Care1364-85352021-01-0125112410.1186/s13054-020-03446-9Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysisDominik Menges0Bianca Seiler1Yuki Tomonaga2Matthias Schwenkglenks3Milo A. Puhan4Henock G. Yebyo5Department of Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of ZurichFaculty of Medicine (MeF), University of ZurichDepartment of Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of ZurichDepartment of Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of ZurichDepartment of Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of ZurichDepartment of Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of ZurichAbstract Background This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effectiveness of systematic early mobilization in improving muscle strength and physical function in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods We conducted a two-stage systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library until January 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effects of early mobilization initiated within 7 days after ICU admission compared with late mobilization, standard early mobilization or no mobilization. Priority outcomes were Medical Research Council Sum Score (MRC-SS), incidence of ICU-acquired weakness (ICUAW), 6-min walk test (6MWT), proportion of patients reaching independence, time needed until walking, SF-36 Physical Function Domain Score (PFS) and SF-36 Physical Health Component Score (PCS). Meta-analysis was conducted where sufficient comparable evidence was available. We evaluated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach. Results We identified 12 eligible RCTs contributing data from 1304 participants. Two RCTs were categorized as comparing systematic early with late mobilization, nine with standard early mobilization and one with no mobilization. We found evidence for a benefit of systematic early mobilization compared to late mobilization for SF-36 PFS (MD 12.3; 95% CI 3.9–20.8) and PCS (MD 3.4; 95% CI 0.01–6.8), as well as on the proportion of patients reaching independence and the time needed to walking, but not for incidence of ICUAW (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.38–1.03) or MRC-SS. For systematic early compared to standard early mobilization, we found no statistically significant benefit on MRC-SS (MD 5.8; 95% CI − 1.4 to 13.0), incidence of ICUAW (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.63–1.27), SF-36 PFS (MD 8.1; 95% CI − 15.3 to 31.4) or PCS (MD − 2.4; 95% CI − 6.1 to 1.3) or other priority outcomes except for change in 6MWT from baseline. Generally, effects appeared stronger for systematic early compared to late mobilization than to standard early mobilization. We judged the certainty of evidence for all outcomes as very low to low. Conclusion The evidence regarding a benefit of systematic early mobilization remained inconclusive. However, our findings indicate that the larger the difference in the timing between the intervention and the comparator, the more likely an RCT is to find a benefit for early mobilization. Study Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42019122555).https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-03446-9Early mobilizationRehabilitationIntensive careCritical careICUPhysical therapy |
| spellingShingle | Dominik Menges Bianca Seiler Yuki Tomonaga Matthias Schwenkglenks Milo A. Puhan Henock G. Yebyo Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysis Critical Care Early mobilization Rehabilitation Intensive care Critical care ICU Physical therapy |
| title | Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full | Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_fullStr | Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_short | Systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_sort | systematic early versus late mobilization or standard early mobilization in mechanically ventilated adult icu patients systematic review and meta analysis |
| topic | Early mobilization Rehabilitation Intensive care Critical care ICU Physical therapy |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-03446-9 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT dominikmenges systematicearlyversuslatemobilizationorstandardearlymobilizationinmechanicallyventilatedadulticupatientssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT biancaseiler systematicearlyversuslatemobilizationorstandardearlymobilizationinmechanicallyventilatedadulticupatientssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yukitomonaga systematicearlyversuslatemobilizationorstandardearlymobilizationinmechanicallyventilatedadulticupatientssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT matthiasschwenkglenks systematicearlyversuslatemobilizationorstandardearlymobilizationinmechanicallyventilatedadulticupatientssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT miloapuhan systematicearlyversuslatemobilizationorstandardearlymobilizationinmechanicallyventilatedadulticupatientssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT henockgyebyo systematicearlyversuslatemobilizationorstandardearlymobilizationinmechanicallyventilatedadulticupatientssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |