结构化早期动员方案对危重症患者动员水平和肌肉力量的影响:随机临床试验。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION Physiotherapy Theory and Practice Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-07 DOI:10.1080/09593985.2023.2233097
Maria Aparecida Stroppa de Paula, Erich Vidal Carvalho, Rodrigo de Souza Vieira, Cristiane Bastos-Netto, Luciana Angélica da Silva de Jesus, Caio Groetaers Stohler, Gustavo Candiá Arantes, Fernando Antonio Basile Colugnati, Maycon Moura Reboredo, Bruno Valle Pinheiro
{"title":"结构化早期动员方案对危重症患者动员水平和肌肉力量的影响:随机临床试验。","authors":"Maria Aparecida Stroppa de Paula, Erich Vidal Carvalho, Rodrigo de Souza Vieira, Cristiane Bastos-Netto, Luciana Angélica da Silva de Jesus, Caio Groetaers Stohler, Gustavo Candiá Arantes, Fernando Antonio Basile Colugnati, Maycon Moura Reboredo, Bruno Valle Pinheiro","doi":"10.1080/09593985.2023.2233097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Few studies have evaluated the effects of structured early mobilization (EM) protocols on the level of mobilization in critical care patients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the impact of a structured EM protocol on the level of mobilization, muscle strength, and the level of activities of daily living (LADL) after intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized clinical trial (U1111-1245-4840) included adults patients who were randomized into two groups: intervention (<i>n</i> = 40) and control (<i>n</i> = 45). The intervention group underwent conventional physiotherapy and structured EM protocols, and the control group underwent conventional physiotherapy. The level of mobilization from 0 (no mobilization) to 5 (walking), muscle strength (Medical Research Council scale), LADL (Katz Index), and incidence of complications were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The level of mobilization from day 1 to day 7 increased in the intervention group compared with the control group (<i>p</i> < .05). Muscle strength did not change during the protocol in the intervention and control groups {day 1 [effect size (<i>r</i>) = 0.15, <i>p</i> = .161], at ICU discharge [<i>r</i> = 0.16, <i>p</i> = .145], and after ICU discharge [<i>r</i> = 0.16, <i>p</i> = .191]}. The LADL did not differ between the intervention and control groups after ICU discharge [4 (1-6) vs. 3 (1-5), <i>p</i> = .702] or 30 days after hospital discharge [6 (5-6) vs. 6 (5-6), <i>p</i> = .945]. The structured EM protocol was safe, and no severe complications were observed during the protocol.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A structured EM protocol increased the level of mobilization without improving muscle strength and the LADL compared with conventional physiotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":48699,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of a structured early mobilization protocol on the level of mobilization and muscle strength in critical care patients: A randomized clinical trial.\",\"authors\":\"Maria Aparecida Stroppa de Paula, Erich Vidal Carvalho, Rodrigo de Souza Vieira, Cristiane Bastos-Netto, Luciana Angélica da Silva de Jesus, Caio Groetaers Stohler, Gustavo Candiá Arantes, Fernando Antonio Basile Colugnati, Maycon Moura Reboredo, Bruno Valle Pinheiro\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09593985.2023.2233097\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Few studies have evaluated the effects of structured early mobilization (EM) protocols on the level of mobilization in critical care patients.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the impact of a structured EM protocol on the level of mobilization, muscle strength, and the level of activities of daily living (LADL) after intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized clinical trial (U1111-1245-4840) included adults patients who were randomized into two groups: intervention (<i>n</i> = 40) and control (<i>n</i> = 45). The intervention group underwent conventional physiotherapy and structured EM protocols, and the control group underwent conventional physiotherapy. The level of mobilization from 0 (no mobilization) to 5 (walking), muscle strength (Medical Research Council scale), LADL (Katz Index), and incidence of complications were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The level of mobilization from day 1 to day 7 increased in the intervention group compared with the control group (<i>p</i> < .05). Muscle strength did not change during the protocol in the intervention and control groups {day 1 [effect size (<i>r</i>) = 0.15, <i>p</i> = .161], at ICU discharge [<i>r</i> = 0.16, <i>p</i> = .145], and after ICU discharge [<i>r</i> = 0.16, <i>p</i> = .191]}. The LADL did not differ between the intervention and control groups after ICU discharge [4 (1-6) vs. 3 (1-5), <i>p</i> = .702] or 30 days after hospital discharge [6 (5-6) vs. 6 (5-6), <i>p</i> = .945]. The structured EM protocol was safe, and no severe complications were observed during the protocol.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A structured EM protocol increased the level of mobilization without improving muscle strength and the LADL compared with conventional physiotherapy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48699,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2023.2233097\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2023.2233097","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:很少有研究评估结构化早期动员(EM)方案对重症监护患者动员水平的影响:评估结构化早期动员方案对重症监护病房(ICU)和出院后动员水平、肌肉力量和日常生活活动水平(LADL)的影响:这项随机临床试验(U1111-1245-4840)将成人患者随机分为两组:干预组(40 人)和对照组(45 人)。干预组接受常规物理治疗和结构化电磁方案,对照组接受常规物理治疗。结果显示,干预组从第1天开始的活动度从0(无活动度)到5(行走)、肌肉力量(医学研究委员会量表)、LADL(卡茨指数)以及并发症的发生率均有所提高:结果:与对照组相比,干预组患者从第1天到第7天的活动能力均有所提高(p r) = 0.15,p = .161],ICU出院时[r = 0.16,p = .145],ICU出院后[r = 0.16,p = .191]}。干预组和对照组的 LADL 在 ICU 出院后 [4 (1-6) vs. 3 (1-5),p = .702] 或出院 30 天后 [6 (5-6) vs. 6 (5-6),p = .945] 没有差异。结构化急救方案是安全的,方案实施期间未发现严重并发症:结论:与传统物理疗法相比,结构化急救方案提高了患者的活动能力,但没有改善患者的肌力和LADL。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effect of a structured early mobilization protocol on the level of mobilization and muscle strength in critical care patients: A randomized clinical trial.

Background: Few studies have evaluated the effects of structured early mobilization (EM) protocols on the level of mobilization in critical care patients.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of a structured EM protocol on the level of mobilization, muscle strength, and the level of activities of daily living (LADL) after intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge.

Methods: This randomized clinical trial (U1111-1245-4840) included adults patients who were randomized into two groups: intervention (n = 40) and control (n = 45). The intervention group underwent conventional physiotherapy and structured EM protocols, and the control group underwent conventional physiotherapy. The level of mobilization from 0 (no mobilization) to 5 (walking), muscle strength (Medical Research Council scale), LADL (Katz Index), and incidence of complications were evaluated.

Results: The level of mobilization from day 1 to day 7 increased in the intervention group compared with the control group (p < .05). Muscle strength did not change during the protocol in the intervention and control groups {day 1 [effect size (r) = 0.15, p = .161], at ICU discharge [r = 0.16, p = .145], and after ICU discharge [r = 0.16, p = .191]}. The LADL did not differ between the intervention and control groups after ICU discharge [4 (1-6) vs. 3 (1-5), p = .702] or 30 days after hospital discharge [6 (5-6) vs. 6 (5-6), p = .945]. The structured EM protocol was safe, and no severe complications were observed during the protocol.

Conclusion: A structured EM protocol increased the level of mobilization without improving muscle strength and the LADL compared with conventional physiotherapy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The aim of Physiotherapy Theory and Practice is to provide an international, peer-reviewed forum for the publication, dissemination, and discussion of recent developments and current research in physiotherapy/physical therapy. The journal accepts original quantitative and qualitative research reports, theoretical papers, systematic literature reviews, clinical case reports, and technical clinical notes. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice; promotes post-basic education through reports, reviews, and updates on all aspects of physiotherapy and specialties relating to clinical physiotherapy.
期刊最新文献
Women's experiences of physical therapy treatment for vulvodynia. Teaching person-centered practice to pre-registration physiotherapy students: a qualitative study. Physiotherapy provided for patients undergoing thoracic surgery in Sweden - a national survey of practice. Patients' lived body experiences in the intensive care unit and beyond - a meta-ethnographic synthesis. The quality of life in individuals with Parkinson's Disease: is it related to functionality and tremor severity? A cross-sectional study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1