Assessment of mobilization capacity in 10 different ICU scenarios by different professions

Background: Mobilization of intensive care patients is a multi-professional task. Aim of this study was to explore how different professions working at Intensive Care Units (ICU) estimate the mobility capacity using the ICU Mobility Score in 10 different scenarios. Methods: Ten fictitious patient-scenarios and guideline-related knowledge were assessed using an online survey. Critical care team members in German-speaking countries were invited to participate. All datasets including professional data and at least one scenario were analyzed. Kruskal Wallis test was used for the individual scenarios, while a linear mixed-model was used over all responses. Results: In total, 515 of 788 (65%) participants could be evaluated. Physicians (p = 0.001) and nurses (p = 0.002) selected a lower ICU Mobility Score (-0.7 95% CI -1.1 to -0.3 and -0.4 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2, respectively) than physical therapists, while other specialists did not (p = 0.81). Participants who classified themselves as experts or could define early mobilization in accordance to the "S2e guideline: positioning and early mobilisation in prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary disorders" correctly selected higher mobilization levels (0.2 95% CI 0.0 to 0.4, p = 0.049 and 0.3 95% CI 0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.002, respectively). Conclusion: Different professions scored the mobilization capacity of patients differently, with nurses and physicians estimating significantly lower capacity than physical therapists. The exact knowledge of guidelines and recommendations, such as the definition of early mobilization, independently lead to a higher score. Interprofessional education, interprofessional rounds and mobilization activities could further enhance knowledge and practice of mobilization in the critical care team

The Functional Trajectory in Frail Compared With Non-frail Critically Ill Patients During the Hospital Stay

Background: Long-term outcome is determined not only by the acute critical illness but increasingly by the reduced functional reserve of pre-existing frailty. The patients with frailty currently account for one-third of the critically ill, resulting in higher mortality. There is evidence of how frailty affects the intrahospital functional trajectory of critically ill patients since prehospital status is often missing. Methods: In this prospective single-center cohort study at two interdisciplinary intensive care units (ICUs) at a university hospital in Germany, the frailty was assessed using the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in the adult patients with critical illness with an ICU stay >24 h. The functional status was assessed using the sum of the subdomains "Mobility" and "Transfer" of the Barthel Index (MTB) at three time points (pre-hospital, ICU discharge, and hospital discharge). Results: We included 1,172 patients with a median age of 75 years, of which 290 patients (25%) were frail. In a propensity score-matched cohort, the probability of MTB deterioration till hospital discharge did not differ in the patients with frailty (odds ratio (OR) 1.3 [95% CI 0.8-1.9], p = 0.301), confirmed in several sensitivity analyses in all the patients and survivors only. Conclusion: The patients with frailty have a reduced functional status. Their intrahospital functional trajectory, however, was not worse than those in non-frail patients, suggesting a rehabilitation potential of function in critically ill patients with frailty

Surgical Intensive Care Unit Optimal Mobilisation Score (SOMS) trial: a protocol for an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial focused on goal-directed early mobilisation of surgical ICU patients

Introduction: Immobilisation in the intensive care unit (ICU) leads to muscle weakness and is associated with increased costs and long-term functional disability. Previous studies showed early mobilisation of medical ICU patients improves clinical outcomes. The Surgical ICU Optimal Mobilisation Score (SOMS) trial aims to test whether a budget-neutral intervention to facilitate goal-directed early mobilisation in the surgical ICU improves participant mobilisation and associated clinical outcomes. Methods and analysis The SOMS trial is an international, multicentre, randomised clinical study being conducted in the USA and Europe. We are targeting 200 patients. The primary outcome is average daily SOMS level and key secondary outcomes are ICU length of stay until discharge readiness and ‘mini’ modified Functional Independence Measure (mmFIM) at hospital discharge. Additional secondary outcomes include quality of life assessed at 3 months after hospital discharge and global muscle strength at ICU discharge. Exploratory outcomes will include: ventilator-free days, ICU and hospital length of stay and 3-month mortality. We will explore genetic influences on the effectiveness of early mobilisation and centre-specific effects of early mobilisation on outcomes. Ethics and dissemination Following Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval in three institutions, we started study recruitment and plan to expand to additional centres in Germany and Italy. Safety monitoring will be the domain of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). The SOMS trial will also explore the feasibility of a transcontinental study on early mobilisation in the surgical ICU. Results: The results of this study, along with those of ancillary studies, will be made available in the form of manuscripts and presentations at national and international meetings. Registration This study has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01363102)

Hospital physicians can’t get no long-term satisfaction: an indicator for fairness in preference fulfillment on duty schedules

Physicians are a scarce resource in hospitals. In order to minimize physician attrition, schedulers incorporate individual physician preferences when creating the physicians’ duty roster. The manual creation of a roster is very time-consuming and often produces suboptimal results. Many schedulers therefore use model-based software to assist in planning. The planning horizon for duty schedules is usually a single month. Many models optimize the plan for the current planning horizon, without taking into account data on preference fulfillment and work load distribution from previous months. It is therefore possible that, when looking at a longer time horizon, some physicians are disadvantaged in terms of preference fulfillment more often than their peers, simply because this generates better results for the individual months. This may be perceived as unfair by the disadvantaged physicians. In order to eliminate this imbalance, we introduce a satisfaction indicator for preference fulfillment in physician scheduling. This indicator is computed for each physician on each monthly plan and is then used to inform decisions regarding preference fulfillment on the current and future plans. As a result, a more equal distribution of preference fulfillment among physicians is achieved. We run a computational study with three different update strategies for our satisfaction indicator. Our study uses 24 months of data from a German university hospital and derives additional generated data from it. Results indicate that our satisfaction indicator, combined with the right update strategy, can achieve an equal distribution of satisfaction over all physicians within a peer group, as well as stable satisfaction levels for each individual physician over a longer time horizon. As our main contribution, we identify that our satisfaction indicator is more effective in creating equal distribution of long-term satisfaction the higher the rate of conflicting preferences is