Cargando…
Early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the PICU: a UK survey
OBJECTIVE: To understand the context and professional perspectives of delivering early rehabilitation and mobilisation (ERM) within UK paediatric intensive care units (PICUs). DESIGN: A web-based survey administered from May 2019 to August 2019. SETTING: UK PICUs. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 124 staff...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9185558/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36053640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001300 |
_version_ | 1784724750552006656 |
---|---|
author | Thompson, Jacqueline Y Menzies, Julie C Manning, Joseph C McAnuff, Jennifer Brush, Emily Clare Ryde, Francesca Rapley, Tim Pathan, Nazima Brett, Stephen Moore, David J Geary, Michelle Colville, Gillian A Morris, Kevin P Parslow, Roger Charles Feltbower, Richard G Lockley, Sophie Kirkham, Fenella J Forsyth, Rob J Scholefield, Barnaby R |
author_facet | Thompson, Jacqueline Y Menzies, Julie C Manning, Joseph C McAnuff, Jennifer Brush, Emily Clare Ryde, Francesca Rapley, Tim Pathan, Nazima Brett, Stephen Moore, David J Geary, Michelle Colville, Gillian A Morris, Kevin P Parslow, Roger Charles Feltbower, Richard G Lockley, Sophie Kirkham, Fenella J Forsyth, Rob J Scholefield, Barnaby R |
author_sort | Thompson, Jacqueline Y |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To understand the context and professional perspectives of delivering early rehabilitation and mobilisation (ERM) within UK paediatric intensive care units (PICUs). DESIGN: A web-based survey administered from May 2019 to August 2019. SETTING: UK PICUs. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 124 staff from 26 PICUs participated, including 22 (18%) doctors, 34 (27%) nurses, 28 (23%) physiotherapists, 19 (15%) occupational therapists and 21 (17%) were other professionals. RESULTS: Key components of participants’ definitions of ERM included tailored, multidisciplinary rehabilitation packages focused on promoting recovery. Multidisciplinary involvement in initiating ERM was commonly reported. Over half of respondents favoured delivering ERM after achieving physiological stability (n=69, 56%). All age groups were considered for ERM by relevant health professionals. However, responses differed concerning the timing of initiation. Interventions considered for ERM were more likely to be delivered to patients when PICU length of stay exceeded 28 days and among patients with acquired brain injury or severe developmental delay. The most commonly identified barriers were physiological instability (81%), limited staffing (79%), sedation requirement (73%), insufficient resources and equipment (69%), lack of recognition of patient readiness (67%), patient suitability (63%), inadequate training (61%) and inadequate funding (60%). Respondents ranked reduction in PICU length of stay (74%) and improvement in psychological outcomes (73%) as the most important benefits of ERM. CONCLUSION: ERM is gaining familiarity and endorsement in UK PICUs, but significant barriers to implementation due to limited resources and variation in content and delivery of ERM persist. A standardised protocol that sets out defined ERM interventions, along with implementation support to tackle modifiable barriers, is required to ensure the delivery of high-quality ERM. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9185558 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91855582022-06-16 Early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the PICU: a UK survey Thompson, Jacqueline Y Menzies, Julie C Manning, Joseph C McAnuff, Jennifer Brush, Emily Clare Ryde, Francesca Rapley, Tim Pathan, Nazima Brett, Stephen Moore, David J Geary, Michelle Colville, Gillian A Morris, Kevin P Parslow, Roger Charles Feltbower, Richard G Lockley, Sophie Kirkham, Fenella J Forsyth, Rob J Scholefield, Barnaby R BMJ Paediatr Open Intensive Care OBJECTIVE: To understand the context and professional perspectives of delivering early rehabilitation and mobilisation (ERM) within UK paediatric intensive care units (PICUs). DESIGN: A web-based survey administered from May 2019 to August 2019. SETTING: UK PICUs. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 124 staff from 26 PICUs participated, including 22 (18%) doctors, 34 (27%) nurses, 28 (23%) physiotherapists, 19 (15%) occupational therapists and 21 (17%) were other professionals. RESULTS: Key components of participants’ definitions of ERM included tailored, multidisciplinary rehabilitation packages focused on promoting recovery. Multidisciplinary involvement in initiating ERM was commonly reported. Over half of respondents favoured delivering ERM after achieving physiological stability (n=69, 56%). All age groups were considered for ERM by relevant health professionals. However, responses differed concerning the timing of initiation. Interventions considered for ERM were more likely to be delivered to patients when PICU length of stay exceeded 28 days and among patients with acquired brain injury or severe developmental delay. The most commonly identified barriers were physiological instability (81%), limited staffing (79%), sedation requirement (73%), insufficient resources and equipment (69%), lack of recognition of patient readiness (67%), patient suitability (63%), inadequate training (61%) and inadequate funding (60%). Respondents ranked reduction in PICU length of stay (74%) and improvement in psychological outcomes (73%) as the most important benefits of ERM. CONCLUSION: ERM is gaining familiarity and endorsement in UK PICUs, but significant barriers to implementation due to limited resources and variation in content and delivery of ERM persist. A standardised protocol that sets out defined ERM interventions, along with implementation support to tackle modifiable barriers, is required to ensure the delivery of high-quality ERM. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9185558/ /pubmed/36053640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001300 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Intensive Care Thompson, Jacqueline Y Menzies, Julie C Manning, Joseph C McAnuff, Jennifer Brush, Emily Clare Ryde, Francesca Rapley, Tim Pathan, Nazima Brett, Stephen Moore, David J Geary, Michelle Colville, Gillian A Morris, Kevin P Parslow, Roger Charles Feltbower, Richard G Lockley, Sophie Kirkham, Fenella J Forsyth, Rob J Scholefield, Barnaby R Early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the PICU: a UK survey |
title | Early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the PICU: a UK survey |
title_full | Early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the PICU: a UK survey |
title_fullStr | Early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the PICU: a UK survey |
title_full_unstemmed | Early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the PICU: a UK survey |
title_short | Early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the PICU: a UK survey |
title_sort | early mobilisation and rehabilitation in the picu: a uk survey |
topic | Intensive Care |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9185558/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36053640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001300 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT thompsonjacqueliney earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT menziesjuliec earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT manningjosephc earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT mcanuffjennifer earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT brushemilyclare earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT rydefrancesca earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT rapleytim earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT pathannazima earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT brettstephen earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT mooredavidj earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT gearymichelle earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT colvillegilliana earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT morriskevinp earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT parslowrogercharles earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT feltbowerrichardg earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT lockleysophie earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT kirkhamfenellaj earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT forsythrobj earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT scholefieldbarnabyr earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey AT earlymobilisationandrehabilitationinthepicuauksurvey |