Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWeblin, Jonathan
dc.contributor.authorHarriman, Adam
dc.contributor.authorButler, Katrina
dc.contributor.authorSnelson, Catherine
dc.contributor.authorMcWilliams, David
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-14T14:23:24Z
dc.date.available2024-02-14T14:23:24Z
dc.date.issued2022-12-08
dc.identifier.citationWeblin J, Harriman A, Butler K, Snelson C, McWilliams D. Comparing rehabilitation outcomes for patients admitted to the intensive care unit with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation during the first two waves of the pandemic: A service evaluation. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2023 Apr;75:103370. doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2022.103370. Epub 2022 Dec 8.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0964-3397
dc.identifier.eissn1532-4036
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.iccn.2022.103370
dc.identifier.pmid36528463
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/3670
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To compare rehabilitation outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit with COVID-19 and mechanically ventilated during wave 1 and 2, receiving two different models of physiotherapy delivery. Methods: Adults admitted to the intensive care unit between October-March 2021 (wave 2) with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 and mechanically ventilated for >24 hours were included. During wave 2, rehabilitation was provided by physiotherapists over five days, with only emergency respiratory physiotherapy delivered at weekends. Rehabilitation status was measured daily using the Manchester Mobility Score to identify time taken to first mobilise and highest level of mobility achieved at ICU discharge. Outcomes were compared to data previously published from the same ICU during 'wave 1' (March-April 2020) when a seven-day rehabilitation physiotherapy service was provided. Results: A total of n = 291 patients were included in analysis; 110 from wave 1, and 181 from wave 2. Patient characteristics and medical management were similar between waves. Mean ± SD time to first mobilise was slower in wave 2 (15 ± 11 days vs 14 ± 7 days), with overall mobility scores lower at both ICU (MMS 5 (Step transferring) vs MMS 4 (standing practice) (4), p < 0.05) and hospital (MMS 7 (Mobile > 30 m MMS) vs MMS 6 (Mobile < 30 m MMS), p < 0.0001) discharge. Significantly more patients in wave 2 required ongoing rehabilitation either at home or as an inpatient compared to wave 1 (81 % vs 49 %, p = 0.003). Conclusion: The change in physiotherapy staff provision from a seven-day rehabilitation service during wave 1 to a five day rehabilitation service with emergency respiratory physio only at weekends in wave 2 was associated with delayed time to first mobilise, lower levels of mobility at both intensive care unit and hospital discharge and higher requirement for ongoing rehabilitation at the point of hospital discharge.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rightsCopyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
dc.subjectIntensive careen_US
dc.subjectPhysiotherapyen_US
dc.subjectRespiratory medicineen_US
dc.titleComparing rehabilitation outcomes for patients admitted to the intensive care unit with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation during the first two waves of the pandemic: a service evaluationen_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.source.journaltitleIntensive and Critical Care Nursing
dc.source.volume75
dc.source.beginpage103370
dc.source.endpage
dc.source.countryNetherlands
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
dc.contributor.trustauthorWeblin, Jonathan
dc.contributor.trustauthorHarriman, Adam
dc.contributor.trustauthorButler, Katrina
dc.contributor.trustauthorSnelson, Catherine
dc.contributor.departmentPhysiotherapyen_US
dc.contributor.departmentCritical Careen_US
dc.contributor.roleAllied Health Professionalen_US
dc.contributor.roleMedical and Dentalen_US
oa.grant.openaccessnaen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record