Skip to main content
 

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Association for Respiratory Care
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
American Association for Respiratory Care

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
EditorialEditorials

Early Mobilization of Patients on Mechanical Ventilation: Worth the Effort and Expense?

Neil R MacIntyre
Respiratory Care January 2019, 64 (1) 112-113; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.06801
Neil R MacIntyre
Duke University Medical Center Durham, North Carolina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

The ventilator discontinuation process involves both disease resolution and proper support to facilitate recovery. This support includes optimizing nutrition, fluid-electrolyte balance, and infection control as well as avoiding problems such as ventilator-induced lung injury, discomfort, and unnecessary sedation. Attempts to rehabilitate respiratory muscle function compromised by systemic inflammation (ICU-acquired weakness), malpositioning of the diaphragm, excessive muscle loading, malnutrition, and disuse atrophy can probably be added to these goals. Indeed, ICU-acquired weakness has been shown in several studies to be associated with an increased duration of mechanical ventilation and with increased ICU and hospital length of stay.1

One of the approaches to muscle rehabilitation in the patient who is critically ill and mechanically ventilated is the concept of early mobility, “use it or lose it.”1 Benefits of physical movement in patients who are critically ill have been known for decades and include less muscle atrophy,2 more muscle strength,3 more ventilator-free days,4 less delirium,4 shorter lengths of stay,5 fewer readmissions,6 and even reduced mortality.5 Most of these studies used formal protocols that advanced mobility in stages from simple passive range of motion to assisted walking, depending on patient capabilities. Taken together, these studies provide substantial evidence that protocols for early mobilization are both possible and safe, and are often associated with important outcome benefits.

In this issue of Respiratory Care, an observational study by Schreiber et al7 adds to this evidence. This particular study focused on subjects dependent on prolonged mechanical ventilation who were transferred from an acute care ICU to their long-term weaning unit. Importantly, this unit had a dedicated team that provided intense physiotherapy and used a formal protocol that moved subjects through 4 stages of activity and mobility.7 The investigators reported successful ventilator withdrawal in 62.3% of these subjects on prolonged mechanical ventilation, a figure comparable with other reports that used early mobility protocols in acute-care ICUs. Not surprisingly, successful ventilator withdrawal was strongly associated with the ability to mobilize subjects. Because there was no control group, it is difficult to determine the specific effect of the physiotherapy protocol. Nevertheless, the results supported the notion that improved mobility is associated with improved ventilator withdrawal.

So, should early mobility be a routine procedure for mechanically ventilated patients? The above supporting studies seem strong but are unblinded by necessity, and this creates potential for bias. Indeed, some have suggested that at least some of the benefits attributed to early mobility programs are really a consequence of an aggressive sedation management program, a strategy well documented to facilitate ventilator withdrawal. Early mobilization protocols also carry potential risks, the most common of which is arterial hemoglobin desaturation.8,9 Fortunately these risks are quite rare and are usually easily managed. However, patient selection and monitoring are critically important, and these must be performed by personnel trained to know how to respond. Recent guidelines have been published to address these issues, and they provide valuable resources to clinicians involved in these programs.10,11 Finally, these programs incur costs for the extra personnel and equipment provided, and hospital administrators must buy in to these additional resources to allow these programs to exist.

In weighing the strength of the supporting evidence against potential downsides, it would seem that, at the present time, formalized, protocol-driven early mobilization programs provided by experienced clinicians are reasonable and have the potential to significantly improve long-term outcomes for patients on mechanical ventilation.12 The most cost-effective way to do this requires further study.

Footnotes

  • Dr MacIntyre discloses relationships with Ventec, Breathe, and InspiRx.

  • See the Original Study on Page 17

  • Copyright © 2019 by Daedalus Enterprises

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Truong AD,
    2. Fan E,
    3. Brower RG,
    4. Needham DM
    . Bench-to-bedside review: mobilizing patients in the intensive care unit–from pathophysiology to clinical trials. Crit Care 2009;13(4):216.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Griffiths RD,
    2. Palmer TE,
    3. Helliwell T,
    4. MacLennan P,
    5. MacMillan RR
    . Effect of passive stretching on the wasting of muscle in the critically ill. Nutrition 1995;11(5):428–432.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Hodgson C,
    2. Bellomo R,
    3. Berney S,
    4. Bailey M,
    5. Buhr H,
    6. et al
    Team Study Investigators, Hodgson C, Bellomo R, Berney S, Bailey M, Buhr H, et al. Early mobilization and recovery in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU: a bi-national, multi-centre, prospective cohort study. Crit Care 2015;19:81.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Schweickert WD,
    2. Pohlman MC,
    3. Pohlman AS,
    4. Nigos C,
    5. Pawlik AJ,
    6. Esbrook CL,
    7. et al
    . Early physical and occupational therapy in mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009;373(9678):1874–1882.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Morris PE,
    2. Goad A,
    3. Thompson C,
    4. Taylor K,
    5. Harry B,
    6. Passmore L,
    7. et al
    . Early intensive care unit mobility therapy in the treatment of acute respiratory failure. Crit Care Med 2008;36(8):2238–2243.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Morris PE,
    2. Griffin L,
    3. Berry M,
    4. Thompson C,
    5. Hite RD,
    6. Winkelman C,
    7. et al
    . Receiving early mobility during an intensive care unit admission is a predictor of improved outcomes in acute respiratory failure. The American journal of the Medical Sciences 2011;341(5):373–377.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Schreiber AF,
    2. Ceriana P,
    3. Ambrosino N,
    4. Malovini A,
    5. Nava S
    . Physiotherapy and weaning from prolonged mechanical ventilation. Respir Care 2019;64(1):17–25.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Adler J,
    2. Malone D
    . Early mobilization in the intensive care unit: a systematic review. Cardiopulm Phys Ther J 2012;23(1):5–13.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Sricharoenchai T,
    2. Parker AM,
    3. Zanni JM,
    4. Nelliot A,
    5. Dinglas VD,
    6. Needham DM
    . Safety of physical therapy interventions in critically ill patients: a single-center prospective evaluation of 1110 intensive care unit admissions. Journal of Critical Care 2014;29(3):395–400.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Hodgson CL,
    2. Stiller K,
    3. Needham DM,
    4. Tipping CJ,
    5. Harrold M,
    6. Baldwin CE,
    7. et al
    . Expert consensus and recommendations on safety criteria for active mobilization of mechanically ventilated critically ill adults. Critical Care 2014;18(6):658–663.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Bourdin G,
    2. Barbier J,
    3. Burle JF,
    4. Durante G,
    5. Passant S,
    6. Vincent B,
    7. et al
    . The feasibility of early physical activity in intensive care unit patients: a prospective observational one-center study. Respir Care 2010;55(4):400–407.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Schmidt UH,
    2. Knecht L,
    3. MacIntyre NR
    . Should early mobilization be routine in mechanically ventilated patients? Respir Care 2016;61(6):867–875.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Respiratory Care: 64 (1)
Respiratory Care
Vol. 64, Issue 1
1 Jan 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author

 

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Association for Respiratory Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Early Mobilization of Patients on Mechanical Ventilation: Worth the Effort and Expense?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Association for Respiratory Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Association for Respiratory Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Early Mobilization of Patients on Mechanical Ventilation: Worth the Effort and Expense?
Neil R MacIntyre
Respiratory Care Jan 2019, 64 (1) 112-113; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.06801

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Early Mobilization of Patients on Mechanical Ventilation: Worth the Effort and Expense?
Neil R MacIntyre
Respiratory Care Jan 2019, 64 (1) 112-113; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.06801
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Info For

  • Subscribers
  • Institutions
  • Advertisers

About Us

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Reprints/Permissions

AARC

  • Membership
  • Meetings
  • Clinical Practice Guidelines

More

  • Contact Us
  • RSS
American Association for Respiratory Care

Print ISSN: 0020-1324        Online ISSN: 1943-3654

© Daedalus Enterprises, Inc.

Powered by HighWire