Ambulation Protocol for Adult Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Quality Improvement Initiative.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Valentina Obreja, Taline Marcarian, Pamela S Miller
{"title":"Ambulation Protocol for Adult Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: A Quality Improvement Initiative.","authors":"Valentina Obreja, Taline Marcarian, Pamela S Miller","doi":"10.4037/ccn2025452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, early mobility decreases mechanical ventilation time, delirium incidence, and length of intensive care unit stay and improves physical functioning. Individual centers use institutional guidelines to develop ambulation protocols. Local Problem A quality improvement initiative was used to evaluate an ambulation protocol for adult intensive care unit patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adult patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation who walked according to the protocol were compared with a historical control group of patients who walked without the protocol. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and independent t tests. Outcomes included adverse safety events, number of patients and ambulation sessions, standing and ambulation time, and distance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From January to March 2021, 13 of 46 patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (28%) walked according to the protocol. In the control group, 14 of 147 patients (10%) walked in 2019; 21 of 144 patients (15%) walked in 2020. Some characteristics of the control group (hospitalized before the COVID-19 pandemic) differed from those of the protocol group (hospitalized during the pandemic). Mean number of ambulation sessions was not significantly different between groups (protocol group, 10; control group, 9). Differences in mean standing time (protocol group, 121.23 minutes; control group, 210.80 minutes), ambulation time (protocol group, 11.77 minutes; control group, 198.70 minutes), and ambulation distance were not significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Standing time, ambulation time, and distance were not significantly different between the groups. The extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ambulation protocol demonstrated clinical significance by increasing the number of patients walking.</p>","PeriodicalId":10738,"journal":{"name":"Critical care nurse","volume":"45 1","pages":"52-60"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care nurse","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4037/ccn2025452","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: For patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, early mobility decreases mechanical ventilation time, delirium incidence, and length of intensive care unit stay and improves physical functioning. Individual centers use institutional guidelines to develop ambulation protocols. Local Problem A quality improvement initiative was used to evaluate an ambulation protocol for adult intensive care unit patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Methods: Adult patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation who walked according to the protocol were compared with a historical control group of patients who walked without the protocol. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and independent t tests. Outcomes included adverse safety events, number of patients and ambulation sessions, standing and ambulation time, and distance.

Results: From January to March 2021, 13 of 46 patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (28%) walked according to the protocol. In the control group, 14 of 147 patients (10%) walked in 2019; 21 of 144 patients (15%) walked in 2020. Some characteristics of the control group (hospitalized before the COVID-19 pandemic) differed from those of the protocol group (hospitalized during the pandemic). Mean number of ambulation sessions was not significantly different between groups (protocol group, 10; control group, 9). Differences in mean standing time (protocol group, 121.23 minutes; control group, 210.80 minutes), ambulation time (protocol group, 11.77 minutes; control group, 198.70 minutes), and ambulation distance were not significant.

Conclusions: Standing time, ambulation time, and distance were not significantly different between the groups. The extracorporeal membrane oxygenation ambulation protocol demonstrated clinical significance by increasing the number of patients walking.

接受体外膜氧合的成人患者的行走方案:质量改进倡议。
背景:对于接受体外膜氧合的患者,早期活动可减少机械通气时间、谵妄发生率和重症监护病房住院时间,改善身体功能。各个中心使用机构指南来制定步行协议。一项质量改进倡议被用于评估接受体外膜氧合的成人重症监护病房患者的走动方案。方法:将接受体外膜氧合治疗并按照该方案行走的成年患者与未按照该方案行走的历史对照组患者进行比较。数据分析包括描述性统计和独立t检验。结果包括不良安全事件、患者数量和走动次数、站立和走动时间以及距离。结果:2021年1月至3月,46例接受体外膜氧合的患者中,有13例(28%)按照方案行走。在对照组中,147名患者中有14名(10%)在2019年行走;144名患者中有21名(15%)在2020年行走。对照组(在COVID-19大流行之前住院)的一些特征与方案组(在大流行期间住院)的特征不同。两组间平均下床次数无显著差异(方案组,10次;对照组,9).平均站立时间差异(方案组,121.23分钟;对照组210.80分钟),下床时间(方案组11.77分钟;对照组,198.70 min),与步行距离无显著性差异。结论:两组患者站立时间、行走时间、行走距离差异无统计学意义。体外膜氧合行走方案通过增加患者的行走次数显示出临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Critical care nurse
Critical care nurse 医学-护理
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Critical Care Nurse (CCN) is an official publication of the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN). Authors are invited to submit manuscripts for consideration and peer review. Clinical topics must meet the mission of CCN and address nursing practice of acute and critically ill patients.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信