ROBotic-assisted Early Mobilization in Ventilated Surgical Critically ill Patients (ROBEM-I) - a randomized, controlled, outcome-assessor-blinded pilot study.
Marco Lorenz, Nadine Langer, Philipp Kloss, Mathilde Maechler, Annika Bald, Linus Warner, Kristina Fuest, Björn Weiß, Stefan J Schaller
{"title":"ROBotic-assisted Early Mobilization in Ventilated Surgical Critically ill Patients (ROBEM-I) - a randomized, controlled, outcome-assessor-blinded pilot study.","authors":"Marco Lorenz, Nadine Langer, Philipp Kloss, Mathilde Maechler, Annika Bald, Linus Warner, Kristina Fuest, Björn Weiß, Stefan J Schaller","doi":"10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A shortage of human resources is a key barrier to the early mobilization of mechanically ventilated ICU patients. Recent advancements in robotic mobilization systems offer promising solutions to this challenge.</p><p><strong>Objective(s): </strong>This study assessed the operability of an AI-assisted robotic mobilization system by a single healthcare provider, along with its safety, feasibility, and potential benefits for mechanically ventilated surgical ICU patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Randomized controlled pilot study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Five surgical ICUs at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany, November 2020 to September 2022.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>Twenty critically ill patients requiring >24 hours of mechanical ventilation.</p><p><strong>Intervention(s): </strong>Twice-daily robotic-assisted mobilization sessions ≥ 20 minutes over five days, compared to the control group receiving standard care.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Number of mobilization sessions conducted by a single person RESULTS: In the robotic-assisted group, no mobility sessions were conducted by a single person (0%)vs. 26 (96%) in the control group (p < 0.001). Significant secondary outcomes included a mobilization duration of 41 minutes/day [IQR 36-47] in the intervention group vs. 19 minutes/day [IQR 13-21] in the control group (p < 0.001) and higher mobilization frequency, with two units/day [IQR 2-2] in the intervention group vs. 0.9 units/day [IQR 0.7-1.0] in the control group (p < 0.001). Interleukin-6 levels decreased significantly by -4.65 pg/mL [IQR -13.00-3.83] in the intervention group vs. an increase of 3.70 pg/mL [IQR -1.30-28.88] in the control group (p = 0.049).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Robotic-assisted mobilization in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients did not reduce required healthcare providers but increased the duration and frequency, and significantly reduced IL-6 levels compared to the standard group.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT04423796.</p>","PeriodicalId":48762,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"101549"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accpm.2025.101549","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: A shortage of human resources is a key barrier to the early mobilization of mechanically ventilated ICU patients. Recent advancements in robotic mobilization systems offer promising solutions to this challenge.
Objective(s): This study assessed the operability of an AI-assisted robotic mobilization system by a single healthcare provider, along with its safety, feasibility, and potential benefits for mechanically ventilated surgical ICU patients.
Design: Randomized controlled pilot study.
Setting: Five surgical ICUs at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany, November 2020 to September 2022.
Intervention(s): Twice-daily robotic-assisted mobilization sessions ≥ 20 minutes over five days, compared to the control group receiving standard care.
Main outcome measures: Number of mobilization sessions conducted by a single person RESULTS: In the robotic-assisted group, no mobility sessions were conducted by a single person (0%)vs. 26 (96%) in the control group (p < 0.001). Significant secondary outcomes included a mobilization duration of 41 minutes/day [IQR 36-47] in the intervention group vs. 19 minutes/day [IQR 13-21] in the control group (p < 0.001) and higher mobilization frequency, with two units/day [IQR 2-2] in the intervention group vs. 0.9 units/day [IQR 0.7-1.0] in the control group (p < 0.001). Interleukin-6 levels decreased significantly by -4.65 pg/mL [IQR -13.00-3.83] in the intervention group vs. an increase of 3.70 pg/mL [IQR -1.30-28.88] in the control group (p = 0.049).
Conclusions: Robotic-assisted mobilization in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients did not reduce required healthcare providers but increased the duration and frequency, and significantly reduced IL-6 levels compared to the standard group.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number NCT04423796.
期刊介绍：
Anaesthesia, Critical Care & Pain Medicine (formerly Annales Françaises d''Anesthésie et de Réanimation) publishes in English the highest quality original material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
