early mobilization on a neurological icu - nydahl.de · early mobilization on a neurological icu...

09.05.16'

1'

Early Mobilization on a neurological ICU

09.0

5.16

Nydahl – Nursing Research

Slides are online: www.nydahl.de > Vortrag

Early Mobilization on a neurological ICU

09.0

5.16


Early mobilization on a neurological ICU

09.0

5.16


12,000 employees 2,500 beds 16 ICUs 230 beds

NICU & SU 6 & 11 beds

Does bed rest support healing?

Immobility increases risks for … •  Pressure sores, contractures, thrombosis •  Atelectasis, pneumonia •  Insulin resistance, loss of Ca+ •  Loss of muscle strength (1-1.5%/d) •  Loss of body weight (20%/2w) •  ICU acquired weakness (50% sepsis, ARDS) •  80% Delirium, 28% PTSD, 28% depression, 24% anxiety •  Rehabilitation after 48h mech. ventilation: up to 9-12 months (Boles et al. 2007, Brower 2009, Vollman 2010, NICE 2010, Desai, 2011)

09.0

5.16


Modified abcdef-approach

09.0

5.16


Mobilization

Wakefulness & Partizipation

Assisted Ventilation mode

Management of pain, anxiety,

stress

Management of delirium

Family presence

Balas et al., 2013; Pic: Strøm, Spuhler

Early Mobilization

Review incl. 52 studies (Nava, 1998 … Wang, 2014) •  Early mobilisation is feasible and safe •  Better strength, endurance, balance •  More independence in ADL, QoL •  Reduced length of MV, ICU, hospital •  Reduced incidence of delirium •  Reduced incidence of complications •  Reduced readmissions •  More admissions, more money •  But: effects multifaceted & incongruent Nydahl, 2016; Pic: Spuhler, 2008

09.0

5.16


09.05.16'

2'

Early Mobilization with neurological pts

n.r. not reported; ns non significant; * significant; ** highly significant, ns non significant

09.0

5.16


Author Pts (after/before)

MV (d) ICU (d) Hosp (d) ADL

Titsworth 2012

170 (93/77)

n.r. 3 vs 4* 9 vs 12* !*

Klein 2015

637 (377/260)

n.r. 4 vs 8** 10 vs 15** !*

Witcher 2015

68 (37/31)

7 vs 5 13 vs 10ns 23 vs 22ns n.r.


n.r. not reported; ns non significant; * significant; ** highly significant, ns non significant

09.0

5.16


Author Pts (after/before)

MV (d) ICU (d) Hosp (d) ADL

Titsworth 2012

170 (93/77)

n.r. 3 vs 4* 9 vs 12* !*

Klein 2015

637 (377/260)

n.r. 4 vs 8** 10 vs 15** !*

Witcher 2015

68 (37/31)

7 vs 5 13 vs 10ns 23 vs 22ns n.r.


09.0

5.16


Author Pts % on MV

Inclusion Out of bed

Titsworth 2012

SAH, tumor, stroke, ICH, other

31% 94% n.r.

Klein 2015 Stroke (isch, hem, SAH), epilepsia, nm disorders

37% 73% 21% ->43%

Witcher 2015 ICH; SAH, Stroke, epilepsia, other

n.r. 37% 65% -> 72%

In- and exclusion criteria

Hodgson 2014

09.0

5.16


•  Interprofessional discussion: inclusion & exclusion criteria

•  Traffic-Light-System •  Red: risks outweigh benefits •  Yellow: benefits may outweigh risk,

individual decision •  Green: clear benefit

•  Neuro: brain pressure, ongoing seizures, large bleeding, palliative

Checklist

Talley, 2013, Berry 2014, Nydahl 2016

09.0

5.16


"  Hygienic working, e.g. hands, disconnection of lines & tubes "  Experienced physician nearby "  Portable ventilator, monitor, suction, manual resuscitator bag "  Security clips for lines, loops "  Press ventilator circuit on ETT with soft/moderate pressure "  Foreseeing thinking: what risks may appear with this patient and

what strategies prevent and solve events? "  Check risks for clinicians, e.g. BMI > 30, hyperactive delirium "  Check length of lines according to targeted mobilization level "  Wheelchair behind patient in case of sudden weakness (Family?)

ICU Mobility Scale

Hodgson 2014

09.0

5.16


0 Nothing (lying in bed) 1 Sitting in bed, exercises in bed 2 Passively moved to a chair 3 Sitting over edge of bed 4 Standing 5 Transferring bed to chair 6 Marching on spot 7 Walking, assistance ≥ 2 persons 8 Walking, assistance 1 person 9 Walking independently (gait aid) 10 Walking independently

Safety ≤ 20% variation HF, BP ≤ 5% variation sO2

Dyspnoea (Borg Scale 3-6): FiO2 + 0.2 & PEEP + 2 mbar Pressure support + 2-4 mbar

09.05.16'

3'

Walking

09.0

5.16


Documentation & Evaluation

09.0

5.16


!Nydahl, 2013, Schreiter, 2013

Whole concept

09.0

5.16


Approach: abcdef concept

Traffic-Light-System: daily screen for mobility

Checklist before mobilization

Stepwise mobilization incl. safety screen

Documentation & evaluation

Take home message

09.0

5.16


Early mobilization •  Is feasible for neurological pts •  Is a team approach & requires

good cooperation •  Reduces complications, leads

to more independency, shorter duration of MV, ICU, hospital

•  More research is needed for neurological patients on ICU

•  [email protected]

Networks for early mobilization •  www.mobilization-network.org •  MedConcert: ICU Recovery

Network, incl. >900 clinicians, monthly newsletter etc.

Conference •  4. European conference on

Weaning & Rehabilitation: Nov,12.-13. 2016 Hamburg

•  [email protected]

Barriers to EM and how to convince them

09.0

5.16


Dubb, Nydahl, 2016

Patient-related barriers: Safety guidelines, ampel-system, stepwise

mobilization, safety screen, feasibility studies, evaluation

Process related barriers: interprofessional rounds, sharing responsibilities, automatic order,

promoters/champions

Structural barriers: protocol & algorithm, daily goals, regular interprofessional staff

training & meetings, documentation, additional staff

Cultural barriers: training & education (Evidence), changed decision making

(RN/PT), champions, feedback

Barriers & Solutions

Dubb, Nydahl, 2016

ETT tolerance: only a very few patients want to be sedated because of the ETT

09.0

5.16


Checklist ETT tolerance Based on syst. Review (Nydahl, 2015) Available on ICU Recovery Network or www.nydahl.de

early mobilization on a neurological icu - nydahl.de · early mobilization on a neurological icu...

Documents