Quality improvement project to improve adherence to lung protective ventilation guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: Lung protective ventilation (LPV) is advocated for all patients requiring mechanical ventilation (MV), for any duration of time, to prevent worsening lung injury. Previous studies proved simple interventions can increase awareness of LPV and disease pathophysiology as well as improve adherence to LPV guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a multi-component LPV quality improvement project (QIP) on adherence to LPV guidelines. METHODS: Tidal volume data for all patients requiring MV at a large, tertiary UK critical care unit were collected retrospectively over 3, 6 months, Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles between September 2019 and August 2022. These cycles included the sequential implementation of LPV reports, bedside whiteboards and targeted education led by a multispecialty working group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Adherence against predetermined targets of <5% of MV hours spent at >10 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW) and >75% of MV hours spent <8 mL/kg PBW for all patients requiring MV. RESULTS: 408 949 hours (17 040 days) of MV data were analysed. Improved LPV adherence was demonstrated throughout the QIP. During mandated MV, time spent >10 mL/kg PBW reduced from 7.65% of MV hours to 4.04% and time spent <8 mL/kg PBW improved from 68.86% of MV hours to 71.87% following the QIP. During spontaneous MV, adherence improved with a reduction in time spent >10 mL/kg PBW from baseline to completion (13.2% vs 6.75%) with increased time spent <8 mL/kg PBW (62.74% vs 72.25%). Despite demonstrating improvements in adherence, we were unable to achieve success in all our predetermined targets. CONCLUSION: This multicomponent intervention including the use of LPV reports, bedside whiteboards and education improves adherence to LPV guidelines. More robust data analysis of reasons for non-adherence to our predetermined targets is required to guide future interventions that may allow further improvement in adherence to LPV guidelines.

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.

OBJECTIVES: 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.

A systematic review of the key factors affecting tissue viability and rehabilitation outcomes of the residual limb in lower extremity traumatic amputees.

Most traumatic lower limb amputees ambulate using a prosthetic limb. Comfort, appearance of the missing limb and function are confirmed as being important during rehabilitation post-amputation. Emerging evidence suggests that impaired tissue viability of the stump affects rehabilitation and thus clinical ability to provide optimum care. The primary objective of this systematic review was to identify key factors relating to tissue viability of the residual limb in lower extremity traumatic amputees. A secondary objective was to identify factors that affect rehabilitation post-amputation. In total, 218 studies were assessed; 37 met pre-determined criteria. Studies were classified according to the WHO ICF framework and the NHMRC level of evidence. Five key themes emerged; Prosthetic Fit; The Residuum; Quality of Life; Amputee Care and Prosthetic Use. The evidence indicates that high frequencies of skin problems affecting tissue viability within this population are inherently linked to intolerance of the prosthesis. Stump integrity, amputee care regimen and pain were also identified as impacting on quality of life, affecting rehabilitation and the ability to become independently mobile. Levels of evidence within all studies were low and indicative of the majority being non-randomised cohort studies or case-control studies. As there are a limited number of interventional studies, further development of robust outcome measures, clinical trials and prospective studies are of utmost importance to unravel the links between tissue viability and the other key factors. This will inform clinical management strategies and help develop targeted therapies and care pathways.

Vestibular assessment in a patient with confirmed lateral medullary syndrome.

The results of vestibular investigations in a patient with confirmed lateral medullary syndrome are presented. This patient showed a unilateral weakness on caloric testing which has not been reported previously in a patient with lateral medullary syndrome. The case for the possibility of a 'central' canal paresis on caloric testing is presented.