ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Early mobilization can be employed to minimize the duration of intensive care. However, a protocol combining neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) with early mobilization has not yet been tested in ICU patients. Our aim was to assess the efficacy of NMES, exercise (EX), and combined therapy (NMES + EX) on duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) in critically ill patients. METHODS: The participants in this randomized double-blind trial were prospectively recruited within 24 hours following admission to the intensive care unit of a tertiary hospital. Eligible patients had 18 years of age or older; MV for less than 72 hours; and no known neuromuscular disease. Computer-generated permuted block randomization was used to assign patients to NMES, EX, NMES + EX, or standard care (control group). The main endpoint was duration of MV. Clinical characteristics were also evaluated and intention to treat analysis was employed. RESULTS: One hundred forty-four patients were assessed for eligibility to participate in the trial, 51 of whom were enrolled and randomly allocated into four groups: 11 patients in the NMES group, 13 in the EX group, 12 in the NMES + EX group, and 15 in the control group (CG). Duration of MV (days) was significantly shorter in the combined therapy (5.7 ± 1.1) and NMEN (9.0 ± 7.0) groups in comparison to CG (14.8 ± 5.4). CONCLUSIONS: NMES + EX consisting of NMES and active EXs was well tolerated and resulted in shorter duration of MV in comparison to standard care or isolated therapy (NMES or EX alone).
Subject(s)
Critical Illness/therapy , Electric Stimulation Therapy/methods , Exercise Therapy/methods , Respiration, Artificial , Adult , Aged , Combined Modality Therapy , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Noninvasive ventilation may improve cardiovascular function and exercise performance. We evaluated the physiologic impact of noninvasive ventilation during isokinetic knee extension resistance exercise in patients with heart failure. METHODS: This clinical trial included 10 male compensated patients with ischemic heart failure (age, 57 ± 9.1 years; ejection fraction, 28.5 ± 5.8%). Subjects underwent 2 bouts of exercise on an isokinetic dynamometer, separated by 72 hours of rest. The resistance exercise was concentric knee extension, at a speed of 60°/s. Five sets of 10 repetitions were performed during the 2 exercise bouts, and each set was separated by 2 minutes of rest. Subjects were administered either bilevel positive airway pressure ventilation (BV) or sham ventilation 20 minutes before and during the 2 exercise sessions in a randomized fashion. Heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure were measured at rest, during exercise, and into recovery. Changes in peak torque (ΔPT), total work (ΔTW), and power (ΔPw) between the fifth and first sets were also measured. RESULTS: Compared with the sham intervention, BV significantly decreased heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure at rest and during exercise (P < .01). There were no significant differences in these variables during recovery. Bi-level positive airway pressure ventilation also significantly reduced ΔPT, ΔTW, and ΔPw compared with the sham intervention (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Bi-level positive airway pressure ventilation significantly improved the cardiovascular response and fatigability during resistance exercise in patients with heart failure. These results suggest that use of BV during exercise training may be beneficial in this population with chronic disease.
