Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 36(2): 524-528, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34284915

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine whether patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) achieved lower rates of physical therapy participation and required more sedation than those on ECMO without COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational, matched-cohort study. SETTING: Bicenter academic quaternary medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: All adults on ECMO for severe COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) during 2020 and matched (matched 1:1 based on age ± 15 years and medical center) adults on ECMO for ARDS not associated with COVID-19. INTERVENTIONS: Observational only. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Measurements were collected retrospectively during the first 20 days of ECMO support and included daily levels of physical therapy activity, number of daily sedation infusions and doses, and level of sedation and agitation (Richmond Agitation and Sedation Score). During the first 20 days of ECMO support, the 22 patients who were on ECMO for COVID-19-associated ARDS achieved a similar proportion of days with active physical therapy participation while on ECMO compared to matched patients on ECMO for non-COVID-19 ARDS (22.5% v 7.5%, respectively; p value 0.43), a similar proportion of days with Richmond Agitation and Sedation Score ≥-2 while on ECMO (47.5% v 27.5%, respectively; p value 0.065), and a similar proportion of days with chemical paralysis while on ECMO (8.4% v 18.0%, respectively; p value 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this matched cohort study supported that sedation requirements were not dramatically greater and did not significantly limit early physical therapy for patients who had COVID-19-associated ARDS and were on venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) versus those without COVID-19-associated ARDS who were on VV-ECMO.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Cohort Studies , Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation/adverse effects , Humans , Physical Therapy Modalities , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Neurocrit Care ; 30(2): 414-420, 2019 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30357597

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Early mobilization of critically ill patients has been shown to improve functional outcomes. Neurosurgery patients with an external ventricular drain (EVD) due to increased intracranial pressure often remain on bed rest while EVD remains in place. The prevalence of mobilizing patients with EVD has not been described, and the literature regarding the safety and feasibility of mobilizing patients with EVDs is limited. The aim of our study was to describe the outcomes and adverse events of the first mobilization attempt in neurosurgery patients with EVD who participated in early functional mobilization with physical therapy or occupational therapy. METHODS: We performed a single-site, retrospective chart review of 153 patients who underwent placement of an EVD. Hemodynamically stable patients deemed appropriate for mobilization by physical or occupational therapy were included. Mobilization and activity details were recorded. RESULTS: The most common principal diagnoses were subarachnoid hemorrhage (61.4%) and intracerebral hemorrhage (17.0%) requiring EVD for symptomatic hydrocephalus. A total of 117 patients were mobilized (76.5%), and the median time to first mobilization after EVD placement in this group of 117 patients was 38 h. Decreased level of consciousness was the most common reason for lack of mobilization. The highest level of mobility on the patient's first attempt was ambulation (43.6%), followed by sitting on the side of the bed (30.8%), transferring to a bedside chair (17.1%), and standing up from the side of the bed (8.5%). No major safety events, such as EVD dislodgment, occurred in any patient. Transient adverse events with mobilization were infrequent at 6.9% and had no permanent neurological sequelae and were mostly headache, nausea, and transient diastolic blood pressure elevation. CONCLUSION: Early progressive mobilization of neurosurgical intensive care unit patients with external ventricular drains appears safe and feasible.


Subject(s)
Cerebral Hemorrhage/therapy , Early Ambulation/statistics & numerical data , Hydrocephalus/therapy , Subarachnoid Hemorrhage/therapy , Ventriculostomy/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cerebral Hemorrhage/complications , Cerebral Hemorrhage/rehabilitation , Cerebral Hemorrhage/surgery , Early Ambulation/adverse effects , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Hydrocephalus/etiology , Hydrocephalus/rehabilitation , Hydrocephalus/surgery , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Subarachnoid Hemorrhage/complications , Subarachnoid Hemorrhage/rehabilitation , Subarachnoid Hemorrhage/surgery , Ventriculostomy/adverse effects , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...