Pragmatic approach to mobilizing individuals with critical illness due to COVID-19: clinical perspective.

PURPOSE: To provide pragmatic guidance for acute rehabilitation management and implementation of early mobility for individuals with critical illness due to COVID-19. METHODS: Clinical perspective developed through reflective clinical practice and narrative review of best available evidence. RESULTS: Current clinical practice guidelines do not provide guidance for implementation of early mobility interventions for individuals with critical illness due to COVID-19 who require enhanced ventilatory support or support of inhaled pulmonary artery vasodilators. Many individuals who may benefit from implementation of early mobility interventions are excluded by strict interpretation of current guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Risk vs benefit of implementing early mobility interventions in individuals with critical illness due to COVID-19 can be mitigated through coordinated efforts of interdisciplinary teams to promote shared decision-making through therapeutic alliances with patients and their families. Clinicians must clearly define the goals of care, understand the limitations of monitoring equipment in the intensive care unit, prepare to titrate levels of oxygen based on an individual's physiologic response to mobility interventions, and help individuals maintain external goal-directed focus of attention to optimize outcomes of early mobility interventions.

Current clinical practice guidelines do not provide guidance for implementation of early mobility interventions for individuals with critical illness due to COVID-19 who require enhanced ventilatory support or support of inhaled pulmonary artery vasodilators.Risk vs benefit of implementing early mobility interventions in individuals with critical illness due to COVID-19 can be mitigated through coordinated efforts of interdisciplinary teams to promote shared decision-making through therapeutic alliances with patients and their families.Clinicians must clearly define the goals of care, understand the limitations of monitoring equipment in the intensive care unit, prepare to titrate levels of oxygen based on an individual's physiologic response to mobility interventions, and help individuals maintain external goal-directed focus of attention to optimize outcomes of early mobility interventions.

Implementation of Early Rehabilitation in Severe COVID-19 Respiratory Failure: A Scoping Review.

The purpose of this scoping review is to describe current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for early rehabilitation for individuals hospitalized in an intensive care unit with COVID-19 and examine practice patterns for implementation of mobility-related interventions. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases were searched from January 1, 2020, through April 1, 2022. Selected studies included individuals hospitalized with severe COVID-19 and provided objective criteria for clinical decision making for mobility interventions. A total of 1464 publications were assessed for eligibility and data extraction. The PRISMA-ScR Checklist and established guidelines for reporting for scoping reviews were followed. Results: Twelve articles met inclusion criteria: 5 CPGs and 7 implementation articles. Objective clinical criteria and guidelines for implementation of early rehabilitation demonstrated variable agreement across systems. No significant adverse events were reported. Conclusions: Sixty percent (3/5) of CPGs restrict mobility for individuals requiring ventilatory support of more than 60% Fio2 (fraction of inspired oxygen) and/or positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) greater than 10-cm H2O (positive end-expiratory pressure). Preliminary evidence from implementation studies may suggest that some individuals with COVID-19 requiring enhanced ventilatory support outside of established parameters may be able to safely participate in mobility-related interventions, though further research is needed to determine safety and feasibility to guide clinical decision making.

Conducting Psychoeducational Assessments During the COVID-19 Crisis: the Danger of Good Intentions.

Decision-makers in school psychology are presently engaged in the process of determining how to, if possible, move forward with conducting mandated psychoeducational evaluations of students in schools during the pandemic. Whereas prominent organizations within the profession (e.g., American Psychological Association, National Association of School Psychologists) have issued guidance and encouraged practitioners to delay testing, it is not clear whether that is a viable option in every jurisdiction. Accordingly, professionals are now considering the potential use of telehealth platforms to conduct assessments, in some form, as we move forward and deal with this crisis. The goal of this brief commentary is to raise some provisional limitations associated with the use of telehealth to conduct psychological assessments that we believe will have to be considered as use of these platforms is debated. Recommendations for professional practice are also provided.