The German Validation Study of the Surgical Intensive Care Unit Optimal Mobility Score

Guideline on positioning and early mobilisation in the critically ill by an expert panel

A scientific panel was created consisting of 23 interdisciplinary and interprofessional experts in intensive care medicine, physiotherapy, nursing care, surgery, rehabilitative medicine, and pneumology delegated from scientific societies together with a patient representative and a delegate from the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies who advised methodological implementation. The guideline was created according to the German Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF), based on The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II. The topics of (early) mobilisation, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, assist devices for mobilisation, and positioning, including prone positioning, were identified as areas to be addressed and assigned to specialist expert groups, taking conflicts of interest into account. The panel formulated PICO questions (addressing the population, intervention, comparison or control group as well as the resulting outcomes), conducted a systematic literature review with abstract screening and full-text analysis and created summary tables. This was followed by grading the evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence and a risk of bias assessment. The recommendations were finalized according to GRADE and voted using an online Delphi process followed by a final hybrid consensus conference. The German long version of the guideline was approved by the professional associations. For this English version an update of the systematic review was conducted until April 2024 and recommendation adapted based on new evidence in systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. In total, 46 recommendations were developed and research gaps addressed.

Robotic-Assisted In-Bed Mobilization in Ventilated ICU Patients With COVID-19: An Interventional, Randomized, Controlled Pilot Study (ROBEM II Study)

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted global healthcare systems, particularly in managing critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. This study aims to assess the feasibility of robotic-assisted mobilization in COVID-19 patients.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled pilot study.

SETTING

Four COVID-19 specialized ICUs at Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin (March 2021 to February 2022).

PATIENTS

Twenty critically ill COVID-19 patients expected to require greater than 24 hours of ventilation.

INTERVENTIONS

A 5-day intervention phase with bid robotic-assisted mobilization greater than or equal to 20 minutes and follow-up at day 180, compared with standard care.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Intervention sessions were conducted in 98.9% according to protocol, with one session missing due to staff shortage. Primary outcome was the mobilization level measured with the ICU Mobility Scale (IMS) and Surgical ICU Optimal Mobilization Score (SOMS), assessed until day 5 or extubation. Safety events were recorded during mobilization. The median IMS and SOMS were 0 (0-0.16) and 1 (1-1.03) in the intervention group, and 0 (0-0.15) ( p = 0.77) and 0.8 (0.65-1.20) ( p = 0.08) in the standard care group, respectively. Significant secondary outcomes included average number of mobilization sessions (intervention: 8.5 [7.75-10] vs. standard care: 4.5 [3.5-5]; p = 0.001), total mobilization time (intervention: 232.5 min [187.25-266.5 min] vs. standard care: 147.5 min [107.5-167.5 min]; p = 0.011), and healthcare providers per session (intervention: 2 [2-2] vs. standard care: 1 [1-1.4]; p = 0.001) during intervention. Four safety events (hypertension and agitation, n = 2 each) in the intervention group and none in the standard care group were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted mobilization in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients appears to be safe and feasible.

Effects of structured protocolized physical therapy on the duration of mechanical ventilation in patients with prolonged weaning

PURPOSE

20% of patients with mechanical ventilation (MV) have a prolonged, complex weaning process, often experiencing a condition of ICU-acquired weakness (ICUAW), with a severe decrease in muscle function and restricted long-term prognosis. We aimed to analyze a protocolized, systematic approach of physiotherapy in prolonged weaning patients and hypothesized that the duration of weaning from MV would be shortened.

METHODS

ICU patients with prolonged weaning were included before (group 1) and after (group 2) introduction of a quality control measure of a structured and protocolized physiotherapy program. Primary endpoint was the tested dynamometric handgrip strength and the Surgical Intensive Care Unit Optimal Mobilization Score (SOMS). Secondary endpoints were weaning success rate, ventilator-free days, hospital mortality, the prevalence of ICUAW, infections and delirium.

RESULTS

106 patients were included. Both the SOMS and the handgrip test were significantly improved after introducing the program. Despite no differences in weaning success rates at discharge, the total length of MV was significantly shorter in group 2, which also had lower prevalence of infection and higher probability of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Protocolized, systematic physiotherapy resulted in an improvement of the clinical outcome in patients with prolonged weaning. Results were objectifiable with the SOMS and the handgrip test.

The optimal dose of mobilisation therapy in the ICU: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the impact of duration of early mobilisation on survivors of critical illness. The hypothesis was that interventions lasting over 40 min, as per the German guideline, positively affect the functional status at ICU discharge.

METHODS

Prospective single-centre cohort study conducted in two ICUs in Germany. In 684 critically ill patients surviving an ICU stay > 24 h, out-of-bed mobilisation of more than 40 min was evaluated.

RESULTS

Daily mobilisation ≥ 40 min was identified as an independent predictor of an improved functional status upon ICU discharge. This effect on the primary outcome measure, change of Mobility-Barthel until ICU discharge, was observed in three different models for baseline patient characteristics (average treatment effect (ATE), all three models p < 0.001). When mobilisation parameters like level of mobilisation, were included in the analysis, the average treatment effect disappeared [ATE 1.0 (95% CI - 0.4 to 2.4), p = 0.16].

CONCLUSIONS

A mobilisation duration of more than 40 min positively impacts functional outcomes at ICU discharge. However, the maximum level achieved during ICU stay was the most crucial factor regarding adequate dosage, as higher duration did not show an additional benefit in patients with already high mobilisation levels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospective Registry of Mobilization-, Routine- and Outcome Data of Intensive Care Patients (MOBDB), NCT03666286. Registered 11 September 2018-retrospectively registered, https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT03666286 .

Early mobilisation in critically ill COVID-19 patients: a subanalysis of the ESICM-initiated UNITE-COVID observational study

BACKGROUND

Early mobilisation (EM) is an intervention that may improve the outcome of critically ill patients. There is limited data on EM in COVID-19 patients and its use during the first pandemic wave.

METHODS

This is a pre-planned subanalysis of the ESICM UNITE-COVID, an international multicenter observational study involving critically ill COVID-19 patients in the ICU between February 15th and May 15th, 2020. We analysed variables associated with the initiation of EM (within 72 h of ICU admission) and explored the impact of EM on mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, as well as discharge location. Statistical analyses were done using (generalised) linear mixed-effect models and ANOVAs.

RESULTS

Mobilisation data from 4190 patients from 280 ICUs in 45 countries were analysed. 1114 (26.6%) of these patients received mobilisation within 72 h after ICU admission; 3076 (73.4%) did not. In our analysis of factors associated with EM, mechanical ventilation at admission (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.25, 0.35; p = 0.001), higher age (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.98, 1.00; p ≤ 0.001), pre-existing asthma (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.73, 0.98; p = 0.028), and pre-existing kidney disease (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71, 0.99; p = 0.036) were negatively associated with the initiation of EM. EM was associated with a higher chance of being discharged home (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.08, 1.58; p = 0.007) but was not associated with length of stay in ICU (adj. difference 0.91 days; 95% CI - 0.47, 1.37, p = 0.34) and hospital (adj. difference 1.4 days; 95% CI - 0.62, 2.35, p = 0.24) or mortality (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.7, 1.09, p = 0.24) when adjusted for covariates.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that a quarter of COVID-19 patients received EM. There was no association found between EM in COVID-19 patients' ICU and hospital length of stay or mortality. However, EM in COVID-19 patients was associated with increased odds of being discharged home rather than to a care facility. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04836065 (retrospectively registered April 8th 2021).

Reliability and Effectiveness of the Japanese Version of the Mobilization Quantification Score

Background The mobilization quantification score (MQS) provides an opportunity to quantify the duration and intensity of mobilization therapy in the intensive care unit (ICU) and predict functional outcomes in ICU patients after surgery and stroke. MQS is a numerical measurement of early mobilization dose in the ICU, and its relationship with activities of daily living (ADL) dependence has been shown. We created and validated the Japanese version of the MQS using the endpoint ADL in a mixed population of patients in the ICU. Materials and methods In this prospective study, consecutive patients who were admitted to one of three ICUs of a tertiary care hospital in Japan, aged ≥18 years, and who received mechanical ventilation for >48 hours were enrolled. The Japanese version of the MQS was applied twice daily by an ICU physiotherapist and data recorded for analysis. The primary outcome was ADL dependence at hospital discharge, defined as a Barthel index (BI) of <70 or in-hospital death. The reliability among assessors was verified by calculating the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (2.1) for the average daily MQS. We performed a multiple logistic regression analysis to examine and identify a binary cutoff point for high-/low-dose rehabilitation. Results Of the 340 target patients, eight were aged <18 years, 109 had neurological complications, 11 had a BI <70 before admission, 79 had a lack of communication skills, 16 were terminally ill, eight did not complete the assessment during their ICU stay, 18 died in the ICU, and 53 denied consent. After 302 patients were excluded, 38 were included in the study. Six assessors, two at each hospital, measured the MQS in 38 patients. The ICC (2.1) for the MQS mean value was 0.98 (0.96-0.99) during the ICU stay. Logistic regression analysis using the mean MQS on admission to ICUs as an explanatory variable showed a significant association between increased MQS and decreased ADL dependence at discharge (odds ratio (OR): 0.76, confidence interval (CI): 0.61-0.96, adjusted p = 0.009). Logistic regression analysis using a high MQS on admission to ICUs as an explanatory variable showed a significant association between increased MQS and decreased ADL dependence at hospital discharge (OR: 0.14, CI: 0.03-0.66, adjusted p = 0.013). Conclusions We present a validated version of the Japanese MQS with a high inter-rater reliability that predicts ADL dependence at hospital discharge. The instrument can be used in future clinical trials in the ICU to control for the mobilization level in the ICU. The increased utilization of mobilization acutely in the ICU setting as quantified by the MQS may improve patient outcomes.

Clustering of critically ill patients using an individualized learning approach enables dose optimization of mobilization in the ICU

BACKGROUND

While early mobilization is commonly implemented in intensive care unit treatment guidelines to improve functional outcome, the characterization of the optimal individual dosage (frequency, level or duration) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that artificial intelligence-based clustering of a large ICU cohort can provide individualized mobilization recommendations that have a positive impact on the likelihood of being discharged home.

METHODS

This study is an analysis of a prospective observational database of two interdisciplinary intensive care units in Munich, Germany. Dosage of mobilization is determined by sessions per day, mean duration, early mobilization as well as average and maximum level achieved. A k-means cluster analysis was conducted including collected parameters at ICU admission to generate clinically definable clusters.

RESULTS

Between April 2017 and May 2019, 948 patients were included. Four different clusters were identified, comprising "Young Trauma," "Severely ill & Frail," "Old non-frail" and "Middle-aged" patients. Early mobilization (< 72 h) was the most important factor to be discharged home in "Young Trauma" patients (OR_adj 10.0 [2.8 to 44.0], p < 0.001). In the cluster of "Middle-aged" patients, the likelihood to be discharged home increased with each mobilization level, to a maximum 24-fold increased likelihood for ambulating (OR_adj 24.0 [7.4 to 86.1], p < 0.001). The likelihood increased significantly when standing or ambulating was achieved in the older, non-frail cluster (OR_adj 4.7 [1.2 to 23.2], p = 0.035 and OR_adj 8.1 [1.8 to 45.8], p = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

An artificial intelligence-based learning approach was able to divide a heterogeneous critical care cohort into four clusters, which differed significantly in their clinical characteristics and in their mobilization parameters. Depending on the cluster, different mobilization strategies supported the likelihood of being discharged home enabling an individualized and resource-optimized mobilization approach.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials NCT03666286, retrospectively registered 04 September 2018.

[Mobilization of Intensive Care Unit Patients: How Can the ICU Rooms and Modern Medical Equipment Help?]

Intensive Care Unit patients frequently develop physical impairments, mainly weakness, during their ICU stay. Early mobilization is a central therapeutic element in patients on an intensive care unit to prevent and treat these physical sequelae to conserve independence. Different barriers such as lacking patient motivation, insufficient staffing and fear of dislocating vascular access or the airway led to insufficient implementation of current guideline recommendation. Integration of modern medical equipment as well as the adequate ICU room concepts is a promising option to overcome those barriers.Allowing for sufficient free floor area when planning an ICU - maybe through the integration of mobile elements - is likely to ease early mobilization and should be thoroughly considered when building or remodeling an ICU. Furthermore, wireless monitoring has been deemed necessary and could potentially decrease the fear regarding dislocation due to less cable or lines that need to be managed during mobilization.Virtual reality is a rapidly evolving field and while in ICU patients it could so far only show to reduce stress level it has been shown to improve rehabilitation in stroke patients. It is imaginable that its integration in mobilization on the ICU will boost patients' motivation. Trials are still outstanding.Robotics integrated in the ICU bed or in form of exoskeletons are currently being piloted in critically ill patients with many expected benefits due to the ability to support patients tailored to their individual needs, reduce staff requirements as the robotics will cover support function and improved duration and intensity of mobilization as for example the patient can be ambulated without ever leaving the bed, which also translates into potentially reduced fear regarding dislocation of the airway or vascular access.Currently, evidence on the benefits regarding the integration of ICU rooms as well as modern medical technology into the process of (early) mobilization is lacking but especially in the sector of robotics a huge potential is to be suspected.

Assessment of mobilization capacity in 10 different ICU scenarios by different professions

Background

Mobilization of intensive care patients is a multi-professional task. Aim of this study was to explore how different professions working at Intensive Care Units (ICU) estimate the mobility capacity using the ICU Mobility Score in 10 different scenarios.

Methods

Ten fictitious patient-scenarios and guideline-related knowledge were assessed using an online survey. Critical care team members in German-speaking countries were invited to participate. All datasets including professional data and at least one scenario were analyzed. Kruskal Wallis test was used for the individual scenarios, while a linear mixed-model was used over all responses.

Results

In total, 515 of 788 (65%) participants could be evaluated. Physicians (p = 0.001) and nurses (p = 0.002) selected a lower ICU Mobility Score (-0.7 95% CI -1.1 to -0.3 and -0.4 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2, respectively) than physical therapists, while other specialists did not (p = 0.81). Participants who classified themselves as experts or could define early mobilization in accordance to the “S2e guideline: positioning and early mobilisation in prophylaxis or therapy of pulmonary disorders” correctly selected higher mobilization levels (0.2 95% CI 0.0 to 0.4, p = 0.049 and 0.3 95% CI 0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.002, respectively).

Conclusion

Different professions scored the mobilization capacity of patients differently, with nurses and physicians estimating significantly lower capacity than physical therapists. The exact knowledge of guidelines and recommendations, such as the definition of early mobilization, independently lead to a higher score. Interprofessional education, interprofessional rounds and mobilization activities could further enhance knowledge and practice of mobilization in the critical care team.

Measurement of mobility and physical function in hospitalised trauma patients: A systematic review of instruments and their measurement properties

Introduction

It is well recognised that organised trauma systems reduce trauma patient mortality. As established systems mature, there is an increasing need to better understand the patient recovery trajectory. Mobility and physical function are key aspects of recovery, but the optimal instruments for measurement in the acute hospital setting remain unclear.

Methods

A systematic review was undertaken to identify and describe mobility and physical function instruments scored by direct patient assessment, in adult trauma patients in an acute hospital setting. Databases were searched with no date restrictions. Instruments that were specific to subgroups or related to individual conditions, diseases or joints were excluded. The consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments checklist was used to assess risk of bias where relevant. Clinimetric properties were reported where possible, including reliability, validity and responsiveness.

Results

Fourteen thousand one hundred and fourteen articles were identified with 37 eligible for final review, including six instruments. None had been specifically designed for use in a heterogeneous range of trauma patients. The Functional Independence Measure was the most commonly cited (n = 10 studies), with evidence of construct validity, responsiveness and minimal floor/ceiling effects (<3%). The Acute Care Index of Function (n = 1 study) was found to be valid and responsive whilst the modified Iowa Level of Assistance (n = 2 studies) was reliable and responsive, but ceiling effects ranged from 26% to 37%. Little clinimetric data were available for other measures.

Conclusion

Evidence from a few studies show promise for the use of the Functional Independence Measure, Acute Care Index of Function and modified Iowa Level of Assistance to measure mobility and physical function in trauma patients, however comprehensive clinimetric data are lacking. Future research should test these scores in specifically designed clinimetric property studies in defined trauma patient populations. This would enable the identification of a gold standard measure for evaluating treatment effectiveness, enabling benchmarking between centres, allow prediction of recovery pathways and optimise trauma patient outcomes.

[Early mobilisation on the intensive care unit : What we know]

BACKGROUND

Early mobilization is defined as intervention within the first 72 h after intensive care unit (ICU) admission. According to the current state of relevant studies, evidence on early mobilization in critically ill patients is still inconsistent. This leads to insecurity in caretakers and subsequently to incomplete implementation in German ICUs.

OBJECTIVES

What type of intervention is suitable for certain patient groups? Which issues remain unresolved?

RESULTS

To obtain best possible outcomes, early mobilization should be initiated during the first 72 h after ICU admission. Implementation of early mobilization improves clinical outcome and should be integrated in a patient-centered bundle (such as ABCDEF). Mechanical ventilation is not a contraindication to intervention. Evidence in neurocritical care as well as functionally dependent patients is still low. Mode of intervention and dosage of early mobilisation remain unclear.

CONCLUSION

Early mobilization is safe and feasible, resulting in improved outcomes in surgical and medical ICU patients. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the optimal dosage and duration of intervention, especially in neurocritical care patients.

Influence of the initial level of consciousness on early, goal-directed mobilization: a post hoc analysis

PURPOSE

Early mobilization within 72 h of intensive care unit (ICU) admission improves functional status at hospital discharge. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of early, goal-directed mobilization in critically ill patients across a broad spectrum of initial consciousness levels.

METHODS

Post hoc analysis of the international, randomized, controlled, outcome-assessor blinded SOMS trial conducted 2011-2015. Randomization was stratified according to the immediate post-injury Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) (≤ 8 or > 8). Patients received either SOMS-guided mobility treatment with a facilitator or standard care. We used general linear models to test the hypothesis that immediate post-randomization GCS modulates the intervention effects on functional independence at hospital discharge.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The significant effect of early, goal-directed mobilization was consistent across levels of GCS without evidence of effect modification, for the primary outcome functional independence at hospital discharge (p = 0.53 for interaction), as well as average achieved mobility level during ICU stay (mean achieved SOMS level) and functional status at hospital discharge measured with the functional independence measure. In patients with low GCS, delay to first mobilization therapy was longer (0.7 ± 0.2 days vs. 0.2 ± 0.1 days, p = 0.008), but early, goal-directed mobilization compared with standard care significantly increased functional independence at hospital discharge in this subgroup of patients with immediate post-randomization GCS ≤ 8 (OR 3.67; 95% CI 1.02-13.14; p = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

This post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial suggests that early, goal-directed mobilization in patients with an impaired initial conscious state (GCS ≤ 8) is not harmful but effective.

Recent evidence on early mobilization in critical-Ill patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine the benefits of early mobilization and summarize the results of most recent clinical studies examining early mobilization in critically ill patients followed by a presentation of recent developments in the field.

RECENT FINDINGS

Early mobilization of ICU patients, defined as mobilization within 72 h of ICU admission, is still uncommon. In medical and surgical critically ill patients, mobilization is well tolerated even in intubated patients. In neurocritical care, evidence to support early mobilization is either lacking (aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage), or the results are inconsistent (e.g. stroke). Successful implementation of early mobilization requires a cultural change; preferably based on an interprofessional approach with clearly defined responsibilities and including a mobilization scoring system. Although the evidence for the majority of the technical tools is still limited, the use of a bed cycle ergometer and a treadmill with strap system has been promising in smaller trials.

SUMMARY

Early mobilization is well tolerated and feasible, resulting in improved outcomes in surgical and medical ICU patients. Implementation of early mobilization can be challenging and may need a cultural change anchored in an interprofessional approach and integrated in a patient-centered bundle. Scoring systems should be integrated to define daily goals and used to verify patients' achievements or identify barriers immediately.

Evaluating physical functioning in critical care: considerations for clinical practice and research

The evaluation of physical functioning is valuable in the intensive care unit (ICU) to help inform patient recovery after critical illness, to identify patients who may require rehabilitation interventions, and to monitor responsiveness to such interventions. This viewpoint article discusses: (1) the concept of physical functioning with reference to the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health; (2) the importance of measuring physical functioning in the ICU; and (3) methods for evaluating physical functioning in the ICU. Recommendations for clinical practice and research are made, along with discussion of future directions.

Functional Status Score for the ICU: An International Clinimetric Analysis of Validity, Responsiveness, and Minimal Important Difference

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the internal consistency, validity, responsiveness, and minimal important difference of the Functional Status Score for the ICU, a physical function measure designed for the ICU.

DESIGN

Clinimetric analysis.

SETTINGS

Five international datasets from the United States, Australia, and Brazil.

PATIENTS

Eight hundred nineteen ICU patients.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Clinimetric analyses were initially conducted separately for each data source and time point to examine generalizability of findings, with pooled analyses performed thereafter to increase power of analyses. The Functional Status Score for the ICU demonstrated good to excellent internal consistency. There was good convergent and discriminant validity, with significant and positive correlations (r = 0.30-0.95) between Functional Status Score for the ICU and other physical function measures, and generally weaker correlations with nonphysical measures (|r| = 0.01-0.70). Known group validity was demonstrated by significantly higher Functional Status Score for the ICU scores among patients without ICU-acquired weakness (Medical Research Council sum score, ≥ 48 vs < 48) and with hospital discharge to home (vs healthcare facility). Functional Status Score for the ICU at ICU discharge predicted post-ICU hospital length of stay and discharge location. Responsiveness was supported via increased Functional Status Score for the ICU scores with improvements in muscle strength. Distribution-based methods indicated a minimal important difference of 2.0-5.0.

CONCLUSIONS

The Functional Status Score for the ICU has good internal consistency and is a valid and responsive measure of physical function for ICU patients. The estimated minimal important difference can be used in sample size calculations and in interpreting studies comparing the physical function of groups of ICU patients.

Early, goal-directed mobilisation in the surgical intensive care unit: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Immobilisation predicts adverse outcomes in patients in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU). Attempts to mobilise critically ill patients early after surgery are frequently restricted, but we tested whether early mobilisation leads to improved mobility, decreased SICU length of stay, and increased functional independence of patients at hospital discharge.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, international, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial in SICUs of five university hospitals in Austria (n=1), Germany (n=1), and the USA (n=3). Eligible patients (aged 18 years or older, who had been mechanically ventilated for <48 h, and were expected to require mechanical ventilation for ≥24 h) were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of a stratified block randomisation via restricted web platform to standard of care (control) or early, goal-directed mobilisation using an inter-professional approach of closed-loop communication and the SICU optimal mobilisation score (SOMS) algorithm (intervention), which describes patients' mobilisation capacity on a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 (no mobilisation) to 4 (ambulation). We had three main outcomes hierarchically tested in a prespecified order: the mean SOMS level patients achieved during their SICU stay (primary outcome), and patient's length of stay on SICU and the mini-modified functional independence measure score (mmFIM) at hospital discharge (both secondary outcomes). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01363102).

FINDINGS

Between July 1, 2011, and Nov 4, 2015, we randomly assigned 200 patients to receive standard treatment (control; n=96) or intervention (n=104). Intention-to-treat analysis showed that the intervention improved the mobilisation level (mean achieved SOMS 2·2 [SD 1·0] in intervention group vs 1·5 [0·8] in control group, p<0·0001), decreased SICU length of stay (mean 7 days [SD 5-12] in intervention group vs 10 days [6-15] in control group, p=0·0054), and improved functional mobility at hospital discharge (mmFIM score 8 [4-8] in intervention group vs 5 [2-8] in control group, p=0·0002). More adverse events were reported in the intervention group (25 cases [2·8%]) than in the control group (ten cases [0·8%]); no serious adverse events were observed. Before hospital discharge 25 patients died (17 [16%] in the intervention group, eight [8%] in the control group). 3 months after hospital discharge 36 patients died (21 [22%] in the intervention group, 15 [17%] in the control group).

INTERPRETATION

Early, goal-directed mobilisation improved patient mobilisation throughout SICU admission, shortened patient length of stay in the SICU, and improved patients' functional mobility at hospital discharge.

FUNDING

Jeffrey and Judy Buzen.