Measurement and reporting of physical rehabilitation interventions in pediatric critical care: a scoping review

Treatment Fidelity in 94 Randomized Controlled Trials of Physical Rehabilitation in the ICU: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

Recent reviews demonstrated discordant effects of ICU-based physical rehabilitation on physical function. These inconsistencies may be related to differences in treatment fidelity-the extent to which a protocol is delivered as planned. Before evaluating the association of fidelity with outcomes, we must first understand the extent of treatment fidelity reporting in ICU-based physical rehabilitation randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

Six electronic databases from inception to December 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

We included RCTs enrolling adults or children admitted to the ICU, if greater than or equal to 50% were invasively mechanically ventilated greater than 24 hours, and underwent an ICU-based physical rehabilitation intervention, with no limitation to comparators or outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

We screened and extracted data independently and in duplicate, with a third reviewer as needed. Extracted data included study characteristics, treatment descriptions, and the presence of National Institutes of Health Behaviour Change Consortium (NIH-BCC) treatment fidelity tool components. Treatment fidelity scores were calculated as the proportion of reported (numerator) out of total NIH-BCC components (denominator). We calculated scores across studies and by treatment group (intervention vs. comparator). We used linear regression to assess for a time trend in study treatment fidelity scores.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 20,433 citations, 94 studies met inclusion criteria. Authors reported a median (first-third quartiles) of 19% (14-26%) of treatment fidelity components across studies. Intervention group scores were higher than comparator groups (24% [19-33%] vs. 14% [5-24%], p < 0.01). We found a mean increase in study treatment fidelity scores by 0.7% (0.3 points) per year.

CONCLUSIONS

Only 19% of treatment fidelity components were reported across studies, with comparator groups more poorly reported. Future research could investigate ways to optimize treatment fidelity reporting and determine characteristics associated with treatment fidelity conduct in ICU-based physical rehabilitation RCTs.

Comparator Groups in ICU-Based Studies of Physical Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review of 125 Studies

To characterize comparator groups (CGs) in ICU-based studies of physical rehabilitation (PR), including the type, content, and reporting.

DATA SOURCES

We followed a five-stage scoping review methodology, searching five databases from inception to June 30, 2022. Study selection and data extraction were completed independently, in duplicate.

STUDY SELECTION

We screened studies by title and abstract, then full-text. We included prospective studies with greater than or equal to two arms enrolling mechanically ventilated adults (≥ 18 yr), with any planned PR intervention initiated in the ICU.

DATA EXTRACTION

We conducted a quantitative content analysis of authors' description of CG type and content. We categorized similar CG types (e.g., usual care), classified content into unique activities (e.g., positioning), and summarized these data using counts (proportions). We assessed reporting using Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT; proportion of reported items/total applicable).

DATA SYNTHESIS

One hundred twenty-five studies were included, representing 127 CGs. PR was planned in 112 CGs (88.2%; 110 studies), representing four types: usual care (n = 81, 63.8%), alternative treatment than usual care (e.g., different from intervention; n = 18, 14.2%), alternative treatment plus usual care (n = 7, 5.5%), and sham (n = 6, 4.7%). Of 112 CGs with planned PR, 90 CGs (88 studies) reported 60 unique activities, most commonly passive range of motion (n = 47, 52.2%). The remaining 22 CGs (19.6%; 22 studies) reported vague descriptions. PR was not planned in 12 CGs (9.5%; 12 studies), and three CGs (2.4%; three studies) reported no details. Studies reported a median (Q1-Q3) of 46.6% (25.0-73.3%) CERT items. Overall, 20.0% of studies reported no detail to understand planned CG activities.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common type of CG was usual care. We identified heterogeneity in planned activities and CERT reporting deficiencies. Our results could help guide the selection, design, and reporting of CGs in future ICU-based PR studies.

Effectiveness of physical rehabilitation interventions in critically ill patients-A protocol for an overview of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Adult and pediatric patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) requiring invasive ventilatory support, sedation, and muscle blockade may present neuromusculoskeletal deterioration. Different physical rehabilitation interventions have been studied to evaluate their effectiveness in improving critically ill patients' outcomes. Given that many published systematic reviews (SRs) aims to determine the effectiveness of different types of physical rehabilitation interventions, it is necessary to group them systematically and assess the methodological quality of SRs to help clinicians make better evidence-based decisions. This overview of SRs (OoSRs) aims to map the existing evidence and to determine the effectiveness of physical rehabilitation interventions to improve neuromusculoskeletal function and other clinical outcomes in adult and pediatric critically ill patients.

METHODS

An OoSRs of randomized and non-randomized clinical trials involving critically ill adult and pediatric patients receiving physical rehabilitation intervention will be conducted. A sensitive search of MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, and other search resources will be conducted. Two independent reviewers will conduct study selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment. Discrepancies will be resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. The degree of overlap of studies will be calculated using the corrected covered area. The methodological quality of the SRs will be measured using the AMSTAR-2 tool. The GRADE framework will report the certainty of evidence by selecting the "best" SR for each physical rehabilitation intervention and outcome.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this overview are expected to determine the effectiveness and safety of physical rehabilitation interventions to improve neuromusculoskeletal function in adult and pediatric critically ill patients based on a wide selection of the best available evidence and to determine the knowledge gaps in this topic by mapping and assessing the methodological quality of published SRs.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023389672.

Measurements of Older Adults' Physical Competence under the Concept of Physical Literacy: A Scoping Review

Physical literacy, especially in the fields of physical education and public health, has been gaining global interest in recent years. Applying an appropriate method to measure physical competence under the concept of physical literacy for older adults aligns with the goal of healthy aging. In this scoping review, we reflected on previous empirical studies regarding the measurements of physical competence among older adults holistically and systematically to identify and analyze gaps in the topic of “physical literacy” among older adults as a precursor to a systematic review. We searched five databases using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for Protocols guidelines: (1) SPORTDiscus; (2) PubMed; (3) Scopus; (4) ScienceDirect; and (5) Web of Science. There were 29 studies included in our thematic analysis. Through our review, we found that 73% of the mean age of the participants comprised older baby boomers who were from 65–74 years old as aging continues. Therefore, more effort should be made in developing physical literacy for older adults with the goal of health promotion. Our results showed that most studies adopted both self-reported and objective measures, in which objective measures were widely embraced by scholars in the measurement, while self-reported measures were encouraged to be included in the assessment as well. Using assessment tools to measure a combination of actual physical competence and perceived physical competence is recommended in the measurement of physical competence, especially in older adults. In addition, other elements of physical literacy should be taken into account when measuring physical competency in older adults. For future implementation, when framing the model to chart physical literacy for older adults, it is important to review the definition again and adopt a holistic measurement system including every aspect of physical literacy.