TY - GEN
T1 - TO:MOVE-ICU
T2 - To Optimise MObilisation in mechanically VEntilated and conscious patients in the Intensive Care Unit: A Participatory Design study
AU - Lehmkuhl, Lene
PY - 2023/10/19
Y1 - 2023/10/19
N2 - In Denmark, approximately 30,000 patients are treated in an intensive care unit (ICU) every year.Technological advances and improved intensive care treatment have increased the number ofpatients surviving critical illness. However, former ICU survivors experience a variety of cognitive,psychological and physical health challenges that may persist for up to five years after an ICUadmission. Mobilisation within the first days of ICU stay can reduce muscle atrophy and improvepatients’ physical functioning at hospital discharge. International guidelines recommendmobilisation when clinically possible, and it is considered to be safe and beneficial, even duringmechanical ventilation. At the same time, reduced sedation and good pain management arerecommended, so that patients are as comfortable as possible with the least possible use ofmedication. This also means that patients can participate in the mobilisation. However, studies showthat mobilisation of mechanically ventilated patients lack implementation in clinical practice.Overall, a gap exists between existing evidence and current practice, which indicates that thepractice of mobilising in ICU could be optimised. However, mobilisation in ICU practice iscomplex and involve many aspects. The key assumption behind this study was that in-depthknowledge is needed to support mobilisation and initiate patients’ rehabilitation starting already inICU. The overall aim of the study was to optimise mobilisation of conscious and mechanically ventilated patients during their stay in the ICU. This was concretised through objectives in relation to exploring, identifying and developing an intervention to support mobilisation in ICU, involving patients’, nurses’ and physiotherapists’ perspectives. A Participatory Design study in three iterative phases was planned. Two phases were conducted, to explore the experiences of conscious patients, nurses and physiotherapists, and to develop an intervention to engage patients, nurses and physiotherapists to eventually optimise mobilisation in ICU. The scientific approach was phenomenological-hermeneutic, inspired by Paul Ricoeur’s philosophy of interpretation. In the first phase, patients’, nurses’ and physiotherapists’ needs were identified, based on the challenges experienced in current practice. Participant observations were conducted in three ICUs, both of 12 conscious and mechanically ventilated patients, and of the nurses and physiotherapists who participated in their mobilisation sessions. In addition, accelerometer observations were conducted, to gain further insight into the movement pattern and daily variation in patients’ physical activity during mechanical ventilation and ICU stay. Subsequently, interviews were conducted with seven of the previous included patients, and two focus group interviews were facilitated with nurses and physiotherapists. The findings revealed that mechanically ventilated ICU patients primarily are sedentary. Physical activity was performed within two narrow time periods during the day and seemed related to nurseand/or physiotherapist-initiated activities. Patients experienced mobilisation as being confronted with a failed body. They reacted with both surprise and fright to the loss of bodily control. Bodily guidance, human relations and a ‘balanced standing by’ to stepwise support and challenge the patients during mobilisation was found to enhance them in getting the body back on track. The findings reflected a need for an individualised and flexible mobility plan to adapt various activities to the different stages of the patient’s recovery. Furthermore, we found a need to clarify communication to align expectations of mobilisation between patients and healthcare professionals became apparent to optimise mobilisation. In the second phase, an intervention was developed based on the findings from phase 1 that reflected the perspective of patients, nurses and physiotherapists. To facilitate collaboration and mutual learning in the design process six workshops were. The concept of ‘bridging the communication gap’ led to development of a prototype that was tested in clinical practice. Eventually, it led to the development of the intervention, which we called TO:MOVE-ICU. The two-part intervention consisted of: a patient-centred app module Training at intensive care, with a ‘circadian rhythm plan’ and training exercises to support patient communication in planning mobilisation, and a Mobility milestone board, including a clinical guide to support interprofessional communication and workflow. A third phase was planned; however, the patient-centred Training at intensive care needed to be further adjusted. The collective TO:MOVE-ICU intervention will be pilot tested in a feasibility study in 2024. This study contributed with a unique insight into the patient experience of mobilisation while conscious and mechanically ventilated in ICU. Furthermore, an intervention was developed based on the perspectives of both patients, nurses and physiotherapist to inform future mobilisation practice. The first steps have been taken towards the implementation of an intervention that can align interprofessional communication and support individualised planning of mobilisation adapted to the patient’s recovery trajectory. Some cultural changes are noted in clinical practice towards engaging patients. These are needed to further support a co-determined approach and involve the patients who can and wish to take part in the planning of mobilisation in ICU. The TO:MOVE intervention however cannot stand alone, because human interaction and ‘balanced standing by’ are essential to optimise mobilisation in ICU.
AB - In Denmark, approximately 30,000 patients are treated in an intensive care unit (ICU) every year.Technological advances and improved intensive care treatment have increased the number ofpatients surviving critical illness. However, former ICU survivors experience a variety of cognitive,psychological and physical health challenges that may persist for up to five years after an ICUadmission. Mobilisation within the first days of ICU stay can reduce muscle atrophy and improvepatients’ physical functioning at hospital discharge. International guidelines recommendmobilisation when clinically possible, and it is considered to be safe and beneficial, even duringmechanical ventilation. At the same time, reduced sedation and good pain management arerecommended, so that patients are as comfortable as possible with the least possible use ofmedication. This also means that patients can participate in the mobilisation. However, studies showthat mobilisation of mechanically ventilated patients lack implementation in clinical practice.Overall, a gap exists between existing evidence and current practice, which indicates that thepractice of mobilising in ICU could be optimised. However, mobilisation in ICU practice iscomplex and involve many aspects. The key assumption behind this study was that in-depthknowledge is needed to support mobilisation and initiate patients’ rehabilitation starting already inICU. The overall aim of the study was to optimise mobilisation of conscious and mechanically ventilated patients during their stay in the ICU. This was concretised through objectives in relation to exploring, identifying and developing an intervention to support mobilisation in ICU, involving patients’, nurses’ and physiotherapists’ perspectives. A Participatory Design study in three iterative phases was planned. Two phases were conducted, to explore the experiences of conscious patients, nurses and physiotherapists, and to develop an intervention to engage patients, nurses and physiotherapists to eventually optimise mobilisation in ICU. The scientific approach was phenomenological-hermeneutic, inspired by Paul Ricoeur’s philosophy of interpretation. In the first phase, patients’, nurses’ and physiotherapists’ needs were identified, based on the challenges experienced in current practice. Participant observations were conducted in three ICUs, both of 12 conscious and mechanically ventilated patients, and of the nurses and physiotherapists who participated in their mobilisation sessions. In addition, accelerometer observations were conducted, to gain further insight into the movement pattern and daily variation in patients’ physical activity during mechanical ventilation and ICU stay. Subsequently, interviews were conducted with seven of the previous included patients, and two focus group interviews were facilitated with nurses and physiotherapists. The findings revealed that mechanically ventilated ICU patients primarily are sedentary. Physical activity was performed within two narrow time periods during the day and seemed related to nurseand/or physiotherapist-initiated activities. Patients experienced mobilisation as being confronted with a failed body. They reacted with both surprise and fright to the loss of bodily control. Bodily guidance, human relations and a ‘balanced standing by’ to stepwise support and challenge the patients during mobilisation was found to enhance them in getting the body back on track. The findings reflected a need for an individualised and flexible mobility plan to adapt various activities to the different stages of the patient’s recovery. Furthermore, we found a need to clarify communication to align expectations of mobilisation between patients and healthcare professionals became apparent to optimise mobilisation. In the second phase, an intervention was developed based on the findings from phase 1 that reflected the perspective of patients, nurses and physiotherapists. To facilitate collaboration and mutual learning in the design process six workshops were. The concept of ‘bridging the communication gap’ led to development of a prototype that was tested in clinical practice. Eventually, it led to the development of the intervention, which we called TO:MOVE-ICU. The two-part intervention consisted of: a patient-centred app module Training at intensive care, with a ‘circadian rhythm plan’ and training exercises to support patient communication in planning mobilisation, and a Mobility milestone board, including a clinical guide to support interprofessional communication and workflow. A third phase was planned; however, the patient-centred Training at intensive care needed to be further adjusted. The collective TO:MOVE-ICU intervention will be pilot tested in a feasibility study in 2024. This study contributed with a unique insight into the patient experience of mobilisation while conscious and mechanically ventilated in ICU. Furthermore, an intervention was developed based on the perspectives of both patients, nurses and physiotherapist to inform future mobilisation practice. The first steps have been taken towards the implementation of an intervention that can align interprofessional communication and support individualised planning of mobilisation adapted to the patient’s recovery trajectory. Some cultural changes are noted in clinical practice towards engaging patients. These are needed to further support a co-determined approach and involve the patients who can and wish to take part in the planning of mobilisation in ICU. The TO:MOVE intervention however cannot stand alone, because human interaction and ‘balanced standing by’ are essential to optimise mobilisation in ICU.
U2 - 10.21996/9vzk-an52
DO - 10.21996/9vzk-an52
M3 - Ph.D. thesis
PB - Syddansk Universitet. Det Sundhedsvidenskabelige Fakultet
ER -