Search

Objective: Wearable activity monitors can provide detailed data on activity after cardiac surgery and discriminate a patient's risk for hospital-based outcomes. However, comparative data for different monitoring approaches, as well as predictive ability over clinical characteristics, are lacking. In addition, data on specific thresholds of activity are needed. The objective of this study was to compare 3 wearable activity monitors and 1 observational mobility scale in discriminating risk for 3 hospital-based outcomes, and to establish clinically relevant step thresholds. Methods: Cardiac surgery patients were enrolled between June 2016 and August 2017 in a cohort study. Postoperative activity was measured by 3 accelerometry monitors (StepWatch Ambulation Monitor, Fitbit Charge HR, and ActiGraph GT9X) and 1 nurse-based observation scale. Monitors represent a spectrum of characteristics, including wear location (ankle/wrist), output (activity counts/steps), consumer accessibility, and cost. Primary outcomes were duration of hospitalization >7 days, discharge to a nonhome location, and 30-day readmission. Results: Data were available from 193 patients (median age 67 years [interquartile range, 58-72]). All postoperative day 2 activity metrics (ie, from StepWatch, Fitbit, ActiGraph, and the observation scale) were independently associated with prolonged hospitalization and discharge to a nonhome location. Only steps as measured by StepWatch was independently associated with 30-day readmission. Overall, StepWatch provided the greatest discrimination (C-statistics 0.71-0.76 for all outcomes). Step thresholds between 250 and 500 steps/day identified between 74% and 96% of patients with any primary outcome. Conclusions: Data from wearable accelerometers provide additive value in early postoperative risk-stratification for hospital-based outcomes. These results both support and provide guidance for activity-monitoring programs after cardiac surgery.

Importance: Identifying cognitive impairment in adults in acute care is essential so that providers can address functional deficits and plan for safe discharge. Occupational therapy practitioners play an essential role in screening for, evaluating, and treating cognitive impairment., Objective: To test and compare the psychometrics and feasibility of three cognitive screens and select the ideal screen for use in acute care., Design: Prospective mixed methods., Setting: Acute care hospital., Participants: Fifty adults., Outcomes and Measures: We examined the interrater reliability, administration time, and usability of the Brief Cognitive Assessment Tool Short Form (BCAT-SF), the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care "6-Clicks" Applied Cognitive Inpatient Short Form (AM-PAC ACISF), and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). We compared the construct validity, sensitivity, and specificity of the BCAT-SF and AM-PAC ACISF with those of the MoCA., Results: Interrater reliability was good to excellent; ICCs were .98 for the MoCA, .97 for the BCAT-SF, and .86 for the AM-PAC ACISF. The BCAT-SF and the AM-PAC ACISF both had 100% sensitivity, and specificity was 74% for the BCAT-SF and 98% for the AM-PAC ACISF. The optimal cutoff score for cognitive impairment on the AM-PAC ACISF was <22. Administration time of the AM-PAC ACISF (1.0 min) was significantly less than that of the BCAT-SF (5.0 min) and the MoCA (13.3 min; p < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: Each screen demonstrated acceptable reliability and construct validity. The AM-PAC ACISF had the optimum mix of performance and feasibility for the fast-paced acute care setting. What This Article Adds: Early identification of cognitive impairment using the AM-PAC ACISF can allow for timely occupational therapy intervention in acute care settings., (Copyright © 2023 by the American Occupational Therapy Association, Inc.)