Search

INTRODUCTION: Measurement instruments are important in clinical practice and research for assessing physical function in critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU).OBJECTIVE: To investigate inter-rater reliability and responsiveness of the Danish version of the CPAx (CPAx-D).METHOD: Critically ill patients from three Danish ICUs were included. Patients were assessed with CPAx-D by two blinded testers during a regular physiotherapy session. Follow-up tests were performed in patients who stayed in the ICU for more than 24 hours, were not transferred to another hospital or received palliative care. Floor and ceiling effects were examined in all assessments.Results For the reliability analysis 66 patients were included.Results Showed no significant difference between raters. For the total score, intra class correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.996 (95% CI: 0.993; 0.997), standard error of measurement was 0.72 point and minimal detectable change 2.0 points. Bland-Altman plot revealed no heteroscedacity. The responsiveness results of 24 patients showed that the effect size was 1.2 and the standardized response mean 1.1, which was in accordance with the hypothesis. No ceiling or floor effect was revealed.CONCLUSION: The CPAx-D showed excellent inter-rater reliability and responsiveness.

Background Optimising outcomes for critically ill patients with COVID-19 patients requires early interdisciplinary rehabilitation. As admission numbers soared through the pandemic, the redeployed workforce needed rapid, effective training to deliver these rehabilitation interventions. Methods The COVID-19 ICU Remote-Learning Rehab Course (CIRLC-rehab) is a one-day interdisciplinary course developed after the success of CIRLC-acute. The aim of CIRLC-rehab was to rapidly train healthcare professionals to deliver physical, nutritional and psychological rehabilitation strategies in the ICU/acute setting. The course used blended learning with interactive tutorials delivered by shielding critical care professionals. CIRLC-rehab was evaluated through a mixed-methods approach, including questionnaires, and follow-up semi-structured interviews to evaluate perceived impact on clinical practice. Quantitative data are reported as n (%) and means (SD). Inductive descriptive thematic analysis with methodological triangulation was used to analyse the qualitative data from the questionnaires and interviews. Results 805 candidates completed CIRLC-rehab. 627 (78.8%) completed the post-course questionnaire. 95% ( n = 596) found CIRLC-rehab extremely or very useful and 96.0% ( n = 602) said they were very likely to recommend the course to colleagues. Overall confidence rose from 2.78/5 to 4.14/5. The course promoted holistic and humanised care, facilitated informal networks, promoted interdisciplinary working and equipped the candidates with practical rehabilitation strategies that they implemented into clinical practice. Conclusion This pragmatic solution to educating redeployed staff during a pandemic increased candidates’ confidence in the rehabilitation of critically ill patients. There was also evidence of modifications to clinical care utilising learning from the course that subjectively facilitated holistic and humanised rehabilitation, combined with the importance of recognising the humanity, of those working in ICU settings themselves. Whilst these data are self-reported, we believe that this work demonstrates the real-term benefits of remote, scalable and rapid educational delivery.

Background Many Intensive Care Unit (ICU) survivors suffer from a multi- system disability, termed the post-intensive care syndrome. There is no current national coordination of either rehabilitation pathways or related data collection for them. In the last year, the need for tools to systematically identify the multidisciplinary rehabilitation needs of severely affected COVID-19 survivors has become clear. Such tools offer the opportunity to improve rehabilitation for all critical illness survivors through provision of a personalised Rehabilitation Prescription (RP). The initial development and secondary refinement of such an assessment and data tools is described in the linked paper. We report here the clinical and workforce data that was generated as a result. Methods Prospective service evaluation of 26 acute hospitals in England using the Post-ICU Presentation Screen (PICUPS) tool and the RP. The PICUPS tool comprised items in domains of a) Medical and essential care, b) Breathing and nutrition; c) Physical movement and d) Communication, cognition and behaviour. Results No difference was seen in total PICUPS scores between patients with or without COVID-19 (77 (IQR 60-92) vs. 84 (IQR 68-97); Mann-Whitney z = −1.46, p = 0.144. A network analysis demonstrated that requirements for physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech and language therapy, dietetics and clinical psychology were closely related and unaffected by COVID-19 infection status. A greater proportion of COVID-19 patients were referred for inpatient rehabilitation (13% vs. 7%) and community-based rehabilitation (36% vs.15%). The RP informed by the PICUPS tool generally specified a greater need for multi-professional input when compared to rehabilitation plans instituted. Conclusions The PICUPS tool is feasible to implement as a screening mechanism for post-intensive care syndrome. No differences are seen in the rehabilitation needs of patients with and without COVID-19 infection. The RP could be the vehicle that drives the professional interventions across the transitions from acute to community care. No single discipline dominates the rehabilitation requirements of these patients, reinforcing the need for a personalised RP for critical illness survivors.

Background The unprecedented increase in critically ill patients due to the COVID-19 pandemic mandated rapid training in critical care for redeployed staff to work safely in intensive care units (ICU). Methods The COVID-19 ICU Remote-Learning Course (CIRLC) is a remote delivery course developed in response to the pandemic. This was a one-day course focused on the fundamentals of Intensive Care. The course used blended learning with recorded lectures and interactive tutorials delivered by shielding and frontline ICU trained professionals. The course was developed within one week and piloted at three NHS Trusts. It was then made publicly available free of charge to redeployed healthcare professionals across the UK and Ireland. An iterative cycle of improvement was used to update the course content weekly. A course confidence questionnaire with quantitative and qualitative questions was used to evaluate effectiveness. Data is reported as n (%), means (SD) and thematic analysis was used for the open questions. Results 1,269 candidates from 171 organisations completed the course, with 99 volunteer trainers. 96% of respondents rated the course as very or extremely useful. 86% rated the online platform as excellent. Overall confidence improved from 2.7/5 to 3.9/5. Qualitative data showed that the course was pitched at the appropriate level, accessible and built clinicians confidence to work in intensive care. Conclusion This model of educational delivery with a rapid iteration cycle was a pragmatic, effective solution to knowledge-based training under social distancing measures. Whilst full course evaluation was not possible, we believe that this work demonstrates practical guidance on educational response in a pandemic as well as highlighting the altruistic nature of the critical care community.

Background Patients who have had prolonged stays in intensive care have ongoing rehabilitation needs. This is especially true of COVID-19 ICU patients, who can suffer diverse long-term ill effects. Currently there is no systematic data collection to guide the needs for therapy input for either of these groups nor to inform planning and development of rehabilitation services. These issues could be resolved in part by the systematic use of a clinical tool to support decision-making as patients progress from the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), through acute hospital care and onwards into rehabilitation. We describe (i) the development of such a tool (the Post-ICU Presentation Screen (PICUPS)) and (ii) the subsequent preparation of a person-centred Rehabilitation Prescription (RP) to travel with the patient as they continue down the care pathway. Methods PICUPS development was led by a core group of experienced clinicians representing the various disciplines involved in post-ICU rehabilitation. Key constructs and item-level descriptors were identified by group consensus. Piloting was performed as part of wider clinical engagement in 26 acute hospitals across England. Development and validation of such a tool requires clinimetric analysis, and this was based on classical test theory. Teams also provided feedback about the feasibility and utility of the tool. Results Initial PICUPS design yielded a 24-item tool. In piloting, a total of 552 records were collated from 314 patients, of which 121 (38.5%) had COVID-19. No obvious floor or ceiling effects were apparent. Exploratory factor analysis provided evidence of uni-dimensionality with strong loading on the first principal component accounting for 51% of the variance and Cronbach’s alpha for the full-scale score 0.95 – although a 3-factor solution accounted for a further 21%. The PICUPS was responsive to change both at full scale- and item-level. In general, positive responses were seen regarding the tool’s ability to describe the patients during their clinical course, engage and flag the relevant professionals needed, and to inform what should be included in an RP. Conclusions The PICUPS tool has robust scaling properties as a clinical measure and is potentially useful as a tool for identifying rehabilitation needs as patients step down from ICU and acute hospital care.

Background There has been a recent surge in the creation and adaptation of instruments to measure physical functioning (PF) in the intensive care unit (ICU). Selecting the right measurement instrument depends on understanding the core constructs that it measures in terms of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) domains. Purpose The purpose of this study was to map systematically the ICF domains and subdomains included in the PF measurement instruments used for adult patients during the ICU stay. Data Sources A systematic search was carried out in Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, CINAHL, and LILACS as well as a hand search up to May 17, 2017. Study Selection Study selection included all types of research articles that used at least 1 PF measurement instrument in adult patients within the ICU. Data Extraction Study design, year of publication, study population, and the measurement instruments reported were recorded. A consensus of experts analyzed the ICF domains included in each instrument. Data Synthesis We found 181 articles containing 60 PF measurement instruments used during the ICU stay. Twenty-six ICF domains were identified, 38 instruments included Mobility, and 13 included Muscle function. Limitations Studies not written in English or Spanish were excluded. Conclusions There are numerous PF measurement instruments used in adult patients in the ICU. The most frequent ICF domain measured is Mobility. This study highlights the ICF domains contained in the instruments that can be used clinically, providing a complete database of instruments that could facilitate selection of the most appropriate measure based on the patients’ needs.

The development of intensive care unit follow-up clinics has provided an opportunity to truly understand the complexities of recovering from critical illness from the patient perspective; they have shown us, as clinicians and researchers, that successful discharge from ICU is just the start of the journey of recovery for many patients. This chapter explores the history of ICU follow-up, the evidence supporting (and refuting) the potential benefits, and the patient perspective of ICU follow-up.

Objectives: To translate and culturally adapt the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool into Swedish and to test the inter-rater reliability of the Swedish version in critically ill patients. Design: This is an observational study. Methods: Translation and cross-cultural adaptation was performed in line with international recommendations, including forward and backward translation and expert round table discussions. The inter-rater reliability of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool – Swedish was then explored in 50 critically ill adult patients, pragmatically recruited, in a University Hospital clinical setting. Reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient for aggregated scores and quadratic weighted Cohen’s kappa analysis for individual items Results: The expert round table discussion group agreed that the translation was a satisfactory equivalent to the original version and applicable for use within the clinical setting. Reliability of aggregated scores and individual items were very good (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.97 and quadric weighted kappa values ranging from 0.88 to 0.98). The measurement error for aggregated scores was low, with a standard error of measurement of 1.79, smallest detectable change of 4.95, and limits of agreement of 5.20 and −4.76. The percentage agreement for individual items ranged from 64% to 88%. Conclusion: The Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool – Swedish was found applicable and appropriate for assessment of functioning in critically ill patients in an acute setting in Sweden, and it displayed high inter-rater reliability. This implies that the Swedish version can be used as assessment tool within intensive care and acute wards in Sweden.Implications for rehabilitationThere is a lack of validated instruments to test the functional status of critically ill patients in Sweden.The Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool is validated and reliable in English.The Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool – Swedish is considered reliable for use by physiotherapist in intensive care settings in Sweden.The Swedish version is feasible for use within clinical practice due to its simplicity and strong clinical relevance. There is a lack of validated instruments to test the functional status of critically ill patients in Sweden. The Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool is validated and reliable in English. The Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool – Swedish is considered reliable for use by physiotherapist in intensive care settings in Sweden. The Swedish version is feasible for use within clinical practice due to its simplicity and strong clinical relevance.

Purpose: The aim of the study was to validate the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool (CPAx) in Danish, including translation, cross-cultural adaptation and evaluation of clinemetric properties. Method: International recommendations for translation and cross-cultural adaptation of outcome measures were followed. Physiotherapists with ICU experience investigated the clinemetric properties of the Danish CPAx version among 30 critically ill patients at three different ICUs. Furthermore, a focus group interview was carried out to examine cross-cultural adaptation of the CPAx tool. Results: Translation and pre-test of the Danish version of CPAx resulted in a measurement tool with good clinemetric properties. Few adaptations were made with consideration of comparability between the Danish and the English version. The author of the original version of CPAx, Eve Corner, approved the Danish translation. Conclusion: The Danish version of the CPAx seems to be an appropriate measurement instrument for evaluation of physical function in ICU patients. This study is the first step toward a validation of a Danish version of the CPAx tool. However, further research is needed to investigate reliability and responsiveness among patients in the ICU.

Background: Critically ill patients following traumatic injury or major surgery are at risk of loss of skeletal muscle mass, which leads to decreased physical function. Early rehabilitation in an intensive care unit (ICU) is thought to preserve or restore physical functioning. The Chelsea critical care physical assessment (CPAx) is a measurement tool used to assess physical function in the ICU. Objectives: To determine whether the use of the CPAx tool as part of physiotherapy patient assessment, in two adult trauma and surgical ICU settings where early patient mobilisation forms part of standard physiotherapy practice, had an impact on ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS) through delivery of problem-oriented treatment plans. Method: A single-centred pre–post quasi-experimental study was conducted. The population was a consecutive sample of surgical and trauma ICU patients. Participants’ functional ability was assessed with the CPAx tool on alternative days during their ICU stay, and rehabilitation goals were modified according to their CPAx score. Intensive care unit and hospital LOS data were collected and compared to data of a matched historical control group. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used. Results: A total of 26 ICU patients were included in the intervention group (n = 26). They received CPAx-guided therapy, and outcomes were matched with ICU patients in the historical control group (n = 26). The median sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score was significantly higher in the control group (p = 0.005) (3.5 [IQR 2–6.3]) versus (2 [IQR 1.8–2.5]) for the intervention group. The median admission CPAx score for the intervention group was 33.5 (IQR 16.1–44), and the median ICU discharge score was 38 (IQR 28.5–43.8). No significant differences were found in ICU days (control 2.7 [IQR 1.1–5.2]; intervention 3.7 [IQR 2.3–5.4]; p = 0.27) or hospital LOS (control 13.5 [IQR 9.3–18.3]; intervention 11.4 [IQR 8.4–20.3], p = 0.42). Chelsea critical care physical assessment scores on ICU admission had a moderate negative correlation with hospital LOS (r = -0.58, p = 0.00, n = 23). Chelsea critical care physical assessment scores at ICU discharge had strong positive correlation with discharge SOFA scores (r = 0.7; p = 0.025; n = 10). Conclusion: Problem-oriented patient rehabilitation informed by the CPAx tool resulted in improvement of physical function but did not reduce ICU or hospital LOS. Clinical implications: A higher level of physical function at ICU admission, measured with CPAx, was associated with shorter hospital LOS. South African Society of Physiotherapy Research Foundation

Critical illness can lead to muscle wasting, functional decline and long-term disability. This is well described subjectively in the literature; however, to date, objective measures have proved elusive. This narrative review aims to explore the objective measurement tools available to assess intensive care unit-acquired weakness, to review the psychometric properties of these tools and to show current practice and the obstacles we face in the development of new measurement scales.

Severe burn leads to a state of hypercatabolism, resulting in rapid muscle loss and long-term disability. As survival rates from severe burn are improving, early rehabilitation is essential to facilitate functional recovery. However, there is no way of measuring the degree of disability in the acute stages, and hence, no marker of functional recovery. This hampers both communication and research into interventions to improve functional outcomes. The Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment tool (CPAx) is a simple objective measure of function, designed and validated in the general Intensive Care Unit (ICU) cohort. The aim of this study was to test the responsiveness of the CPAx in the burns ICU (BICU) cohort and validate its use.Observational study of 52 BICU patients admitted for over 48h. All patients were assessed on the CPAx retrospectively for pre-admission, and prospectively at ICU admission, ICU discharge (or final ICU assessment for non-survivors) and hospital discharge. Analysis of variance, post hoc between group differences in median CPAx score, and floor and ceiling effect (i.e. the percentage of patients scoring full marks (50), or zero) for the four time points were completed. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was estimated as half of the standard deviation of the CPAx score at ICU discharge.A total of 30 patients were included in the final analysis; mean age was 47.1 years (SD 21.2), 63.3% were male, with a median burn total body surface area (TBSA) of 30% (IQR 11.3-48.8). There was a significant difference in the analysis of variance in median CPAx scores at all four time points (p.001). In survivors, the differences in CPAx scores post hoc were significant for all time points (p.05), aside from ICU discharge and hospital discharge. The CPAx MCID for BICU patients was six. Twenty-three (86.7%) patients scored full marks or zero on the CPAx pre-admission. For survivors, no patients scored full marks or zero on the CPAx at ICU and hospital discharge. On ICU admission 66.7% (n=20) scored zero on the CPAx and no patients scored 50.The CPAx score appears to be able to detect improvements in physical function as patients recover from acute severe burn. It has a limited floor and ceiling effect in the acute setting and a change in CPAx score of 6 represents clinically important progress. Further work is required in a larger cohort.

Introduction Many intensive care unit (ICU) survivors suffer from physical disability for months after ICU stay. There is no structured method to identify patients at risk for such problems. The purpose of the study was to develop a method for early in-ICU prediction of the patient’s individual risk for new-onset physical disability two months after ICU stay. Methods In total, 23 potential predictors for physical disability were assessed before individual ICU discharge. Two months after ICU discharge, out of 232 eligible patients, 148 ICU survivors (64%) completed the activity of daily living (ADL) staircase questionnaire to determine new-onset physical disability. Results A total of 95% percent of patients had no ADL reduction prior to ICU admission. Forty-seven percent (n = 69) of questionnaire responders suffered from worsened ADL. We identified four independent predictors for new-onset physical disability: Low educational level (odds ratio (OR) = 6.8), impaired core stability (OR = 4.6), fractures (OR = 4.5) and ICU length of stay longer than two days (OR = 2.6). The predictors were included in a screening instrument. The regression coefficient of each predictor was transformed into a risk score. The sum of risk scores was related to a predicted probability for physical disability in the individual patient. The cross-validated area under receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for the screening instrument was 0.80. Conclusions Educational level is the single most important predictor for new-onset physical disability two months after ICU stay, followed by impaired core stability at ICU discharge, the presence of fractures and ICU stay longer than two days. A simple screening instrument based on these predictors can be used at ICU discharge to determine the risk for new-onset physical disability. This preliminary instrument may help clinicians to identify patients in need of support, but needs external validation prior to wider clinical use. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-014-0455-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction Intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) is common in survivors of critical illness, resulting in global weakness and functional deficit. Although ICU-AW is well described subjectively in the literature, the value of objective measures has yet to be established. This project aimed to evaluate the construct validity of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment tool (CPAx) by analyzing the association between CPAx scores and hospital-discharge location, as a measure of functional outcome. Methods The CPAx was integrated into practice as a service-improvement initiative in an 11-bed intensive care unit (ICU). For patients admitted for more than 48 hours, between 10 May 2010 and 13 November 2013, the last CPAx score within 24 hours of step down from the ICU or death was recorded (n = 499). At hospital discharge, patients were separated into seven categories, based on continued rehabilitation and care needs. Descriptive statistics were used to explore the association between ICU discharge CPAx score and hospital-discharge location. Results Of the 499 patients, 171 (34.3%) returned home with no ongoing rehabilitation or care input; 131 (26.2%) required community support; 28 (5.6%) went to inpatient rehabilitation for 6 weeks; 27 (5.4%) required nursing home level of care; 80 (16.0%) died in the ICU, and 37 (7.4%) died in hospital. A significant difference was found in the median CPAx score between groups (P

Objective To develop a scoring system to measure physical morbidity in critical care – the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool (CPAx). Method The development process was iterative involving content validity indices (CVI), a focus group and an observational study of 33 patients to test construct validity against the Medical Research Council score for muscle strength, peak cough flow, Australian Therapy Outcome Measures score, Glasgow Coma Scale score, Bloomsbury sedation score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, Short Form 36 (SF-36) score, days of mechanical ventilation and inter-rater reliability. Participants Trauma and general critical care patients from two London teaching hospitals. Results Users of the CPAx felt that it possessed content validity, giving a final CVI of 1.00 (P < 0.05). Construct validation data showed moderate to strong significant correlations between the CPAx score and all secondary measures, apart from the mental component of the SF-36 which demonstrated weak correlation with the CPAx score (r = 0.024, P = 0.720). Reliability testing showed internal consistency of α = 0.798 and inter-rater reliability of κ = 0.988 (95% confidence interval 0.791 to 1.000) between five raters. Conclusion This pilot work supports proof of concept of the CPAx as a measure of physical morbidity in the critical care population, and is a cogent argument for further investigation of the scoring system. © 2012 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction The secondary physical effects of critical illness, for example, muscle atrophy, can be detrimental to functional outcome and quality of life in critical care survivors. To minimise these problems early physiotherapy in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is advocated. However, research to identify the optimal rehabilitation strategy is hindered by lack of an ICU specific objective measure of physical recovery. Current measures are either impairment specific, thus not capturing the full picture, or their validity is unproven in this population. Aim To develop a measurement tool to assess physical recovery in the heterogeneous general adult critical care population. Method Face/content validity The initial tool was developed in a clinical setting by specialist physiotherapists and is called the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment tool (CPAx). It is a pictorial composite of 10 numerical evaluations of pertinent functions and impairments. It was tested for face and content validity with a content validity index questionnaire (CVIQ), a subsequent focus group and a repeat CVIQ. Inter-rater reliability Five physiotherapists using the CPAx regularly all assessed the same two patients. Data were analysed for intra-class correlation co-efficient (ICC) and internal consistency. Construct validity A dual centred cohort study of 32 ICU patients was completed. Treating physiotherapists assessed patients using the CPAx thrice weekly. Additionally, biceps and quadriceps strength, cough peak flow (CPF) and components of the AusTOMs scores (a physiotherapy outcome measure) were tested by a researcher blinded to the CPAx scores. Correlation co-efficients were then used to analyse the data. Results Face/content validity Pre and post focus group CVIs were 0.67 (p>0.05) and 0.83 (p Reliability Reliability was strong with internal consistency of 0.98 and ICC 0.902 (95% CI 0.799 to 0.969; p= Construct validity Pilot data showed strong positive correlations (0.744–0.922, p Conclusion Preliminary data show that the CPAx is a reliable and valid measure of physical function in ICU patients. It can now be used as an outcome measure for physiotherapy research and has potential to act as a predictor of functional outcome in the ICU population.