Dataset Information

Effects of robotic-assisted early mobilization versus conventional mobilization in intensive care unit patients: prospective interventional cohort study with retrospective control group analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Approximately one in three survivors of critical illness suffers from intensive-care-unit-acquired weakness, which increases mortality and impairs quality of life. By counteracting immobilization, a known risk factor, active mobilization may mitigate its negative effects on patients. In this single-center trial, the effect of robotic-assisted early mobilization in the intensive care unit (ICU) on patients' outcomes was investigated.

Methods

We enrolled 16 adults scheduled for lung transplantation to receive 20 min of robotic-assisted mobilization and verticalization twice daily during their first week in the ICU (intervention group: IG). A control group (CG) of 13 conventionally mobilized patients after lung transplantation was recruited retrospectively. Outcome measures included the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, muscle parameters evaluated by ultrasound, and quality of life after three months.

Results

During the first week in the ICU, the intervention group received a median of 6 (interquartile range 3-8) robotic-assisted sessions of early mobilization and verticalization. There were no statistically significant differences in the duration of mechanical ventilation (IG: median 126 vs. CG: 78 h), length of ICU stay, muscle parameters evaluated by ultrasound, and quality of life after three months between the IG and CG.

Conclusion

In this study, robotic-assisted mobilization was successfully implemented in the ICU setting. No significant differences in patients' outcomes were observed between conventional and robotic-assisted mobilization. However, randomized and larger studies are necessary to validate the adequacy of robotic mobilization in other cohorts.

Trial registration

This single-center interventional trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov as NCT05071248 on 27/08/2021.

SUBMITTER: Huebner L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10999075 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of robotic-assisted early mobilization versus conventional mobilization in intensive care unit patients: prospective interventional cohort study with retrospective control group analysis.

Huebner Lucas L Warmbein Angelika A Scharf Christina C Schroeder Ines I Manz Kirsi K Rathgeber Ivanka I Gutmann Marcus M Biebl Johanna J Mehler-Klamt Amrei A Huber Jana J Eberl Inge I Kraft Eduard E Fischer Uli U Zoller Michael M

Critical care (London, England) 20240406 1

<h4>Background</h4>Approximately one in three survivors of critical illness suffers from intensive-care-unit-acquired weakness, which increases mortality and impairs quality of life. By counteracting immobilization, a known risk factor, active mobilization may mitigate its negative effects on patients. In this single-center trial, the effect of robotic-assisted early mobilization in the intensive care unit (ICU) on patients' outcomes was investigated.<h4>Methods</h4>We enrolled 16 adults schedul ...[more]

PMID: 38582934

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionRobotic-assisted bariatric surgery is increasingly performed. There remains controversy about the overall benefit of robotic-assisted (RBS) compared to conventional laparoscopic (LBS) bariatric surgery. In this study, we used a large national risk-stratified bariatric clinical database to compare outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastric bypass (RNYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG).MethodsA retrospective analysis of the 2015 and 2016 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use Data File (PUF) was performed. Primary robotic and laparoscopic RYNGB and SG were analyzed. Descriptive analysis was performed of the unmatched cohorts, followed by 1:3 case-controlled matching. Cases and controls were matched by patient demographics and pre-operative comorbidities, and peri-operative outcomes compared.Results77,991 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RnYGB) (7.5% robotic-assisted) and 189,503 SG (6.8% robotic-assisted) cases were identified. Operative length was significantly higher in both the robotic-assisted RnYGB and SG cohorts (p < 0.0001). Outcomes were similar between the robotic-assisted and laparoscopic RnYGB cohorts, except a lower mortality rate (p = 0.05), transfusion requirement (p = 0.005), aggregate bleeding (p = 0.04), and surgical site infections (SSI) (p = 0.006) in the robotic-assisted cohort. Outcomes were also similar between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic SG, except for a longer length of stay (p < 0.0001) and higher rates of conversion (p < 0.0001), 30-day intervention (p = 0.01), operative drain present (p < 0.0001), sepsis (p = 0.01), and organ space SSI (p = 0.0002) in the robotic cohort. Bleeding was lower in the robotic SG cohort and mortality was similar.ConclusionBoth robotic-assisted and laparoscopic RnYGB and SG are overall very safe. Robotic-assisted gastric bypass is associated with a lower mortality and morbidity; however, a clear benefit for robotic-assisted SG compared to laparoscopic SG was not seen. Given the longer operative and hospital duration, robotic SG is not cost-effective.

Dataset Information

Effects of robotic-assisted early mobilization versus conventional mobilization in intensive care unit patients: prospective interventional cohort study with retrospective control group analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Publications

Effects of robotic-assisted early mobilization versus conventional mobilization in intensive care unit patients: prospective interventional cohort study with retrospective control group analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets