Search

Background: Early mobilization (EM) of intensive care (IC) patients is important but complex with facilitators and barriers. Compared to general IC patients, burn IC patients are more hyper-metabolic. They have extensive wounds, lengthy wound dressing changes, and repeated surgeries that may affect possibilities of EM. This study aimed to identify facilitators and barriers of EM in burn IC patients among all disciplines involved. Additionally, we assessed EM practices, i.e. when are which patients considered suitable for EM., Methods: A survey was sent to 139 professionals involved in EM of burn IC patients (discipline groups: Intensivists, medical doctors, registered nurses, therapists)., Results: Response rate was 57 %. The majority found EM very important, yet different definitions were chosen. Perceived barriers mainly concerned patient-level factors, most frequently hemodynamic instability and excessive sedation followed by skin graft surgery, fatigue, and pain management. Most frequent barriers at the provider-level were limited staffing, safety concerns, and conflicting perceptions about the suitability of EM. At the institutional-level, we found no high barriers. Interdisciplinary variation on perceived barriers, when to initiate it, and permitted maximal activity were ascertained., Conclusion: Skin grafts and pain management were barriers of EM specific for burn care. Opinions on frequency, dosage and duration of EM varied widely. Improving interdisciplinary communication is key., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The author(s) declares no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Ventilation strategies aiming at prevention of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI), including low tidal volumes (V T ) and use of positive end-expiratory pressures (PEEP) are increasingly used in critically ill patients. It is uncertain whether ventilation practices changed in a similar way in burn patients. Our objective was to describe applied ventilator settings and their relation to development of VILI in burn patients., Data Sources: Systematic search of the literature in PubMed and EMBASE using MeSH, EMTREE terms and keywords referring to burn or inhalation injury and mechanical ventilation., Study Selection: Studies reporting ventilator settings in adult or pediatric burn or inhalation injury patients receiving mechanical ventilation during the ICU stay., Data Extraction: Two authors independently screened abstracts of identified studies for eligibility and performed data extraction., Data Synthesis: The search identified 35 eligible studies. V T declined from 14 ml/kg in studies performed before to around 8 ml/kg predicted body weight in studies performed after 2006. Low-PEEP levels (<10 cmH 2 O) were reported in 70% of studies, with no changes over time. Peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) values above 35 cmH 2 O were frequently reported. Nevertheless, 75% of the studies conducted in the last decade used limited maximum airway pressures (≤35 cmH 2 O) compared to 45% of studies conducted prior to 2006. Occurrence of barotrauma, reported in 45% of the studies, ranged from 0 to 29%, and was more frequent in patients ventilated with higher compared to lower airway pressures., Conclusion: This systematic review shows noticeable trends of ventilatory management in burn patients that mirrors those in critically ill non-burn patients. Variability in available ventilator data precluded us from drawing firm conclusions on the association between ventilator settings and the occurrence of VILI in burn patients., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.)