[Effect of enhanced rehabilitation on the prognosis of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit: a retrospective historical controlled study].

OBJECTIVE

To observe the effects of enhanced rehabilitation on the prognosis of critically ill patients in the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

A single-center retrospective historical controlled study was conducted, patients admitted to the ICU of Peking University First Hospital from May 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021, and from October 1, 2021, to September 30, 2022 were enrolled. According to the different rehabilitation treatment strategies during different periods, patients were divided into the conventional rehabilitation group (patients receiving conventional rehabilitation treatment from May 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021) and the enhanced rehabilitation group (patients receiving the therapy of multidisciplinary team, ie medical care-rehabilitation-nursing care from October 1, 2021, to September 30, 2022). General data, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II), and study endpoints were collected. Primary endpoints included rehabilitation-therapy rate, intervention time for rehabilitation, rehabilitation-related adverse events, and prognostic indicators such as (length of stay in hospital, length of stay in the ICU, and duration of mechanical ventilation). Secondary endpoints included incidence of deep vein thrombosis and hospital mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to analyze cumulative discharge rates within 50 days.

RESULTS

A total of 539 ICU patients were enrolled, with 245 in the conventional rehabilitation group and 294 in the enhanced rehabilitation group; 322 patients had an APACHE II score ≤ 15, while 217 patients had an APACHE II score > 15. Compared to the conventional rehabilitation group, the enhanced rehabilitation group demonstrated significantly higher rehabilitation-therapy rate [51.70% (152/294) vs. 11.43% (28/245)], earlier intervention time for rehabilitation [days: 2.00 (1.00, 3.00) vs. 4.00 (3.00, 7.00)]; shorter length of stay in hospital [days: 18.00 (12.00, 30.00) vs. 21.00 (13.00, 36.00)] and lower incidence of DVT [17.01% (50/294) vs. 24.08% (59/245)]. The differences were all statistically significant (all P < 0.05). There were no rehabilitation-related adverse events occurred in either group. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a significantly higher cumulative discharge rate within 50 days in the enhanced rehabilitation group compared to the conventional rehabilitation group [86.7% (255/294) vs. 82.9% (203/245); Log-Rank test: χ = 4.262, P = 0.039]. Subgroup analysis showed that for patients with APACHE II score ≤ 15, the enhanced rehabilitation subgroup had higher rehabilitation-therapy rate [44.32% (78/176) vs. 6.16% (9/146), P < 0.05]. For patients with APACHE II score > 15, compared to the conventional rehabilitation group, the enhanced subgroup demonstrated higher rehabilitation-therapy rate [62.71% (74/118) vs. 19.19% (19/99), P < 0.05] and shorter length of stay in hospital [days: 20.50 (12.00, 31.25) vs. 26.00 (16.00, 43.00), P < 0.05].

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced rehabilitation therapy with medical care, rehabilitation and nursing care, improved rehabilitation-therapy rate, advanced time of rehabilitation treatment, reduced length of stay in hospital and incidence of deep vein thrombosis in critically ill patients, particularly benefited those with APACHE II score > 15. The enhanced rehabilitation was beneficial to the patient in the intensive care unit with safety and worth more investigation.