Background Increasing mobility in the intensive care unit is an important part of the ABCDEF bundle. Objective To examine the impact of an interdisciplinary mobility protocol in 7 specialty intensive care units that previously implemented other bundle components. Methods A staggered quality improvement project using the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses mobility protocol was conducted. In phase 1, data were collected on patients with intensive care unit stays of 24 hours or more for 2 months before and 2 months after protocol implementation. In phase 2, data were collected on a random sample of 20% of patients with an intensive care unit stay of 3 days or more for 2 months before and 12 months after protocol implementation. Results The study population consisted of 1266 patients before and 1420 patients after implementation in phase 1 and 258 patients before and 1681 patients after implementation in phase 2. In phase 1, the mean (SD) mobility level increased in all intensive care units, from 1.45 (1.03) before to 1.64 (1.03) after implementation (P < .001). Mean (SD) ICU Mobility Scale scores increased on initial evaluation from 4.4 (2.8) to 5.0 (2.8) (P = .01) and at intensive care unit discharge from 6.4 (2.5) to 6.8 (2.3) (P = .04). Complications occurred in 0.2% of patients mobilized. In phase 2, 84% of patients had out-of-bed activity after implementation. The time to achieve mobility levels 2 to 4 decreased (P = .05). Intensive care unit length of stay decreased significantly in both phases. Conclusions Implementing the American Association of Critical-Care early mobility protocol in intensive care units with ABCDEF components in place can increase mobility levels, decrease length of stay, and decrease delirium with minimal complications.

Background Removal of urinary catheters depends on accurate noninvasive measurements of bladder volume. Patients with acute kidney injury often have low bladder volumes/ascites, possibly causing measurement inaccuracy. Objective To evaluate the accuracy of bladder volumes measured with bladder scanning and 2-dimensional ultrasound (US) compared with urinary catheterization among different types of clinicians. Methods Prospective correlational descriptive study of 73 adult critical care patients with low urine output receiving hemodialysis or unable to void. Bladder volumes were independently measured by (1) a physician and an advanced practice registered nurse using US, (2) an advanced practice registered nurse and a bedside nurse using bladder scanning, and (3) urinary catheterization (cath). Bland-Altman and χ2 analyses were conducted. Results Mean (SD) cath volume was 171.7 (269.7) mL (range, 0-1100 mL). Abdominal fluid was observed in 28% of patients. Bias was −1.3 mL for US vs cath and 3.3 mL for bladder scanning vs cath. For patients with abdominal fluid and cath volume less than 150 mL, decisions to not catheterize patients were accurate more often when based on US measurements (97%-100%) than when based on bladder scanning measurements (86%-89%; P = .02). In patients with cath volume of 300 mL or more, decisions to catheterize patients were accurate more often when based on bladder scanning measurements (94%-100%) than when based on horizontal US measurements (50%-56%; P = .001). Conclusions Bladder volume can be measured accurately with bladder scanning or US, but abdominal fluid remains a confounding factor limiting accuracy of bladder scanning.

Background: Hospital fall rates have changed minimally with preventive measures; however, the effect on injury rate is unclear. Purpose: The purpose was to determine whether fall-related injuries have changed over time. Methods: A retrospective comparison was done of 1134 adult inpatient falls in 2017 to 1235 falls in 2001-2002 for injury and fall circumstances. Separate comparisons were made of patient characteristics by service line for 2017. Results: Severe fall injuries declined from 6% to 2.4%. Elimination issues remained the most common circumstance (38.9% and 42%). In 2017, malnutrition (31.6%), low function (61.4%), fall history (26.3%), and use of high-risk medications (83.2%) were common in patients who fell. Predictors of falls with injury by patient population were as follows: surgery—male gender (P = .01), low function (P = .006), elimination issues (P = .04); oncology—low function (P = .04); and neurology—low function (P = .02). Conclusions: Severe fall-related injuries have decreased in the past 15 years. The most common circumstance for falls remains elimination issues.

Background: Early mobility benefits include improved strength, decreased length of stay (LOS), and delirium. The impact of an early mobility protocol on return to activities of daily living (ADL) is less studied.Objective: The aim of this study was to examine 1-year outcomes including ADL performance after the institution of an ICU early mobility protocol.Methods: One year after the initiation of an early mobility protocol in 7 intensive care units (ICUs) at an academic medical center, patients with an ICU stay of 7 days or more were enrolled in a 1-year follow-up phone call study. Baseline demographic data included the following: average ICU mobility and highest ICU mobility level achieved (4 levels), highest ICU mobility score (10 levels) at ICU admission, ICU discharge (DC), hospital DC, LOS, and delirium positive days. At 4 time points after DC (1, 3, 6, 12 months), patients were contacted regarding current residence, employment, readmissions, and current level of ADL from the Katz ADL (scored 0-6) and Lawton instrumental ADL scales (scored 0-8).Results: A convenience sample of 106 patients was enrolled with a mean age of 58 ± 15.4 years, ICU LOS of 18 ± 11.5 days, and hospital LOS of 37.5 ± 31 days; 58 (55%) were male; 4 expired before DC.Mobility results included mean mobility level of 1.6 ± 0.8, mean highest mobility level 3.3 ± 0.9; ICU mobility score was 5.9 ± 2.4 at time of ICU DC and 7.3 ± 2.5 at hospital DC. Katz ADL scores improved from 4.8 at 1 month to 5.6 at 12 months ( P = .002), and Lawton IADL scores improved from 4.2 to 6.6 ( P < .001). Mobility scores were predictors of 1 month Katz ( P = .004) and Lawton ( P < .001) scores.None of the mobility levels or scores were predictive for readmissions. Most patients were not working before admission, and not all returned to work. Days positive for delirium were predictive of 1 month Katz and Lawton ( P = .014, .002) scores. Impact of delirium was gone by 1 year. Discussion: In this critically ill patient population followed for 1 year, ICU mobility positively impacted return to ADLs and improved ADLs over time but not readmissions. Delirium positive days decreased ADL scores, but the effect diminished over time.

Purpose: Hospitals are implementing a variety of fall prevention programs to reduce the fall rates of hospitalized patients. But if patients don't perceive themselves to be at risk for falling and don't adhere to fall prevention strategies, such programs are likely to be less effective. The purpose of this study was to describe the perceptions of fall risk among hospitalized patients across four acute care specialty services. Methods: One hundred patients who had been admitted to the study hospital and who had a Morse Fall Scale score over 45 were asked to complete the Patient Perception Questionnaire, a tool designed to explore a patient's confidence regarding their fall risk, fear of falling, and intention to engage in fall prevention activities. Morse Fall Scale scores were collected via retrospective chart review. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation coefficients, and independent sample t tests. Results: Participants' mean age was 65 years; 52% were male, 48% female. Although all 100 participants were deemed at risk for falls per their Morse Fall Scale scores, only 55% considered themselves to be at such risk. As patients' confidence in their ability to perform mobility tasks increased, their intention to ask for help and fear of falling significantly decreased. Patients who had been admitted as the result of a fall demonstrated significantly lower confidence scores and higher fear scores. Conclusions: Patients who score high on fall risk assessments often don't perceive themselves to be at high risk for falling, and thus might not engage in fall prevention activities. Developing a fall risk assessment method that incorporates both a patient's physiological condition and their perception of their fall risk could help reduce fall rates in the acute care setting.