Occupational Therapy in the ICU: A Scoping Review of 221 Documents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Occupational therapists have specialized expertise to enable people to perform meaningful "occupations" that support health, well-being, and participation in life roles. Given the physical, cognitive, and psychologic disability experienced by ICU survivors, occupational therapists could play an important role in their recovery. We conducted a scoping review to determine the state of knowledge of interventions delivered by occupational therapists in adult ICU patients. DATA SOURCES: Eight electronic databases from inception to 05/2018. STUDY SELECTION: We included reports of adult patients receiving direct patient care from an occupational therapist in the ICU, all study designs, and quantitative and qualitative traditions. DATA EXTRACTION: Independently in duplicate, interprofessional team members screened titles, abstracts, and full texts and extracted report and intervention characteristics. From original research articles, we also extracted study design, number of patients, and primary outcomes. We resolved disagreements by consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 50,700 citations, 221 reports met inclusion criteria, 74 (79%) published after 2010, and 125 (56%) appeared in critical care journals. The three most commonly reported types of interventions were mobility (81%), physical rehabilitation (61%), and activities of daily living (31%). We identified 46 unique original research studies of occupational therapy interventions; the most common study research design was before-after studies (33%). CONCLUSIONS: The role of occupational therapists in ICU rehabilitation is not currently well established. Current interventions in the ICU are dominated by physical rehabilitation with a growing role in communication and delirium prevention and care. Given the diverse needs of ICU patients and the scope of occupational therapy, there could be an opportunities for occupational therapists to expand their role and spearhead original research investigating an enriched breadth of ICU interventions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".