MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090797859 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000004580

Barriers and Facilitators to Early Rehabilitation in the ICU: A Theory Driven Delphi Study

2020· article· en· W3090797859 on OpenAlexafffund
Brian H. Cuthbertson, Shannon L. Goddard, Fabiana Lorencatto, Ellen H. Koo, Louise Rose, Eddy Fan, Michelle E. Kho, Dale M. Needham, Gordon D. Rubenfeld, Jill Francis

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreToronto East General HospitalMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineDelphi methodRehabilitationPsychological interventionIntensive careNursingRelevance (law)Family medicineClinical psychologyPhysical therapyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: There is conflicting evidence for the effectiveness of early rehabilitation in the intensive care and marked variation in rates of implementation in practice. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to early rehabilitation in mechanically ventilated patients and their relevance to practice, as perceived by key ICU clinicians across North America. DESIGN: A Delphi study using the Theoretical Domains Framework, consisting of an initial qualitative round and subsequent quantitative rounds, was conducted to gather clinician agreement and perceived importance of barriers and facilitators to early rehabilitation. The survey included questions on the range of individual, sociocultural, and broader organizational influence on behaviors. SETTING: Clinical practice in North America. SUBJECTS: Four clinician groups (intensive care physicians, nurses, therapists, and respiratory therapists). INTERVENTIONS: A three-round Delphi study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Fifty of 74 (67%) of invited clinicians completed the study. Agreement and consensus with Delphi survey items were high in both rounds within and between professional groups. Agreement was highest for items related to the domain "Beliefs about Consequences" (e.g., mortality reduction) and lowest for items related to the domain "Behavioral Regulation" (e.g., team discussion of barriers). Beliefs expressed about improved mortality and improvements in a variety of other long-term outcomes were not consistent with the current evidence base. Individual agreement scores changed very little from Round 2 to Round 3 of the Delphi, suggesting stability of beliefs and existing consensus. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified a wide range of beliefs about early rehabilitation that may influence provider behavior and the success and appropriateness of further implementation. The apparent inconsistency between the optimism of stakeholders regarding mortality reductions and a low level of implementation reported elsewhere represent the most major challenge to future implementation success. Other foci for future implementation work include planning, barriers, feedback, and education of staff.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.118
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.118
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207