MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389082702 · doi:10.5014/ajot.2023.050230

Efficacy of Early Enhanced Occupational Therapy in an Intensive Care Unit (EFFORT–ICU): A Single-Site Feasibility Trial

2023· article· en· W4389082702 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrea Rapolthy‐Beck, Jennifer Fleming, Merrill Turpin, Kellie Sosnowski, Simone Dullaway, Hayden White

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOccupational therapyPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialIntensive care unitHospital Anxiety and Depression ScaleActivities of daily livingIntensive careRandomizationAnxietyIntensive care medicineSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: This research trial contributes to the evidence for occupational therapy service delivery in intensive care settings. OBJECTIVE: To explore the feasibility of a trial to evaluate the impact of early enhanced occupational therapy on mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care. DESIGN: Single-site assessor-blinded randomized controlled feasibility trial. SETTING: Level 5 8-bed adult medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) at Logan Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 30 mechanically ventilated patients randomly allocated to two groups. OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We compared standard care with enhanced occupational therapy with outcomes measured at discharge from the ICU, hospital discharge, and 90 days post randomization. The primary outcome measure was the FIM®. Secondary outcomes included the Modified Barthel Index (MBI); Montreal Cognitive Assessment; grip strength, measured using a dynamometer; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (Version 2). The intervention group received daily occupational therapy, including cognitive stimulation, upper limb retraining, and activities of daily living. Data were analyzed using independent groups t tests and effect sizes. RESULTS: Measures and procedures were feasible. A significant difference was found between groups on FIM Motor score at 90 days with a large effect size (p = .05, d = 0.76), and MBI scores for the intervention group approached significance (p = .051) with a large effect size (d = 0.75) at 90 days. Further moderate to large effect sizes were obtained for the intervention group for cognitive status, functional ability, and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This trial demonstrated that occupational therapy is feasible and beneficial in the ICU. Criteria to progress to a full-scale randomized controlled trial were met. This study contributes to embedding ongoing consistency of practice and scope of service delivery for occupational therapy in this field. What This Article Adds: Occupational therapists should be considered core team members in the critical care-ICU, with funding to support ongoing service provision and optimization of patient outcomes based on effective and feasible service delivery.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207