Dataset Information

Actigraphy to Measure Physical Activity in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

In the intensive care unit (ICU), prolonged inactivity is common, increasing patients' risk for adverse outcomes, including ICU-acquired weakness. Hence, interventions to minimize inactivity are gaining popularity, highlighting actigraphy, a measure of activity involving a wristwatch-like accelerometer, as a method to inform these efforts. Therefore, we performed a systematic review of studies that used actigraphy to measure patient activity in the ICU setting.

Data sources

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest from inception until December 2016.

Study selection

Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion. A study was eligible for inclusion if it was published in a peer-reviewed journal and used actigraphy to measure activity in ≥5 ICU patients.

Data extraction

Two reviewers independently performed data abstraction and risk of bias assessment. Abstracted actigraphy-based activity data included total activity time and activity counts.

Results

Of 16 studies (607 ICU patients) identified, 14 (88%) were observational, 2 (12%) were randomized control trials, and 5 (31%) were published after 2009. Mean patient activity levels per 15 to 60 second epoch ranged from 25 to 37 daytime and 2 to 19 nighttime movements. Actigraphy was evaluated in the context of ICU and post-ICU outcomes in 11 (69%) and 5 (31%) studies, respectively, and demonstrated potential associations between actigraphy-based activity levels and delirium, sedation, pain, anxiety, time to extubation, and length of stay.

Conclusion

Actigraphy has demonstrated that patients are profoundly inactive in the ICU with actigraphy-based activity levels potentially associated with important measures, such as delirium, sedation, and length of stay. Larger and more rigorous studies are needed to further evaluate these associations and the overall utility of actigraphy in the ICU setting.

SUBMITTER: Schwab KE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7449762 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:RationalePoor sleep quality is common in the intensive care unit (ICU) and may be associated with adverse outcomes. Hence, ICU-based efforts to promote sleep are gaining attention, motivating interest in methods to measure sleep in critically ill patients. Actigraphy evaluates rest and activity by algorithmically processing gross motor activity data, usually collected by a noninvasive wristwatch-like accelerometer device. In critically ill patients, actigraphy has been used as a surrogate measure of sleep; however, its use has not been systematically reviewed.ObjectivesTo conduct a systematic review of ICU-based studies that used actigraphy as a surrogate measure of sleep, including its feasibility, validity, and reliability as a measure of sleep in critically ill patients.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Proquest, and Web of Science for studies that used actigraphy to evaluate sleep in five or more patients in an ICU setting.ResultsOur search yielded 4,869 citations, with 13 studies meeting eligibility criteria. These 13 studies were conducted in 10 countries, and eight (62%) were published since 2008. Across the 13 studies, the mean total sleep time of patients in the ICU, as estimated using actigraphy, ranged from 4.4 to 7.8 hours at nighttime and from 7.1 to 12.1 hours over a 24-hour period, with 1.4 to 49.0 mean nocturnal awakenings and a sleep efficiency of 61 to 75%. When compared side-by-side with other measures of sleep (polysomnography, nurse assessments, and patient questionnaires), actigraphy consistently yielded higher total sleep time and sleep efficiency, fewer nighttime awakenings (vs. polysomnography), and more overall awakenings (vs. nurse assessment and patient questionnaires). None of the studies evaluated the association between actigraphy-based measures of sleep and outcomes of patients in the ICU.ConclusionsIn critically ill patients, actigraphy is being used more frequently as a surrogate measure of sleep; however, because actigraphy only measures gross motor activity, its ability to estimate sleep is limited by the processing algorithm used. Prior ICU-based studies involving actigraphy were heterogeneous and lacked data regarding actigraphy-based measures of sleep and patient outcomes. Larger, more rigorous and standardized studies are needed to better understand the role of actigraphy in evaluating sleep and sleep-related outcomes in critically ill patients.

Project description:Strained intensive care unit (ICU) capacity represents a fundamental supply-demand mismatch in ICU resources. Strain is likely to be influenced by a range of factors; however, there has been no systematic evaluation of the spectrum of measures that may indicate strain on ICU capacity.We performed a systematic review to identify indicators of strained capacity. A comprehensive peer-reviewed search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science Core Collection was performed along with selected grey literature sources. We included studies published in English after 1990. We included studies that: (1) focused on ICU settings; (2) included description of a quality or performance measure; and (3) described strained capacity. Retrieved studies were screened, selected and extracted in duplicate. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). Analysis was descriptive.Of 5297 studies identified in our search; 51 fulfilled eligibility. Most were cohort studies (n = 39; 76.5%), five (9.8%) were case-control, three (5.8%) were cross-sectional, two (3.9%) were modeling studies, one (2%) was a correlational study, and one (2%) was a quality improvement project. Most observational studies were high quality. Sixteen measures designed to indicate strain were identified 110 times, and classified as structure (n = 4, 25%), process (n = 7, 44%) and outcome (n = 5, 31%) indicators, respectively. The most commonly identified indicators of strain were ICU acuity (n = 21; 19.1% [process]), ICU readmission (n = 18; 16.4% [outcome]), after-hours discharge (n = 15; 13.6% [process]) and ICU census (n = 13; 11.8% [structure]). There was substantial heterogeneity in the operational definitions used to define strain indicators across studies.We identified and characterized 16 indicators of strained ICU capacity across the spectrum of healthcare quality domains. Future work should aim to evaluate their implementation into practice and assess their value for evaluating strategies to mitigate strain.This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (March 27, 2015; CRD42015017931 ).

Project description:Patients in the ICU often sleep poorly for various reasons, which may predispose to delirium. We previously conducted a clinical trial in which we tested the efficacy of ramelteon, a melatonin-receptor agonist used to treat insomnia, versus placebo, in preventing ICU delirium in patients who underwent elective pulmonary thromboendarterectomy (PTE) surgery. Here we examine sleep, activity, and circadian patterns, measured with actigraphy, to understand changes in these metrics with our intervention and in those with and without delirium. Participants wore wrist actigraphy devices while recovering post-operatively in the ICU. For sleep analysis, we extracted total sleep time and sleep fragmentation metrics over the 22:00 to 06:00 period nightly, and daytime nap duration from the daytime period (0:600 to 22:00) for each participant. For activity analyses, we extracted the following metrics: total daytime activity count (AC), maximum daytime AC, total nighttime AC, and maximum nighttime AC. Next, we performed a nonparametric circadian analysis on ACs over each 24-h day and extracted the following: interdaily stability (IS), intra-daily variability (IV), relative amplitude (RA), and low and high periods of activity (L5 and M10) as well as their start times. These metrics were compared between patients who received ramelteon versus placebo, and between patients who became delirious versus those who did not develop delirium. We additionally made comparisons between groups for daytime and nighttime light levels. No differences in sleep, activity, circadian metrics or light levels were found between drug groups. Delirious patients, when compared to those who were never delirious, had a lower IS (0.35 ± 0.16 vs. 0.47 ± 0.23; P = 0.006). Otherewise, no differences in IV, L5, M10, or RA were found between groups. L5 and M10 activity values increased significantly over the post-extubation for the whole cohort. No differences were found for daytime or nighttime light levels between groups. Overall, ramelteon did not impact sleep or circadian metrics in this cohort. Consistent with clinical experience, delirious patients had less inter-daily stability in their rest-activity rhythms. These data suggest that actigraphy might have value for individual assessment of sleep in the ICU, and for determining and detecting the impact of interventions directed at improving sleep and circadian activity rhythms in the ICU.Trial registration: REGISTERED at CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT02691013. Registered on February 24, 2016 by principal investigator, Dr. Robert L. Owens.

Project description:BackgroundPhysical rehabilitation (PR) interventions in the intensive care unit (ICU) can improve patients' functional outcomes, yet systematic reviews identified discordant effects and poor reporting. We conducted a scoping review to determine the extent of ICU PR interventions and how they were reported and measured.MethodsWe searched five databases from inception to December 2016 for prospective studies evaluating adult ICU PR interventions. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts for inclusion. We assessed completeness of reporting using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology, or Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence guidelines, as appropriate. For planned PR interventions, we evaluated reporting with the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) and assessed intervention and control groups separately. We calculated completeness of reporting scores for each study; scores represented the proportion of reported items. We compared reporting between groups using Kruskal-Wallis with Bonferroni corrections and t tests, α = 0.05.ResultsWe screened 61,774 unique citations, reviewed 1429 full-text publications, and included 117: 39 randomized trials, 30 case series, 9 two-group comparison, 14 before-after, and 25 cohort. Interventions included neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) (14.5%), passive/active exercises (15.4%), cycling (6.8%), progressive mobility (32.5%), and multicomponent (29.9%). The median (first,third quartiles) study reporting score was 75.9% (62.5, 86.7) with no significant differences between reporting guidelines. Of 87 planned intervention studies, the median CERT score was 55.6%(44.7,75.0); cycling had the highest (85.0%(62.2,93.8)), and NMES and multicomponent the lowest (50.0% (39.5, 70.3) and 50.0% (41.5, 58.8), respectively) scores. Authors reported intervention groups better than controls (p < 0.001).ConclusionsWe identified important reporting deficiencies in ICU PR interventions, limiting clinical implementation and future trial development.