Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/30734
Title: Metabolic cost of physical rehabilitation in mechanically ventilated patients in critical care: an observational study
Authors: Jenkins, TO
Stieper Karbing, D
Rees, SE
Krogh Poulsen, M
Patel, BV
Polkey, MI
MacBean, V
Keywords: physical therapy modalities;critical care;oxygen consumption;respiration;artificial;rehabilitation
Issue Date: 5-Apr-2025
Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
Citation: Jenkins, T.O. et al. (2025) 'Metabolic cost of physical rehabilitation in mechanically ventilated patients in critical care: an observational study', BMJ Open Respiratory Research, 12, e002878, pp. 1 - 9. doi: 10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002878.
Abstract: Background: Physical rehabilitation is advocated to improve muscle strength and function after critical illness, yet interventional studies have reported inconsistent benefits. A greater insight into patients’ physiological response to exercise may provide an option to prescribe individualised, targeted rehabilitation, yet there is limited data measuring oxygen consumption (VO2) during physical rehabilitation. We aimed to test the feasibility of measuring VO2 during seated and standing exercise using the Beacon Caresystem and quantify within- and between-patient variability of VO2 percentage change. Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study on patients mechanically ventilated for ≥72 hours and able to participate in physical rehabilitation in critical care. Oxygen consumption was measured continuously using indirect calorimetry. A total of 29 measurements were taken from ten participants performing active sitting and standing exercise. Results: Median (IQR) first session baseline VO2 was 3.54 (2.9–3.9) mL/kg/min, increasing significantly to 4.37 (3.96–5.14) mL/kg/min during exercise (p=0.005). The median (IQR) coefficient of variation of VO2 percentage change in participants (n=7) who completed more than one rehabilitation session (range 2–7 sessions) was 43 (34–61)% in 26 measurements. The median (IQR) coefficient of variation of VO2 percentage change was 46 (26–63)% in participants performing >1 sitting exercise session (six participants, 19 sessions). Conclusions: VO2 increases significantly with exercise but is highly variable between participants, and in the same participant on separate occasions, performing the same functional activity. These data suggest that simplified measures of function do not necessarily relate to oxygen consumption.
Description: Trial registration number NCT05101850.
What is already known on this topic: ⇒ Physical rehabilitation can increase oxygen consumption in mechanically ventilated patients, yet there is a paucity of evidence exploring between- and within-patient variability of oxygen consumption change in patients undertaking the same functional activity. What this study adds: ⇒ This study shows that oxygen consumption during physical rehabilitation varies considerably within, and between, mechanically ventilated patients performing the same functional activity. How this study might affect research, practice or policy: ⇒ These data highlight that how functional measures, such as the ICU mobility scale, do not necessarily relate to exercise intensity. Formal cardiopulmonary testing and measurement of oxygen consumption may have the potential to assist with exercise prescription and categorise rehabilitation interventions in future interventional studies.
Data availability statement: Data are available on reasonable request. The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request
URI: https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/30734
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjresp-2024-002878
Other Identifiers: ORCiD: Timothy O Jenkins https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8631-0725
ORCiD: Victoria MacBean https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0268-2693
Article number e002878
Appears in Collections:Dept of Health Sciences Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdfCopyright © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. Published by BMJ Group. Re-use permitted under CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).940.32 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons