Person: González Seguel, Felipe
Loading...
Email Address
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
Last Name
González Seguel
First Name
Felipe
Name
Felipe Andrés González Seguel
2 results
¿Qué estás buscando?
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Publication Daily compliance of the ABCDEF liberation bundle for patients in the intensive care unit: A retrospective descriptive study(2024) Muñoz, Felipe; Leppe Zamora, Jaime; González Seguel, Felipe; Castro-Avila, Ana CristinaIntroduction Implementing the ABCDEF bundle has demonstrated improved outcomes in patients with critical illness. This study aims to describe the daily compliance of the ABCDEF bundle in a Chilean intensive care unit. Methods Retrospective observational study of electronic clinical records of nursing, physiotherapy, and medical professionals who cared for patients over 18 years of age, admitted to an intensive care unit for at least 24 hours, with or without mechanical ventilation. Daily bundle compliance was determined by considering the daily records for each element: Assess pain (element A), both spontaneous awakening trials (element B1) and spontaneous breathing trials (element B2), choice of sedation (element C), delirium assessment (element D), early mobilization (element E), and family engagement (element F). Results 4165 registered bundle elements were obtained from nursing (47%), physiotherapy (44%), and physicians (7%), including 1134 patient/days (from 133 patients). Elements E and C showed 67 and 40% compliance, while D, A, and B2 showed 24, 14 and 11%, respectively. For B1 and F, 0% compliance was achieved. Compliance was higher in patients without mechanical ventilation for A and E, while it was similar for D. Conclusions Early mobilization had the highest compliance, while spontaneous awakening trials and family engagement had absolute non-compliance. Future studies should explore the reasons for the different degrees of compliance per bundle element in clinical practice.Publication Early Mobilization Dose Reporting in Randomized Clinical Trials With Patients Who Were Mechanically Ventilated: A Scoping Review(2024) González Seguel, Felipe; Letelier, RenatoObjective: The aim of this scoping review was to investigate the mobilization dose reporting in the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of patients receiving mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit. Methods: In this scoping review, RCTs published from inception to December 2022 were searched in relevant electronic databases. Trials that involved adults receiving mechanical ventilation (>48 hours) and any early mobilization modality were analyzed. Two independent authors screened, selected, and extracted data. The mobilization doses of the intervention groups (IGs) and the comparator groups (CGs) were assessed as the proportion of reported items/total applicable from the main items of the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT). Results: Twenty-three RCTs comprising 2707 patients (1358 from IG and 1349 from CG) were included, involving studies on neuromuscular electrical stimulation (n = 7), progressive mobility (n = 6), leg cycling (n = 3), tilt table (n = 1), and multicomponent (n = 6) mobilization. The pooled reporting of CERT items was 68% (86% for IG and 50% for CG). The most reported CERT items were type of exercise (100%) and weekly frequency (100%) for IG, whereas the least reported were intensity (4%) and individualization (22%) for CG. Regardless of the group, individualization, progression, and intensity of mobilization were the least reported items. Eight IGs (35%) reported all CERT items, whereas no CGs reported all of them. Conclusions: Deficits in mobilization dose reporting of intensive care unit RCTs were identified, especially for exercise intensity in adults receiving mechanical ventilation. One-third of IG reported all exercise dosing items, whereas no CG reported all of them. Future studies should investigate the details of optimal dosage reporting, particularly for CG. Impact: The lack of dose reporting may partially explain the inconsistency in the meta-analysis results of early mobilization trials, thus limiting the interpretation for clinical practice in the intensive care unit.