Turner-Stokes, L; Corner, EJ; Siegert, RJ; Brown, C; Wallace, S; Highfield, J; Bear, D; ... Puthucheary, Z; + view all Turner-Stokes, L; Corner, EJ; Siegert, RJ; Brown, C; Wallace, S; Highfield, J; Bear, D; Aitken, LM; Montgomery, H; Puthucheary, Z; - view fewer (2021) The post-ICU presentation screen (PICUPS) and rehabilitation prescription (RP) for intensive care survivors part I: Development and preliminary clinimetric evaluation. Journal of the Intensive Care Society 10.1177/1751143720988715. (In press).

Preview

Text Montgomery_The post-ICU presentation screen (PICUPS) and rehabilitation prescription (RP) for intensive care survivors part I- Development and preliminary clinimetric evaluation_AAM.pdf - Accepted Version Download (632kB) | Preview

Abstract

BANCKGROUND: Patients who have had prolonged stays in intensive care have ongoing rehabilitation needs. This is especially true of COVID-19 ICU patients, who can suffer diverse long-term ill effects. Currently there is no systematic data collection to guide the needs for therapy input for either of these groups nor to inform planning and development of rehabilitation services. These issues could be resolved in part by the systematic use of a clinical tool to support decision-making as patients progress from the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), through acute hospital care and onwards into rehabilitation. We describe (i) the development of such a tool (the Post-ICU Presentation Screen (PICUPS)) and (ii) the subsequent preparation of a person-centred Rehabilitation Prescription (RP) to travel with the patient as they continue down the care pathway. METHODS: PICUPS development was led by a core group of experienced clinicians representing the various disciplines involved in post-ICU rehabilitation. Key constructs and item-level descriptors were identified by group consensus. Piloting was performed as part of wider clinical engagement in 26 acute hospitals across England. Development and validation of such a tool requires clinimetric analysis, and this was based on classical test theory. Teams also provided feedback about the feasibility and utility of the tool. RESULTS: Initial PICUPS design yielded a 24-item tool. In piloting, a total of 552 records were collated from 314 patients, of which 121 (38.5%) had COVID-19. No obvious floor or ceiling effects were apparent. Exploratory factor analysis provided evidence of uni-dimensionality with strong loading on the first principal component accounting for 51% of the variance and Cronbach’s alpha for the full-scale score 0.95 – although a 3-factor solution accounted for a further 21%. The PICUPS was responsive to change both at full scale- and item-level. In general, positive responses were seen regarding the tool’s ability to describe the patients during their clinical course, engage and flag the relevant professionals needed, and to inform what should be included in an RP. CONCLUSIONS: The PICUPS tool has robust scaling properties as a clinical measure and is potentially useful as a tool for identifying rehabilitation needs as patients step down from ICU and acute hospital care.

Download activity - last month

Export as JSONXMLCSV

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as CSVJSONXML

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as CSVJSONXML

Archive Staff Only

View Item