Study of the intensive care unit activity scale in the early rehabilitation of patients after direct cardiac surgery

Table 1 Intensive care unit mobility scale rating scale

IMS	Activity content
Grade 0	Perform the first step, physical activity (goal; twice daily), including PROM at least 10 times daily, and train and encourage family members to perform PROM on the patient for 15–30 min, if the patient can tolerate it
Grade 1	Perform step 2 and step 3. If not tolerated, perform step 3 first and step 2 again. Step 2, elevate the head of the bed > 45° for > 1 h (goal: Twice daily). Step 3, adjust the bed to a chair position, elevate the head of the bed > 60° for > 1 h, and repeat every 2 h if tolerated by the patient
Grade 2	Perform step 4, adjusting the bed into a heart failure chair position for > 1 h, and if the patient tolerates it, repeat the above every 2 h for > 4 h at a time. Steps 2 to 4 require checking the patient’s tolerance level at least twice every 30 min
Grade 3	Perform step 5, sit at the edge of the bed (target; 20 min) or help the patient to sit at the edge of the bed with minimal assistance, this step requires at least one staff member to help the patient sit and assist the patient to move their lower limbs
Grade 4	Perform step 6, stand at the edge of the bed for > 2 min (goal; twice daily). If possible, try to walk at the edge of the bed for 10 s
Grades 5–6	Perform step 7, move the patient to sit on a chair for > 60 min (goal; 2–3 times daily) and adjust the patient’s sitting position every 1 h, if the patient is unstable during this process, support the patient to the chair with assistance and do not continue to step 8
Grades 7–10	Perform step 8, walking tolerance training (goal; 2-3 times daily), recording the distance the patient walks and assistive devices used

IMS: Intensive care unit mobility scale; PROM: Passive physical activity.

Table 2 Comparison of general demographic and clinical data of post cardiac surgery patients in the two groups

Factors	Observation	Control	χ2	P value
	n = 60	n = 60
Sex
Men	40	31	2.794	0.095
Women	20	29
Age
18–30	0	1	2.588	0.662
31–50	11	11
51–60	23	17
61–70	16	21
70 above	10	10
Occupation
Farmer	54	54	1.612	0.816
Laborer	1	3
Retired	2	1
Other	3	2
APACHE-II
1–10	16	19	3.088	0.244
11–20	37	39
21–30	7	2
Diagnosis
Heart valve disease	34	34	0	1
Coronary heart disease	18	18
Aortic dissection	8	8
Surgical procedure
Heart valve replacement + plasty	21	26	2.037	0.361
Coronary bypass	18	20
Aortic replacement + plasty	21	14

APACHE-II scores: Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Status Score II.

Table 3 Comparison of the revised pelme critical patient activity score between the two groups of postoperative cardiac patients

Group	Cases	PermeScore	Of them
			Activity upon request	Impaired mobility	Bed mobility	Underbed mobility
Observation	60	25.98 ± 0.97	7	1.1	5.8	12.1
Control	60	22.63 ± 1.08	7	1	5.35	9.2
t	-17.83
P value	P < 0.005

PermeScore: The Perme Intensive Care Unit Mobility Score.

Table 4 Comparison of rehabilitation indexes between two groups of postoperative cardiac patients (mean ± SD)

Group	Cases	Duration of mechanical ventilation (h)		Length of ICU stay (d)
observation	60	18.30 ± 3.28		4.04 ± 0.83
control	60	21.59 ± 7.93		4.66 ± 2.19
t		2.97	2.038
P value		P < 0.05	P < 0.05

ICU: Intensive care unit.

Table 5 Comparison of the incidence of complications or adverse events between the two groups of postoperative cardiac patients (cases), n (%)

Group	Cases	Number of cases	pulmonary atelectasis	arrhythmia	Poor incision healing	Pipe Slip	Total
Observation	60	2	1	1	0	0	4 (6.7)
Control	60	9	4	3	1	1	18 (30.0)
χ2	4.904
P value	P < 0.05