Effectiveness, Safety, and Barriers to Early Mobilization in the Intensive Care Unit

Table 4

Outcome measures for assessing the effectiveness of early mobilization on mobility in the intensive care unit.

Author (year)	Outcome measure	No. of items	Total score	Psychometric properties
Tipping et al. [53] (2016)	ICU Mobility Scale	11	0–10	Valid; Responsive; Acceptable floor and the ceiling effect
Perme et al. [52] (2014); Kawaguchi et al. [54] (2016)	Perme ICU Mobility Score	15	0–32; Higher score—few potential mobility restrictions and decreased assistance; Lower score—more potential restrictions to mobility and more assistance needed for mobility	Valid; High reliability (α > 0.90)
Corner et al. [55] (2014)	Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment tool	10	0–50	Valid; Limited floor and the ceiling effect
Denehy et al. [56] (2013)	Interval scores; Physical Function ICU Test (PFIT-s)	4	0–12	Valid; MCID = 1.5points (on interval of 10)
Thrush et al. [57] (2012); Huang et al. [58] (2016)	Functional status score for intensive care unit (FSS-ICU)	5	0–35; Higher the score, better the physical functioning	Valid; Responsive; Good internal consistency; MCID = 2–5
Kasotakis et al. [59] (2012)	Surgical intensive care unit optimal mobility score (SOMS)	5	0–4; Higher the score, better the mobility	Valid; Reliable