The Role of Awareness and Training Perceptions in Shaping Respiratory Therapists’ Involvement in Intensive Care Unit Early Mobilization Efforts in a Tertiary Hospital

Abstract

Background: Early mobilization in the Intensive Care Unit is a critical intervention associated with improved patient outcomes, including reduced length of stay and enhanced functional recovery. Respiratory therapists, with their expertise in ventilator management and patient airway care, are integral to facilitating EM, particularly in mechanically ventilated patients. Despite these benefits, EM implementation remains inconsistent, often due to perceived barriers such as limited staff awareness and training. This study aimed to investigate the perceptions of awareness and adequacy of training among respiratory therapists at a tertiary hospital regarding their involvement in EM initiatives within the ICU.

Methodology: A quantitative, cross-sectional design was employed using an electronically distributed, validated questionnaire adapted from Cabana et al.. The study was conducted at tertiary across all adult ICU departments. The target population included all respiratory therapists currently practicing in the ICU with a minimum of six months' experience. The instrument comprised three main sections: awareness and training, attitudes toward EM, and behavioral/institutional factors influencing EM engagement. Participants responded using Likert scales. Data were analyzed using SPSS v22, employing descriptive statistics (mean, SD, frequencies, percentages), Chi-square tests, and independent sample t-tests, with significance set at p<0.05.

Results: The majority of participating respiratory therapists were male (67.5%), with the largest proportion aged 20-29 (40.4%). Most held a Bachelor’s degree (78.1%), and a significant segment had 4-6 years of ICU experience (40.4%). Key findings indicated a high level of agreement among RTs regarding the adequacy of their training in safely mobilizing mechanically ventilated ICU patients (mean score 4.21 ± 0.68) and confidence in their ability to mobilize patients (mean score 1.75 ± 0.75, reverse-scored). There was also a strong consensus on the benefits of intensive mobilization strategies (mean score 4.40 ± 0.65). However, variability was observed in documentation practices of patient physical functioning (mean score 3.10 ± 1.00), and a notable proportion of participants perceived time constraints as a barrier to active participation in patient mobilization (mean score 3.30 ± 1.00).

Conclusion: Respiratory therapists at this tertiary hospital demonstrate strong awareness, adequate training, and confidence in their role in early mobilization. While they are crucial for successful EM, inconsistencies in documentation and perceived time constraints represent ongoing challenges. Addressing these specific barriers through standardized protocols and optimized workflow management is essential to further enhance EM implementation and improve patient outcomes in the ICU.