by Recovery Force Health | Mar 10, 2025 | Insight
Venous thromboembolism (VTE), encompassing deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a significant health concern for hospitalized patients, with an estimated annual rate of 350,000 to 600,000 cases in the United States¹. It is a leading cause of preventable hospital death and one of the most frequent reasons for hospital readmissions following surgery.
As a result, VTE prevention is considered one of the most critical interventions that directly affects patient safety and the overall cost of care². Even though as many as 70% of healthcare-associated VTE cases are preventable, fewer than half of hospitalized patients receive preventative measures³.
This blog explores the dual approach to VTE prevention, focusing on the role of pharmacological and mechanical prophylaxis and when to use each based on established clinical guidelines, studies, and risk stratifications.
Understanding VTE Prevention Strategies
VTE prevention strategies are typically divided into two main categories:
- Pharmacological prophylaxis: The use of anticoagulant medications to inhibit blood clotting.
- Mechanical prophylaxis: Using techniques to promote blood flow, such as intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices and early ambulation strategies.
Pharmacological Prophylaxis
Pharmacological prophylaxis is effective and appropriate for patients at high risk of developing a blood clot but also carries the potential for bleeding complications. This may make them less suitable for patients at moderate or low risk for clotting issues.
Bleeding risk varies with individual patient factors, such as age, bleeding history, kidney function, and the specific medication used.
Mechanical Prophylaxis
Mechanical prophylaxis is an integral part of VTE prevention, and unlike anticoagulant medications/blood thinners, mechanical methods decrease the risk of blood clots without increasing bleeding risk. It is also beneficial when pharmacological options are contraindicated, such as in patients with a high bleeding risk or in lower-risk patients who may not need anticoagulant medication. Intermittent Pneumatic Compression (IPCs) devices are a widely accepted method for preventing DVTs.
The Benefits of Combination Therapy
Mechanical prophylaxis is regularly recommended for use in combination with pharmacologic prophylaxis to reduce the incidence of VTE, particularly in surgical patients. Clinical guidelines such as the Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses (AORN) Guideline for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism recommend tailoring prophylaxis based on risk levels, supporting combined approaches in high-risk groups.
These guidelines recommend that VTE protocols be evidence-based and include a standardized VTE risk assessment tool, such as the Caprini Risk Assessment Model, a widely used and extensively validated tool for evaluating VTE risk. Furthermore, AORN guidelines recommend clinical decision support for evidence-based VTE prophylaxis based on the level of risk and bleeding at critical phases of care.
For example, AORN guidelines support the use of mechanical prophylaxis with IPC over no prophylaxis; they also support the use of mechanical prophylaxis with IPC over pharmacology prophylaxis alone in surgery patients at risk for VTE. Additional research from the American Society of Hematology guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism states that mechanical methods may be preferred over pharmacological prophylaxis for patients considered at high risk of bleeding. For those considered at high risk for VTE, combined prophylaxis is preferred over mechanical or pharmacological prophylaxis alone.
The chart below illustrates that mechanical prophylaxis is recommended across nearly every risk category for patients with average and high bleeding risk.
Figure 2. Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Prophylaxis Based on VTE Risk and Bleeding Risk
Source: AORN Guideline for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism
Additionally, key recommendations outlined in the AORN guidelines include:
- Use portable, battery-operated mobile compression devices to increase patient compliance and mobility.
- Ensure IPC devices can record wear time to monitor adherence.
- Encourage early and frequent ambulation or mobilization as a postoperative intervention to prevent VTE.
Exploring Directions for Continued Improvement
A dual approach to VTE prevention, combining pharmacological and mechanical prophylaxis, offers a comprehensive strategy for reducing the risk of VTE in hospitalized patients. By understanding the benefits and limitations of each approach and tailoring prophylaxis based on individual risk factors, healthcare providers can optimize patient outcomes and reduce the burden of VTE.
However, despite the benefits of mechanical prophylaxis, traditional IPC devices have limitations, often leading staff to opt for pharmacological approaches even in mid-to-low-risk patients who may not require medication. Our next blog explores why traditional IPC devices might lead to low compliance and examines potential strategies to reduce reliance on pharmacological approaches and enhance patient outcomes.
by Recovery Force Health | Feb 4, 2025 | Insight
Hospital-acquired immobility, a condition resulting from a lack of mobility and physical function due to prolonged bed rest during a hospital stay, is a growing concern in healthcare. Hospital-acquired immobility has significant implications, including:
- Reduced patient satisfaction and experience
- Higher rates of complications, such as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism
- Increased healthcare costs due to extended hospital stays, medical interventions, and rehabilitation services
To mitigate the effects of hospital-acquired immobility, it is crucial to prioritize patient mobilization early and consistently. Not only does this practice enhance patient outcomes, but it also reduces the risk of complications, such as deep vein thrombosis (DVT).
When patients remain immobile for extended periods, such as after surgery or during bed rest, blood flow in the veins can slow or become obstructed. A DVT, a blood clot forming in the leg, poses a serious risk; if it dislodges and travels to the lungs, it can lead to a pulmonary embolism. Together, these conditions are referred to as venous thromboembolism (VTE). Approximately 1 out of 10 deaths are related to blood clots, making them the leading cause of preventable hospital death.
Healthcare professionals can proactively combat hospital-acquired immobility and its associated complications by establishing early and progressive mobilization protocols. Beyond simply ambulating, patients benefit from periodic changes in position, such as turning in bed, sitting in bed, dangling their legs at the side of the bed, and getting to the chair. These interventions collectively contribute to improved patient outcomes.
Implementing Data-Driven Approaches in DVT Prevention
Mechanical prophylaxis, such as intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices, is a widely accepted therapeutic method for preventing DVTs. However, these devices can pose significant barriers to mobility due to cumbersome tubes and cords that tether the patient to their bed. Compliance with mechanical prophylaxis is also a notable challenge, with reported adherence to IPC devices as low as 40%.
A straightforward approach to enhancing early mobilization efforts is to focus on practical ways to remove obstacles of IPC devices. One effective solution is to minimize the number of lines, tubes, and cords by using a cordless, tubeless wearable therapeutic compression device, such as the Movement and Compressions (MAC) System.
The MAC System is also the world’s first wearable therapeutic compression device that measures and tracks patient mobility data. Accessibility to meaningful, actionable patient insights empowers bedside caregivers with the critical metrics needed to support the execution of in-hospital mobility and adherence to the recommended 18-22 hours of DVT prophylaxis—transforming how healthcare providers address hospital-acquired immobility.
Furthermore, with accessibility to data they’ve never had before, healthcare providers can make more informed decisions. Leveraging these insights allows hospitals to enhance their prevention protocols, reduce complications from hospital-acquired immobility, and ultimately improve patient outcomes while streamlining hospital operations and lowering healthcare costs.
Clinical Validation: Studies and Outcomes
A study published in an international, peer-reviewed trauma nursing journal aimed to determine whether using the MAC System compared with an IPC device impacts compliance with mechanical VTE prophylaxis in trauma patients. The results obtained from the study concluded that the absence of cords and tubes with the MAC System promotes safe mobility. This significantly influenced compliance and enabled patients to be mobilized safely without the need to unplug/re-plug the device.
Patients who wore the MAC System exhibited considerably more time upright than patients using the current standard of care IPC. The difference was attributed to the MAC System’s ability to provide real-time mobility data on the patient’s upright time, walking time, and the number of steps taken.
Another comparative study published in the American Journal of Nursing highlighted the potential of the MAC System. Among the key findings, it was noted that the MAC System’s data-driven approach enhanced clinical usability for nurses, with accurate documentation of patient mobility levels. The study further stated that “patients were more satisfied with the mobility assistance provided by the MAC System than with the standard IPC device. Given the strong data supporting the importance of mobility in hospitalized patients, this is a clinically relevant finding.”
Conclusion
Hospital-acquired immobility is a significant concern in healthcare, but data-driven approaches offer effective strategies to mitigate its impact. By utilizing technologies such as the MAC System healthcare providers can:
- Receive actionable insights around patient wear time and mobility
- Optimize patient outcomes by improving the overall quality of care
- Reduce healthcare costs from other hospital-acquired conditions
As the healthcare industry increasingly embraces preventative care, prioritizing patient mobilization alongside data-driven decision-making will help combat hospital-acquired immobility and improve patient care.
by Recovery Force Health | Jan 23, 2025 | Insight
Did you know that extended immobility can lead to a range of serious complications, including muscle atrophy, joint stiffness, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pressure ulcers, and longer recovery times? Check out our latest infographic to learn more about the costs of this condition and how RF Health is breaking down barriers and driving change in healthcare.
by Recovery Force Health | Nov 19, 2024 | Insight
Pressure injuries in the sacral region are a pervasive and preventable challenge in U.S. hospitals, representing the single largest contributor to avoidable complications and posing an urgent call to action in patient care. Despite efforts to prevent them, hospital-acquired sacral pressure injuries continue to result in morbidity, mortality, and associated increased healthcare costs.
Aside from the high cost of treatment, sacral pressure injuries (SPIs) significantly impact a patient’s quality of life. The development of sacral pressure injuries can interfere with the patient’s functional recovery, increase the risk of pain and infection, and contribute to extended hospital stays and negative patient experiences.
Sacral pressure injury prevention efforts also affect healthcare workers, particularly when boosting and repositioning patients. The cumulative weight a healthcare worker may have to lift within an 8-hour shift is equivalent to 1.8 tons. Consequently, transferring, lifting, boosting, and repositioning patients is the leading cause of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in healthcare.
What Causes a Sacral Pressure Injury?
A sacral pressure injury, also known as a sacral pressure ulcer or bedsore, is damage to the skin and/or underlying tissue over the sacrum—the triangular-shaped bone at the base of the spine that connects the pelvis to the lower body—as a result of prolonged pressure.
Patients are at higher risk for developing a sacral pressure injury when they are unable to easily change position while in bed or if their Braden Score is 18 or less (the Braden Scale is a risk assessment tool that identifies patients at high risk for developing pressure injuries).
The primary contributing factors for these types of injuries are:
- Pressure: Continuous pressure on the sacrum due to not regularly changing position while sitting or lying down.
- Friction: Skin rubbing against bedding or clothing creates irritation and potential breakdown. This can make fragile skin in the sacral region more vulnerable to injury.
- Shear: This occurs when two surfaces move in opposite directions. For example, a person can slide down when a bed is raised. In sacral pressure injuries, as the tailbone moves down, the skin over it might stay in place, pulling in the opposite direction.
Why The Current Standard of Care is Failing Patients and Healthcare Workers
Most sacral pressure injuries are preventable through interventions by healthcare workers, caregivers, and patients. Frequent turning and repositioning is a common strategy to reduce sacral pressure injuries (and other pressure-related injuries) among hospitalized patients.
This helps to redistribute and relieve pressure from at-risk areas and enhance blood flow in the affected region. Most clinical guidelines recommend a substantial change in the patient’s position every 2 hours, often referred to as the Q2 Turning Protocol.
The National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP) also created guidelines, including a Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol (S-PIPP) checklist for daily assessment, including the following methods to redistribute pressure:
- Use high-specification reactive foam for immobile persons
- Use positioning aids that minimize friction/shear (pillows, wedges)
- Provide a 30-degree turn off of the sacrum, confirm that the sacrum is offloaded with the hand
- Implement an early mobilization program
While these guidelines provide an effective strategy to prevent sacral pressure injuries, success is compromised by the limitations of current Q2 methods for turning and positioning. For example, the standard practice in many facilities involves manually repositioning patients using pillows propped behind them to provide support during turns and maintaining alignment afterward. The primary issue is that a pillow does not typically maintain its shape and will flatten over time. As a result, the patient is not supported in a proper position to relieve pressure. Furthermore, findings suggest that standard pillow turns are not maintained over time, resulting in patients lying on their backs rather than in a position that offloads pressure.
There are also commercially available assistive devices to aid with turning and repositioning, including patient positioning aids such as foam wedges. Unfortunately, current patient positioners fall short by:
- Failing to maintain the recommended 30° tilt position because the patient sinks in (reducing the degree of tilt position) or the positioner slides out of the recommended area
- Offering insufficient support, leading to patient discomfort and noncompliance
- Containing hard, unforgiving materials that can exacerbate pressure injuries
Furthermore, traditional foam wedges also typically require additional aids, such as a glide/repositioning sheet, to help move the patient back into place.
Performance of Support Surfaces: Immersion and Envelopment
Extensive literature supports the significance of load distribution on pressure injury risk. According to the NPIAP, immersion and envelopment are both needed for effective pressure redistribution. Immersion refers to the ability of a surface to distribute body weight by allowing a user to sink into the mattress. Envelopment is the ability of the support surface to conform to the shape of the body as it sinks in. Higher envelopment is characterized by lower, more uniform weight distribution with a high contact area. Unfortunately, commonly used support surfaces are not designed to manage pressure injury risk through immersion and envelopment.
New Advancements in Sacral Pressure Injury Prevention
A new patient positioner technology is designed to effectively offload the sacrum and seamlessly contour the body to reduce boosting while enhancing patient comfort and compliance. Offering an extra 10° of comfort, the patient starts at 40° and holds at 30°, ensuring effective sacral offloading.
These patient positioners, RF Health’s ELEVATE™, address the shortcomings of the current standard of care foam wedges. ELEVATE is the only Q2 positioner currently available that immerses and envelopes a patient to increase pressure redistribution over the largest area possible. ELEVATE’s Envelopment Technology™ allows the positioner to contour to the patient’s body for optimal bodyweight pressure distribution, so the patient stays in place at the NPIAP recommended 30º. This collectively increases the total surface area over which the body weight is distributed, reducing contact pressures.
The benefits of this technology include:
- Improved sacral offloading, reducing pressure injury risk
- Reduced risk of work-related injuries for healthcare workers
- Reduced boosting and repositioning needs
- Enhanced patient comfort and compliance
A Note About Mobility: A Critical Factor in Sacral Pressure Injury Prevention
Hospital-acquired immobility, a condition resulting from a lack of mobility and physical function due to prolonged bed rest during a hospital stay, is another significant contributor to sacral pressure injury development. Early mobilization programs and Q2 turning protocols are crucial to prevent the onset of hospital-acquired immobility and related complications.
In early mobilization programs, patients benefit from periodic changes in position, such as turning or sitting up in bed. Modern patient positioners such as ELEVATE help support critical early mobilization efforts by encouraging patient mobility and movement -providing stable, comfortable support for patients.
Conclusion
Sacral pressure injuries are a persistent yet preventable healthcare challenge. As the healthcare community continues to grapple with the complexities of sacral pressure injury prevention, it’s clear that a new approach is needed. By addressing the limitations of the current standard of care— pillows or foam wedges—and prioritizing comfort, mobility, and proper sacral offloading, innovations such as ELEVATE can help significantly reduce the risk of sacral pressure injuries, improve patient outcomes, and alleviate the strain on healthcare workers.
by Recovery Force Health | Nov 4, 2024 | Insight
Hospital-acquired immobility, a condition resulting from a lack of mobility and physical function due to prolonged bed rest during a hospital stay, is an increasingly serious issue in healthcare that can have far-reaching consequences for patients, healthcare providers, and the broader healthcare system.
Patients can experience a functional decline and deconditioning from baseline mobility as early as the second day of hospitalization. The resulting conditions of hospital-acquired immobility can lead to costly medical interventions, extended length of stay, longer recovery times, and hospital readmissions, ultimately increasing healthcare costs.
Hospital Capacity and Access
One of the most pressing concerns for hospital administrators is access to care, hindered by capacity constraints. Inefficient processes often lead to prolonged lengths of stay, resulting in significant costs—averaging $3,167 per day for nonprofit hospitals in the US, with higher costs incurred for more intensive care. Hospital-acquired immobility can be a key contributor to prolonged length of stay as it can lead to complications for patients such as deep vein thrombosis, muscle atrophy, pressure ulcers, and more—all of which can lengthen the time patients need to recover fully and, in turn, extend their stay in the hospital. This can have downstream effects that lower capacity and the inability to admit new patients in a timely manner.
While building new hospitals is one solution, optimizing efficiency at existing facilities and mobilizing patients to reduce the length of stay can also significantly expand capacity and access.
Even a modest reduction in the average length of stay—by just a fraction of a day—can free up capacity for thousands of additional patients annually.
The Broader Economic Impact
Hospital-acquired immobility can also lead to:
Legal and Liability Costs: Hospitals and healthcare providers may face medical malpractice and legal claims if patients develop preventable conditions due to hospital-acquired immobility. The costs of medical malpractice claims and potential settlements or judgments can be substantial. Beyond financial costs, hospitals may suffer reputational damage, which can erode patient trust and future revenue.
Chronic Conditions: Patients may develop long-term complications which require ongoing treatment and increase overall healthcare costs. Furthermore, the complications can result in a decreased quality of life for patients, leading to additional healthcare needs and expenses related to managing long-term health issues.
Hospital Readmissions: Low mobility is closely linked to hospital readmissions, which are costly and can result in financial penalties under certain healthcare payment models.
Systemic Costs: On a larger scale, hospital-acquired immobility can lead to significant financial burdens on healthcare systems, as preventable conditions contribute to higher healthcare costs, reduced workforce productivity, and increased insurance premiums.
Exploratory Scenario: Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) as a Result of Hospital-Acquired Immobility
The increased risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) serves as a strong example to illustrate the significant economic impact of hospital-acquired immobility. When a patient is immobile for an extended time, such as after surgery or while on bed rest in the hospital, blood flow in the veins can slow down or become blocked. A DVT is a blood clot that forms in the leg. If the blood clot breaks loose and travels to the lungs, it results in a pulmonary embolism (PE). Together, they are known as venous thromboembolism. In the hospital setting, roughly 1 out of 10 deaths are related to blood clots, making them the leading cause of preventable hospital death.
Mechanical prophylaxis, such as intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices, are a widely accepted method and prescription for preventing DVT. However, compliance with mechanical prophylaxis devices is a significant issue, particularly with IPCs, where adherence as low as 40% has been reported. Non-compliance with mechanical prophylaxis leads to a higher incidence of DVT and costly medical interventions.
Multiple studies have identified reasons for non-compliance, including discomfort associated with wrapping a non-breathable air bladder around the leg. Another part of the problem is the multiple cords and tubes connected to mechanical prophylaxis devices, which hinder patient mobility by tethering them to the bed. This creates a reluctance to mobilize for both the healthcare worker and the patient. Furthermore, if the IPC Sleeves are removed for patient mobilization, they are not always reapplied in a timely manner.
The cost of patients’ non-compliance with mechanical prophylaxis devices can be significant; preventable DVT alone costs an estimated $2.5B annually, with each case resulting in a direct hospital cost of $17,367.
Reducing Costs by Prioritizing Early Mobilization to Prevent Hospital-Acquired Immobility
Early and progressive mobilization is crucial for preventing hospital-acquired immobility. By initiating an early mobilization protocol, healthcare workers can take proactive steps to prevent the onset of hospital-acquired immobility and other related complications.
Early mobilization encompasses more than just ambulating; in addition to walking, patients benefit from periodic changes in position, such as turning or sitting up in bed, dangling at the side of the bed, and moving to the chair. Research has shown that this early mobilization effort is associated with improved functional outcomes, reduced hospital costs and readmission risk, and decreased length of stay.
A straightforward approach to enhancing early mobilization efforts is to focus on practical ways to remove some of the barriers in the healthcare setting. This includes minimizing lines, tubes, and cords from IPC devices used to prevent DVT and replacing them with a wearable therapeutic compression device, such as the MAC System, that is cordless and tubeless and delivers 3x over baseline femoral vein response to avoid venous stasis during recovery. The cordless and tubeless design increases patient comfort and allows for greater mobility.
The ROI of Early Mobilization
A sample ROI analysis for a hospital illustrates the potential cost savings early mobilization has on a patient’s length of stay (LOS) with wearable therapeutic compression devices in terms of reduced hospital stays:
- Average length of stay: 4.16 days
- Number of patients: 569
- Average cost per day: $11,700
- 2.5% Reduction: 0.104 days or 2.5 hours (potential cost savings: $692,359)
- 5% Reduction: 0.208 days or 4.99 hours (potential cost savings: $1,384,718)
- 10% Reduction: 0.416 days or 9.98 hours (potential cost savings: $2,769,437)
Conclusion
Hospital-acquired immobility is a growing concern for healthcare systems, with significant economic implications for the broader healthcare system. Prioritizing patient mobilization early and often can help mitigate the economic impact of hospital-acquired immobility on healthcare systems while improving patient outcomes and reducing the risk of complications.
by Recovery Force Health | Sep 23, 2024 | Insight
Hospital-acquired immobility, which refers to a lack of mobility and physical function due to prolonged bed rest and inactivity during a hospital stay, is a growing concern in healthcare. When admitted to the hospital, patients can spend up to 95% of their hospital stay in bed. The resulting condition of hospital-acquired immobility can lead to severe complications, including falls, muscle atrophy, joint stiffness, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pressure ulcers, and longer recovery times, as well as an increased risk of readmissions.
These potential complications ultimately raise healthcare costs; for example, the estimated costs of some of the resulting health issues that can arise from immobility include falls- $6,694; pressure ulcers- $14,506; venous thromboembolism – $17,367; and an overall increase in length of stay at the hospital that could cost an estimated $11,000 per day or more in some cases.
Furthermore, hospital-acquired immobility can significantly impact a patient’s overall health and complicate the transition to home by reducing the ability to perform daily activities. Hospital-acquired immobility is often the reason why patients are not capable of walking out of the hospital at discharge and are delegated to skilled rehab facilities for weeks of costly rehabilitation.
The Impact on Patients of Size
The dangers of hospital-acquired immobility are more significant in bariatric patient populations. For example, the risk of complications such as DVT increases with body mass index (BMI). People with a BMI over 30 have a two- to threefold increase in risk, and the number is even higher for those with a BMI over 40.
One of the most significant barriers to mobilizing bariatric patients is the fear of falling. This can be exacerbated by clinicians’ concerns over being able to successfully retrieve the patient after a fall occurs.
Uneven weight distribution can further affect balance and the center of gravity, making it more challenging to mobilize safely after illness or surgery. Many hospitals also lack specialized equipment designed to accommodate patients of size, as well as the required training and experience for the hospital care team, which can intensify the fear of falling and the inability to get back up for both patients and their clinicians.
As a result, healthcare workers are often hesitant to mobilize bariatric patients due to safety concerns and the risk of injury. However, this can lead to more serious problems as hospital-acquired immobility results in patients becoming deconditioned and more susceptible to falls. On the other hand, more mobilization correlates to fewer falls and a decrease in hospital-acquired conditions.
“In the hospital setting, there’s not much encouragement to get up and mobilize as a larger patient,” said Tracey Carr, bariatric consultant and patient advocate for people of size. “Part of the reason is that the staff are worried about falls, so many healthcare workers would prefer the bariatric patient to stay in bed. But there’s also a significant risk attached to that.”
Prioritizing Mobility: A Crucial Step in Preventing Hospital-Acquired Immobility
Early and progressive mobilization is crucial for preventing hospital-acquired immobility. This is especially true for bariatric patients who can decondition faster than individuals with an average BMI. By initiating an early mobilization protocol, healthcare workers can take proactive steps to prevent the onset of hospital-acquired immobility and, subsequently, other related complications.
Encouraging patients to move as soon as possible can help maintain muscle strength, joint flexibility, and overall physical function. Early mobilization encompasses more than just ambulating; in addition to walking, patients benefit from periodic changes in position, such as turning in bed, sitting up in bed, dangling at the side of the bed, and moving to the chair. Research has shown that this early mobilization effort is associated with improved functional outcomes, reduced hospital costs, and decreased length of stay—in addition to lessening the risk of readmissions and the potential financial penalties from reduced reimbursement accompanying it.
Breaking Down Barriers: A Simple Approach to Combating Hospital-Acquired Immobility
One approach to addressing hospital-acquired immobility is to focus on practical ways to remove some of the barriers in the healthcare setting. This includes minimizing lines, tubes, and cords from equipment such as the intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices used to prevent DVT. The problem with the presence of multiple cords and tubes connected to these devices is that they often hinder patient mobility by tethering them to the bed—leading to an increased risk of falls. At the same time, they can be time-consuming to disconnect and reconnect, creating a reluctance to mobilize for both the healthcare worker and the patient.
Conversations and education about the benefits of mobility can help patients lessen their fears and motivate them to adhere to mobility protocols. These conversations can unearth truths about a patient’s needs and expectations around mobility, helping them achieve their goals during and after their hospital stay. Clinicians will also be less afraid of the risks when they understand how their patients feel about moving, their concerns, and their preferences.
Conclusion
Hospital-acquired immobility is a serious concern affecting all types of patients, particularly those of size. The fear of falling is a significant barrier to mobility but not impossible to overcome. By prioritizing and teaching the importance of mobilizing patients early and often, leveraging innovative technologies such as wearable therapeutic compression devices like the Movement And Compressions (MAC) System, and breaking down barriers, healthcare workers can improve patient outcomes and reduce the risk of complications due to hospital-acquired immobility.
