What question did this study set out to answer?

This review maps literature on early mobilization in Saudi ICUs and assesses healthcare providers' perspectives and implementation barriers.

March 28, 2026Open Access

Early Mobilization in Saudi Intensive Care Units: Implementation, Challenges, and Perspectives – A Scoping Review

Key Points

This review maps literature on early mobilization in Saudi ICUs and assesses healthcare providers' perspectives and implementation barriers.
Followed Arksey and O’Malley’s five-stage framework
Conducted literature search across multiple databases
Included studies on early mobilization in Saudi ICUs
Two reviewers independently screened and charted data
Identified 5862 studies but included only 21, mostly observational
Positive attitudes toward early mobilization among providers, but lack of knowledge exists
Passive mobilization was the most common intervention for mechanically ventilated patients
Patient-related factors emerged as the primary barrier to implementation

Abstract

Abstract Objective: Early mobilization (EM) in intensive care units (ICUs) has gained considerable attention globally due to its potential benefits in improving patient outcomes. This scoping review aims to map the existing literature on EM in ICUs in Saudi Arabia (KSA), assess the perspectives of ICU healthcare providers regarding EM, and identify the level of implementation and barriers to EM in KSA. Methodology: Arksey and O’Malley’s five-stage framework was followed. A search was conducted in PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and EBSCO. The search was supported by gray literature and citation tracking. All studies addressing EM in Saudi ICUs were eligible. Two reviewers independently screened and charted the data. Results: The search identified 5862 studies. Only 21 studies were included, predominantly observational, with limited interventional research. Most studies were conducted in adult ICUs and were concentrated in the central region of KSA, reflecting limited geographic and pediatric representation. Healthcare providers exhibited positive attitudes toward EM, despite the notable lack of knowledge and formal training. Passive mobilization has emerged as the most common intervention, particularly for patients on mechanical ventilation. The most frequently reported barrier was patient-related factors. Conclusions: Despite increasing awareness, EM practices in Saudi ICUs are applied inconsistently due to multiple barriers. To enhance the adoption of EM and improve critical care outcomes in alignment with Saudi Vision 2030, national protocols, interdisciplinary training, and more diverse interventional research are essential.

Read Full Paperexternally

AIに質問

Bookmark

View Full Paper