ICU-acquired weakness

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Despite numerically greater improvements in handgrip strength, gait speed, and 6-minute walk distance in the MRP+UC group compared to usual care, none of these between-group differences in functional

Effect: null; handgrip change 3.6 vs 1.3 kg (p=0.20); gait speed change 0.13 vs 0.07 m/s (p=0.41); 6MWD change 40.6 vs 19.9 ft (p=0.33); SPPB change 1.1 vs 1.

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)

Regardless of treatment group, patients who achieved greater improvements in functional measures including handgrip strength, gait speed, 6MWD, and ambulation were significantly more likely to wean fr

Effect: improvement; OR 1.45 (SPPB), OR 2.19 (basic mobility)