Protocol-directed weaning versus conventional weaning from mechanical ventilation for neurocritical patients in an intensive care unit: a nonrandomized quasi-experimental study.

Alberto Belenguer-Muncharaz, Carmen Díaz-Tormo, Estefania Granero-Gasamans, Maria-Lidón Mateu-Campos
{"title":"Protocol-directed weaning <i>versus</i> conventional weaning from mechanical ventilation for neurocritical patients in an intensive care unit: a nonrandomized quasi-experimental study.","authors":"Alberto Belenguer-Muncharaz,&nbsp;Carmen Díaz-Tormo,&nbsp;Estefania Granero-Gasamans,&nbsp;Maria-Lidón Mateu-Campos","doi":"10.5935/2965-2774.20230340-en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate whether protocol-directed weaning in neurocritical patients would reduce the rate of extubation failure (as a primary outcome) and the associated complications (as a secondary outcome) compared with conventional weaning.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quasi-experimental study was conducted in a medical-surgical intensive care unit from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients aged 18 years or older with an acute neurological disease who were on mechanical ventilation > 24 hours were included. All patients included in the study were ready to wean, with no or minimal sedation, Glasgow coma score ≥ 9, spontaneous ventilatory stimulus, noradrenaline ≤ 0.2μgr/kg/ minute, fraction of inspired oxygen ≤ 0.5, positive end-expiratory pressure ≤ 5cmH2O, maximal inspiratory pressure < -20cmH2O, and occlusion pressure < 6cmH2O.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-four of 314 patients admitted to the intensive care unit were included (50 in the Intervention Group and 44 in the Control Group). There was no significant difference in spontaneous breathing trial failure (18% in the Intervention Group versus 34% in the Control Group, p = 0.12). More patients in the Intervention Group were extubated than in the Control Group (100% versus 79%, p = 0.01). The rate of extubation failure was not signifiantly diffrent between the groups (18% in the Intervention Group versus 17% in the Control Group; relative risk 1.02; 95%CI 0.64 - 1.61; p = 1.00). The reintubation rate was lower in the Control Group (16% in the Intervention Group versus 11% in the Control Group; relative risk 1.15; 95%CI 0.74 - 1.82; p = 0.75). The need for tracheotomy was lower in the Intervention Group [4 (8%) versus 11 (25%) in the Control Group; relative risk 0.32; 95%CI 0.11 - 0.93; p = 0.04]. At Day 28, the patients in the Intervention Group had more ventilator-free days than those in the Control Group [28 (26 - 28) days versus 26 (19 - 28) days; p = 0.01]. The total duration of mechanical ventilation was shorter in the Intervention Group than in the Control Group [5 (2 - 13) days versus 9 (3 - 22) days; p = 0.01]. There were no diffrences in the length of intensive care unit stay, 28-day free from mechanical ventilation, hospital stay or 90-day mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Considering the limitations of our study, the application of a weaning protocol for neurocritical patients led to a high percentage of extubation, a reduced need for tracheotomy and a shortened duration of mechanical ventilation. However, there was no reduction in extubation failure or the 28-day free of from mechanical ventilation compared with the Control Group.ClinicalTrials.gov Registry: NCT03128086.</p>","PeriodicalId":72721,"journal":{"name":"Critical care science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10275310/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/2965-2774.20230340-en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: To investigate whether protocol-directed weaning in neurocritical patients would reduce the rate of extubation failure (as a primary outcome) and the associated complications (as a secondary outcome) compared with conventional weaning.

Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted in a medical-surgical intensive care unit from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients aged 18 years or older with an acute neurological disease who were on mechanical ventilation > 24 hours were included. All patients included in the study were ready to wean, with no or minimal sedation, Glasgow coma score ≥ 9, spontaneous ventilatory stimulus, noradrenaline ≤ 0.2μgr/kg/ minute, fraction of inspired oxygen ≤ 0.5, positive end-expiratory pressure ≤ 5cmH2O, maximal inspiratory pressure < -20cmH2O, and occlusion pressure < 6cmH2O.

Results: Ninety-four of 314 patients admitted to the intensive care unit were included (50 in the Intervention Group and 44 in the Control Group). There was no significant difference in spontaneous breathing trial failure (18% in the Intervention Group versus 34% in the Control Group, p = 0.12). More patients in the Intervention Group were extubated than in the Control Group (100% versus 79%, p = 0.01). The rate of extubation failure was not signifiantly diffrent between the groups (18% in the Intervention Group versus 17% in the Control Group; relative risk 1.02; 95%CI 0.64 - 1.61; p = 1.00). The reintubation rate was lower in the Control Group (16% in the Intervention Group versus 11% in the Control Group; relative risk 1.15; 95%CI 0.74 - 1.82; p = 0.75). The need for tracheotomy was lower in the Intervention Group [4 (8%) versus 11 (25%) in the Control Group; relative risk 0.32; 95%CI 0.11 - 0.93; p = 0.04]. At Day 28, the patients in the Intervention Group had more ventilator-free days than those in the Control Group [28 (26 - 28) days versus 26 (19 - 28) days; p = 0.01]. The total duration of mechanical ventilation was shorter in the Intervention Group than in the Control Group [5 (2 - 13) days versus 9 (3 - 22) days; p = 0.01]. There were no diffrences in the length of intensive care unit stay, 28-day free from mechanical ventilation, hospital stay or 90-day mortality.

Conclusion: Considering the limitations of our study, the application of a weaning protocol for neurocritical patients led to a high percentage of extubation, a reduced need for tracheotomy and a shortened duration of mechanical ventilation. However, there was no reduction in extubation failure or the 28-day free of from mechanical ventilation compared with the Control Group.ClinicalTrials.gov Registry: NCT03128086.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重症监护病房神经危重症患者机械通气的方案导向脱机与传统脱机:一项非随机准实验研究。
目的:研究与常规脱机相比,神经危重症患者的方案导向脱机是否会降低拔管失败率(作为主要结局)和相关并发症(作为次要结局)。方法:2016年1月至2018年12月在某内科外科重症监护病房进行准实验研究。患者年龄≥18岁,伴有急性神经系统疾病,机械通气> 24小时。所有纳入研究的患者均准备断奶,无镇静或最小镇静,格拉斯哥昏迷评分≥9,自发通气刺激,去甲肾上腺素≤0.2μgr/kg/ min,吸入氧分数≤0.5,呼气末正压≤5cmH2O,最大吸气压< -20cmH2O,闭塞压< 6cmH2O。结果:重症监护病房314例患者中94例纳入治疗组(干预组50例,对照组44例)。自发呼吸试验失败的发生率无显著差异(干预组为18%,对照组为34%,p = 0.12)。干预组拔管率高于对照组(100% vs 79%, p = 0.01)。两组间拔管失败率无显著差异(干预组为18%,对照组为17%;相对危险度1.02;95%ci 0.64 - 1.61;P = 1.00)。对照组的再插管率较低(干预组为16%,对照组为11%;相对危险度1.15;95%ci 0.74 - 1.82;P = 0.75)。干预组的气管切开术需求较低[4(8%)比对照组的11 (25%);相对危险度0.32;95%ci 0.11 - 0.93;P = 0.04]。在第28天,干预组患者比对照组患者无呼吸机天数更长[28(26 - 28)天和26(19 - 28)天;P = 0.01]。干预组机械通气总持续时间短于对照组[5(2 - 13)天比9(3 - 22)天;P = 0.01]。重症监护病房的住院时间、无机械通气的28天、住院时间和90天死亡率没有差异。结论:考虑到本研究的局限性,神经危重症患者采用脱机方案,拔管率高,气管切开术需求减少,机械通气时间缩短。然而,与对照组相比,拔管失败或28天无机械通气没有减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Association between hair cortisol concentration and acute stress symptoms in family members of critically ill patients: a cross-sectional study. Reply to: Factors associated with mortality in mechanically ventilated patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome due to COVID-19 evolution. Advancing insights in critical COVID-19: unraveling lymphopenia through propensity score matching - Findings from the Multicenter LYMPH-COVID Study. Daily Chlorhexidine Bath for Health Care Associated Infection Prevention (CLEAN-IT): protocol for a multicenter cluster randomized crossover open-label trial. Reply to: Neurocritical care management supported by multimodal brain monitoring after acute brain injury.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1