Comparison of SAT and SBT Conduct During the ABC Trial and PILOT Trial.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Journal of Intensive Care Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-19 DOI:10.1177/08850666231213337
Tuqa Alkhateeb, Matthew W Semler, Timothy D Girard, E Wesley Ely, Joanna L Stollings
{"title":"Comparison of SAT and SBT Conduct During the ABC Trial and PILOT Trial.","authors":"Tuqa Alkhateeb, Matthew W Semler, Timothy D Girard, E Wesley Ely, Joanna L Stollings","doi":"10.1177/08850666231213337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Implementation of the \"B\" element-both spontaneous awakening trials (SATs) and spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs)-of the ABCDEF bundle improves the outcomes for mechanically ventilated patients. In 2021, the Pragmatic Investigation of optimal Oxygen Targets (PILOT) trial investigating optimal oxygenation targets in patients on mechanical ventilation was completed.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare SAT and SBT conduct between a randomized controlled trial and current clinical care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 2008 Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) Trial (2003-2006) randomized mechanically ventilated patients to paired SATs and SBTs versus sedation per usual care plus SBTs. The PILOT trial (2018-2021) enrolled patients years later where SAT + SBT conduct was observed. We compared SAT and SBT conduct in ABC's interventional group (SAT + SBT; n = 167, 1140 patient days) to that in PILOT (n = 2083, 8355 patient days).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Spontaneous awakening trial safety screens were done in all 1140 ABC patient-days on sedation and/or analgesia and in 3889 of 4228 (92%) in PILOT. Spontaneous awakening trial safety screens were passed in 939 of 1140 (82%) instances in ABC versus only 1897 of 3889 (49%) in PILOT. Interestingly, SAT was performed in ≥95% of passed SAT safety screens in both trials and was passed in 837 of 895 (94%) in ABC versus 1145 of 1867 (61%) in PILOT. SBT safety screens were performed in all 983 ABC instances and 8031 of 8370 (96%) in PILOT. SBT safety screens were passed in 647 of 983 (66%) in ABC versus 4475 of 8031 (56%) in PILOT. Spontaneous breathing trial was performed in ≥93% of passed SBT safety screens in both trials and was passed in 319 of 603 (53%) in ABC versus 3337 of 4454 (75%) in PILOT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study compared SAT/SBT conduction in an ideal setting to real-world practice, 13 years later. Performance of SAT/SBT safety screens, SATs, and SBTs between a definitive clinical trial (ABC) as compared to current clinical care (PILOT) remained high.</p>","PeriodicalId":16307,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intensive Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"3-9"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11622525/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intensive Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08850666231213337","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Implementation of the "B" element-both spontaneous awakening trials (SATs) and spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs)-of the ABCDEF bundle improves the outcomes for mechanically ventilated patients. In 2021, the Pragmatic Investigation of optimal Oxygen Targets (PILOT) trial investigating optimal oxygenation targets in patients on mechanical ventilation was completed.

Objectives: To compare SAT and SBT conduct between a randomized controlled trial and current clinical care.

Methods: The 2008 Awakening and Breathing Controlled (ABC) Trial (2003-2006) randomized mechanically ventilated patients to paired SATs and SBTs versus sedation per usual care plus SBTs. The PILOT trial (2018-2021) enrolled patients years later where SAT + SBT conduct was observed. We compared SAT and SBT conduct in ABC's interventional group (SAT + SBT; n = 167, 1140 patient days) to that in PILOT (n = 2083, 8355 patient days).

Results: Spontaneous awakening trial safety screens were done in all 1140 ABC patient-days on sedation and/or analgesia and in 3889 of 4228 (92%) in PILOT. Spontaneous awakening trial safety screens were passed in 939 of 1140 (82%) instances in ABC versus only 1897 of 3889 (49%) in PILOT. Interestingly, SAT was performed in ≥95% of passed SAT safety screens in both trials and was passed in 837 of 895 (94%) in ABC versus 1145 of 1867 (61%) in PILOT. SBT safety screens were performed in all 983 ABC instances and 8031 of 8370 (96%) in PILOT. SBT safety screens were passed in 647 of 983 (66%) in ABC versus 4475 of 8031 (56%) in PILOT. Spontaneous breathing trial was performed in ≥93% of passed SBT safety screens in both trials and was passed in 319 of 603 (53%) in ABC versus 3337 of 4454 (75%) in PILOT.

Conclusion: This study compared SAT/SBT conduction in an ideal setting to real-world practice, 13 years later. Performance of SAT/SBT safety screens, SATs, and SBTs between a definitive clinical trial (ABC) as compared to current clinical care (PILOT) remained high.

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
ABC试验和PILOT试验中SAT和SBT行为的比较。
背景:实施ABCDEF束的“B”元素——自发觉醒试验(SATs)和自发呼吸试验(sbt)——可改善机械通气患者的预后。2021年,研究机械通气患者最佳氧合目标的实用调查(PILOT)试验完成。目的:比较随机对照试验和当前临床护理的SAT和SBT行为。方法:2008年觉醒和呼吸控制(ABC)试验(2003-2006)将机械通气患者随机分为SATs和sbt配对组与常规护理镇静加sbt组。PILOT试验(2018-2021)在几年后招募患者,观察SAT + SBT行为。我们比较了ABC介入组的SAT和SBT行为(SAT + SBT;n = 167, 1140患者日)和PILOT (n = 2083, 8355患者日)。结果:在镇静和/或镇痛的1140例ABC患者中,以及在PILOT的4228例患者中,有3889例(92%)进行了自发觉醒试验安全性筛选。1140例ABC患者中有939例(82%)通过了自发觉醒试验安全筛查,而PILOT患者中只有1897例(49%)通过了自发觉醒试验安全筛查。有趣的是,在两项试验中,≥95%通过SAT安全筛查的患者进行了SAT检查,而在ABC试验中,895人中有837人(94%)通过了SAT检查,而在PILOT试验中,1867人中有1145人(61%)通过了SAT检查。983例ABC患者和8370例PILOT患者中的8031例(96%)均进行了SBT安全筛查。ABC组983例中有647例(66%)通过了SBT安全筛查,而PILOT组8031例中有4475例(56%)通过了SBT安全筛查。在两项试验中,自发呼吸试验的SBT安全筛查合格者均≥93%,ABC组603例中有319例(53%)通过,而PILOT组4454例中有3337例(75%)通过。结论:13年后,本研究比较了理想环境下的SAT/SBT传导与现实世界中的传导。与当前临床护理(PILOT)相比,确定临床试验(ABC)之间的SAT/SBT安全筛查、SAT和SBT的性能仍然很高。
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
Journal of Intensive Care Medicine
Journal of Intensive Care Medicine CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
3.20%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: Journal of Intensive Care Medicine (JIC) is a peer-reviewed bi-monthly journal offering medical and surgical clinicians in adult and pediatric intensive care state-of-the-art, broad-based analytic reviews and updates, original articles, reports of large clinical series, techniques and procedures, topic-specific electronic resources, book reviews, and editorials on all aspects of intensive/critical/coronary care.
期刊最新文献
Impact of Sepsis Onset Timing on All-Cause Mortality in Acute Pancreatitis: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study. Serial Lactate in Clinical Medicine - A Narrative Review. A Combined Model of Vital Signs and Serum Biomarkers Outperforms Shock Index in the Prediction of Hemorrhage Control Interventions in Surgical Intensive Care Unit Patients. The Effects of Inspiratory Muscle Training in Critically ill Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Anticoagulation Monitoring Strategies During Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) Therapy - Differences Between Simultaneously Obtained Coagulation Tests: A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study.
×
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