Brett N Hryciw, Natasha Hudek, Jamie C Brehaut, Christophe Herry, Nathan Scales, Emma Lee, Aimee J Sarti, Karen E A Burns, Andrew J E Seely
{"title":"<i>Extubation Advisor</i>: Implementation and Evaluation of A Novel Extubation Clinical Decision Support Tool.","authors":"Brett N Hryciw, Natasha Hudek, Jamie C Brehaut, Christophe Herry, Nathan Scales, Emma Lee, Aimee J Sarti, Karen E A Burns, Andrew J E Seely","doi":"10.1177/08850666241291524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Extubation Advisor (EA) is a novel software tool that generates a synoptic report for each Spontaneous Breathing Trial (SBT) conducted to inform extubation decision-making.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess bedside EA implementation, perceptions of utility, and identify barriers and facilitators of use.</p><p><strong>Design, setting and participants: </strong>We conducted a phase I mixed-methods interventional study in three mixed intensive care unit (ICUs) in two academic hospitals. We interviewed critical care physicians (MDs) and respiratory therapists (RTs) regarding user-centered design principles and usability.</p><p><strong>Analysis: </strong>We evaluated our ability to consent participants (feasibility threshold 50%), capture complete data (threshold 90%), generate and review EA reports in real-time (thresholds 75% and 80%, respectively), and MD perception of tool usefulness (6-point Likert scale). We analyzed interview transcripts using inductive coding to identify facilitators and barriers to EA implementation and perceived benefit of tool use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 31 patients who underwent 70 SBTs. Although consent rates [31/31 (100%], complete data capture [68/68 (100%)], and EA report generation [68/70 (97.1%)] exceeded feasibility thresholds, reports were reviewed by MDs for [55/70 (78.6%)] SBTs. Mean MD usefulness score was 4.0/6. Based on feedback obtained from 36 interviews (15 MDs, 21 RTs), we revised the EA report twice and identified facilitators (ability to track patient progress, enhance extubation decision-making, and provide support in resource-limited settings) and barriers (resource constraints, need for education) to tool implementation. Half of respondents (9 MDs, 9 RTs; combined 50%) perceived definite or potential benefit to EA tool use.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This is the first study of a waveform-based variability-derived, predictive clinical decision support tool evaluated in adult ICUs. Our findings support the feasibility of integrating the EA tool into bedside workflow. Clinical trials are needed to assess the utility of the EA tool in practice and its impact on extubation decision-making and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>NCT04708509.</p>","PeriodicalId":16307,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intensive Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"8850666241291524"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intensive Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08850666241291524","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Importance: Extubation Advisor (EA) is a novel software tool that generates a synoptic report for each Spontaneous Breathing Trial (SBT) conducted to inform extubation decision-making.
Objectives: To assess bedside EA implementation, perceptions of utility, and identify barriers and facilitators of use.
Design, setting and participants: We conducted a phase I mixed-methods interventional study in three mixed intensive care unit (ICUs) in two academic hospitals. We interviewed critical care physicians (MDs) and respiratory therapists (RTs) regarding user-centered design principles and usability.
Analysis: We evaluated our ability to consent participants (feasibility threshold 50%), capture complete data (threshold 90%), generate and review EA reports in real-time (thresholds 75% and 80%, respectively), and MD perception of tool usefulness (6-point Likert scale). We analyzed interview transcripts using inductive coding to identify facilitators and barriers to EA implementation and perceived benefit of tool use.
Results: We enrolled 31 patients who underwent 70 SBTs. Although consent rates [31/31 (100%], complete data capture [68/68 (100%)], and EA report generation [68/70 (97.1%)] exceeded feasibility thresholds, reports were reviewed by MDs for [55/70 (78.6%)] SBTs. Mean MD usefulness score was 4.0/6. Based on feedback obtained from 36 interviews (15 MDs, 21 RTs), we revised the EA report twice and identified facilitators (ability to track patient progress, enhance extubation decision-making, and provide support in resource-limited settings) and barriers (resource constraints, need for education) to tool implementation. Half of respondents (9 MDs, 9 RTs; combined 50%) perceived definite or potential benefit to EA tool use.
Conclusion: This is the first study of a waveform-based variability-derived, predictive clinical decision support tool evaluated in adult ICUs. Our findings support the feasibility of integrating the EA tool into bedside workflow. Clinical trials are needed to assess the utility of the EA tool in practice and its impact on extubation decision-making and outcomes.
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.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
