Airway Pressure Release Ventilation setting disagreements. A survey of clinicians

Abstract

Background: Airway pressure release ventilation has been available to clinicians for the last four decades. Unfortunately, its clinical value continues to be debatable. One of the many reasons responsible is the lack of consistency between its settings in clinical practice and research. We hypothesized that clinicians disagree on specific methods when establishing these parameters. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire-based survey was developed and sent to clinicians (critical care attending physician, critical care fellows in training and respiratory therapists) in about one hundred different academic hospitals with critical care training program. The survey consisted of ten questions including each of the four major APRV settings: T-High, T-Low, P-High, and P-Low. The survey was anonymous. Main results: Amongst the 187 respondents, there were significant disagreements between different categories of clinicians regarding methodology for establishing initial settings of APRV. However, when the responses were analyzed after sub-grouping based on categories of clinicians (Critical care attending physician vs critical care fellows vs respiratory therapists), no significant differences could be found. Conclusions: There is no agreement between different categories of clinicians when it comes to the methodology for establishing initial APRV settings. Our study highlights the need for larger clinical trials comparing different approaches to the same which could then be used for establishing scientific guidelines based on best evidence. Keywords: APRV, survey, T-High, T-Low, P-High, P-Low