最大呼气压与诱导咳嗽时最大呼气压的比较作为拔管失败的预测因子。

Melina Carrera, Jose García Urrutia, Cesar Bueno Ardariz, Maria Luz Porra, Claudio Gamarra, Ladislao Pablo Diaz Ballve
{"title":"最大呼气压与诱导咳嗽时最大呼气压的比较作为拔管失败的预测因子。","authors":"Melina Carrera,&nbsp;Jose García Urrutia,&nbsp;Cesar Bueno Ardariz,&nbsp;Maria Luz Porra,&nbsp;Claudio Gamarra,&nbsp;Ladislao Pablo Diaz Ballve","doi":"10.5935/2965-2774.20230275-en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective To compare the diagnostic performance of maximal expiratory pressure with maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough for predicting extubation failure within 72 hours in patients who completed a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). Methods The study was conducted between October 2018 and September 2019. All patients aged over 18 years admitted to the intensive care unit who required invasive mechanical ventilation for over 48 hours and successfully completed a spontaneous breathing trial were included. The maximal expiratory pressure was assessed with a unidirectional valve for 40 seconds, and verbal encouragement was given. The maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough was measured with slow instillation of 2mL of a 0.9% saline solution. The primary outcome variable was extubation failure. Results Eighty patients were included, of which 43 (54%) were male. Twenty-two patients [27.5% (95%CI 18.9 - 38.1)] failed extubation within 72 hours. Differences were observed in the maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough between the group who failed extubation, with a median of 0cmH2O (P25-75: 0 - 90), and the group without extubation failure, with a median of 120cmH2O (P25-75: 73 - 120); p < 0.001. Conclusion In patients who completed a spontaneous breathing trial, the maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough had a higher diagnostic performance for predicting extubation failure within 72 hours. Clinicaltrials.gov Registry: NCT04356625","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/PMC10275301/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maximal expiratory pressure compared with maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough as a predictor of extubation failure.\",\"authors\":\"Melina Carrera,&nbsp;Jose García Urrutia,&nbsp;Cesar Bueno Ardariz,&nbsp;Maria Luz Porra,&nbsp;Claudio Gamarra,&nbsp;Ladislao Pablo Diaz Ballve\",\"doi\":\"10.5935/2965-2774.20230275-en\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective To compare the diagnostic performance of maximal expiratory pressure with maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough for predicting extubation failure within 72 hours in patients who completed a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). Methods The study was conducted between October 2018 and September 2019. All patients aged over 18 years admitted to the intensive care unit who required invasive mechanical ventilation for over 48 hours and successfully completed a spontaneous breathing trial were included. The maximal expiratory pressure was assessed with a unidirectional valve for 40 seconds, and verbal encouragement was given. The maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough was measured with slow instillation of 2mL of a 0.9% saline solution. The primary outcome variable was extubation failure. Results Eighty patients were included, of which 43 (54%) were male. Twenty-two patients [27.5% (95%CI 18.9 - 38.1)] failed extubation within 72 hours. Differences were observed in the maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough between the group who failed extubation, with a median of 0cmH2O (P25-75: 0 - 90), and the group without extubation failure, with a median of 120cmH2O (P25-75: 73 - 120); p < 0.001. Conclusion In patients who completed a spontaneous breathing trial, the maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough had a higher diagnostic performance for predicting extubation failure within 72 hours. Clinicaltrials.gov Registry: NCT04356625\",\"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/PMC10275301/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical care science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5935/2965-2774.20230275-en\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical care science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/2965-2774.20230275-en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较自主呼吸试验(SBT)患者诱导咳嗽时最大呼气压与最大呼气压对预测72小时内拔管失败的诊断价值。方法:研究时间为2018年10月至2019年9月。所有年龄在18岁以上、需要有创机械通气超过48小时并成功完成自主呼吸试验的重症监护病房患者被纳入研究。用单向阀评估最大呼气压40秒,并给予口头鼓励。缓慢滴注2mL 0.9%生理盐水,测定诱导咳嗽时的最大呼气压。主要结局变量为拔管失败。结果:共纳入80例患者,其中男性43例(54%)。22例患者[27.5% (95%CI 18.9 ~ 38.1)]在72小时内拔管失败。拔管失败组诱导咳嗽时最大呼气压的中位数为0 cmh2o (P25-75: 0 - 90),未拔管失败组的中位数为120 cmh2o (P25-75: 73 - 120);P < 0.001。结论:在完成自主呼吸试验的患者中,诱导咳嗽时的最大呼气压在预测72小时内拔管失败方面具有更高的诊断性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Maximal expiratory pressure compared with maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough as a predictor of extubation failure.
Objective To compare the diagnostic performance of maximal expiratory pressure with maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough for predicting extubation failure within 72 hours in patients who completed a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). Methods The study was conducted between October 2018 and September 2019. All patients aged over 18 years admitted to the intensive care unit who required invasive mechanical ventilation for over 48 hours and successfully completed a spontaneous breathing trial were included. The maximal expiratory pressure was assessed with a unidirectional valve for 40 seconds, and verbal encouragement was given. The maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough was measured with slow instillation of 2mL of a 0.9% saline solution. The primary outcome variable was extubation failure. Results Eighty patients were included, of which 43 (54%) were male. Twenty-two patients [27.5% (95%CI 18.9 - 38.1)] failed extubation within 72 hours. Differences were observed in the maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough between the group who failed extubation, with a median of 0cmH2O (P25-75: 0 - 90), and the group without extubation failure, with a median of 120cmH2O (P25-75: 73 - 120); p < 0.001. Conclusion In patients who completed a spontaneous breathing trial, the maximal expiratory pressure during induced cough had a higher diagnostic performance for predicting extubation failure within 72 hours. Clinicaltrials.gov Registry: NCT04356625
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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