Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Br J Anaesth ; 133(1): 164-177, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38637268

RESUMEN

Invasive mechanical ventilation is a key supportive therapy for patients on intensive care. There is increasing emphasis on personalised ventilation strategies. Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have been developed to support this. We conducted a narrative review to assess evidence that could inform device implementation. A search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE. Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Role allocation is well described, with interprofessional collaboration dependent on culture, nurse:patient ratio, the use of protocols, and perception of responsibility. There were no descriptions of process measures, quality metrics, or clinical workflow. Nurse-led weaning is well-described, with factors grouped by patient, nurse, and system. Physician-led weaning is heterogenous, guided by subjective and objective information, and 'gestalt'. No studies explored decision-making with CDSS. Several explored facilitators and barriers to implementation, grouped by clinician (facilitators: confidence using CDSS, retaining decision-making ownership; barriers: undermining clinician's role, ambiguity moving off protocol), intervention (facilitators: user-friendly interface, ease of workflow integration, minimal training requirement; barriers: increased documentation time), and organisation (facilitators: system-level mandate; barriers: poor communication, inconsistent training, lack of technical support). One study described factors that support CDSS implementation. There are gaps in our understanding of ventilation practice. A coordinated approach grounded in implementation science is required to support CDSS implementation. Future research should describe factors that guide clinical decision-making throughout mechanical ventilation, with and without CDSS, map clinical workflow, and devise implementation toolkits. Novel research design analogous to a learning organisation, that considers the commercial aspects of device design, is required.


Asunto(s)
Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas , Respiración Artificial , Humanos , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas/métodos , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Cuidados Críticos/normas , Desconexión del Ventilador/métodos
2.
Respir Care ; 69(8): 931-936, 2024 Jul 24.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38296330

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal suctioning causes discomfort, is associated with adverse effects, and is resource-demanding. An artificial secretion removal method, known as an automated cough, has been developed, which applies rapid, automated deflation, and inflation of the endotracheal tube cuff during the inspiratory phase of mechanical ventilation. This method has been evaluated in the hands of researchers but not when used by attending nurses. The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy of the method over the course of patient management as part of routine care. METHODS: This prospective, longitudinal, interventional study recruited 28 subjects who were intubated and mechanically ventilated. For a maximum of 7 d and on clinical need for endotracheal suctioning, the automatic cough procedure was applied. The subjects were placed in a pressure-regulated ventilation mode with elevated inspiratory pressure, and automated cuff deflation and inflation were performed 3 times, with this repeated if deemed necessary. Success was determined by resolution of the clinical need for suctioning as determined by the attending nurse. Adverse effects were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 84 procedures were performed. In 54% of the subjects, the artificial cough procedure was successful on > 70% of occasions, with 56% of all procedures considered successful. Ninety percent of all the procedures were performed in subjects who were spontaneously breathing and on pressure-support ventilation with peak inspiratory pressures of 20 cm H2O. Rates of adverse events were similar to those seen in the application of endotracheal suctioning. CONCLUSIONS: This study solely evaluated the efficacy of an automated artificial cough procedure, which illustrated the potential for reducing the need for endotracheal suctioning when applied by attending nurses in routine care.


Asunto(s)
Tos , Intubación Intratraqueal , Respiración Artificial , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Succión/métodos , Femenino , Masculino , Intubación Intratraqueal/métodos , Respiración Artificial/métodos , Estudios Longitudinales , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Tos/etiología , Adulto , Automatización , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano de 80 o más Años
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...