Low Tidal Volume Ventilation for Emergency Department Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Practice Patterns and Clinical Impact.

OBJECTIVES: Data suggest that low tidal volume ventilation (LTVV) initiated in the emergency department (ED) has a positive impact on outcome. This systematic review and meta-analysis quantify the impact of ED-based LTVV on outcomes and ventilator settings in the ED and ICU. DATA SOURCES: We systematically reviewed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, references, conferences, and ClinicalTrials.gov. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized and nonrandomized studies of mechanically ventilated ED adults were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened abstracts. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventilation duration, lengths of stay, and occurrence rate of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We assessed impact of ED LTVV interventions on ED and ICU tidal volumes. DATA SYNTHESIS: The search identified 1,023 studies. Eleven studies (n = 12,912) provided outcome data and were meta-analyzed; 10 additional studies (n = 1,863) provided descriptive ED tidal volume data. Overall quality of evidence was low. Random effect meta-analytic models revealed that ED LTVV was associated with lower mortality (26.5%) versus non-LTVV (31.1%) (odds ratio, 0.80 [0.72-0.88]). ED LTVV was associated with shorter ICU (mean difference, -1.0; 95% CI, -1.7 to -0.3) and hospital (mean difference, -1.2; 95% CI, -2.3 to -0.1) lengths of stay, more ventilator-free days (mean difference, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.4-2.4), and lower occurrence rate (4.5% vs 8.3%) of ARDS (odds ratio, 0.57 [0.44-0.75]). ED LTVV interventions were associated with reductions in ED (-1.5-mL/kg predicted body weight [PBW] [-1.9 to -1.0]; p < 0.001) and ICU (-1.0-mL/kg PBW [-1.8 to -0.2]; p = 0.01) tidal volume. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LTVV in the ED is associated with improved clinical outcomes and increased use of lung protection, recognizing low quality of evidence in this domain. Interventions aimed at implementing and sustaining LTVV in the ED should be explored.

Awareness With Paralysis in Mechanically Ventilated Patients in the Emergency Department and ICU: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Awareness with paralysis is a devastating complication for mechanically ventilated patients and can carry long-term psychologic sequelae. Hundreds of thousands of patients require mechanical ventilation in the emergency department and ICU annually, yet awareness has only been rigorously examined in the operating room (incidence ~0.1%). This report collates the global literature regarding the incidence of awareness with paralysis outside of the operating room. DATA SOURCES: We searched OvidMedline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, conference proceedings, and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized or nonrandomized studies (except single case studies) reporting on awareness with paralysis in the emergency department or ICU were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers screened abstracts for eligibility. DATA SYNTHESIS: The search identified 4,454 potentially eligible studies. Seven studies (n = 941 patients) were included for analysis. A random effects meta-analysis of proportions along with multiple subgroup analyses was performed. Significant between-study heterogeneity in reporting of awareness with paralysis was noted, and the quality of the evidence was low. Analyses stratified by: 1) good-quality studies and 2) use of the modified Brice questionnaire to detect awareness revealed estimates of 3.4% (95% CI, 0-10.2%) and 1.9% (95% CI, 1.0-3.0%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of awareness with paralysis in mechanically ventilated patients in the emergency department and ICU, as evaluated in a small number of qualifying studies from this comprehensive systematic review, appears much higher than that reported from the operating room. Given the clinical and statistical heterogeneity, caution is warranted in the interpretation of these findings. Further high-quality studies are needed to both define the true incidence and to target the prevention of awareness with paralysis in this vulnerable patient cohort.

Awareness and bispectral index (BIS) monitoring in mechanically ventilated patients in the emergency department and intensive care unit: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Accidental awareness with recall is one of the most feared complications for patients undergoing general anaesthesia and can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder in up to 70% of patients experiencing it. To reduce the incidence of awareness with recall, the bispectral index monitor is recommended for patients receiving total intravenous anaesthetics, especially those receiving neuromuscular blockers. While extensive investigation into awareness and bispectral index monitoring has occurred for operating room patients, this has not extended to other clinical arenas where sedated and mechanically ventilated patients are cared for, namely the intensive care unit and emergency department. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the world's literature to determine the incidence of awareness with paralysis in mechanically ventilated patients and the impact of bispectral index monitoring for reducing this complication. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Randomised trials and non-randomised studies are eligible for inclusion. With aid from a medical librarian, an electronic search will include Ovid Medline, Embase.com, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. To find data published in abstract form, literature from professional society conferences (2010-2019) will be manually searched. Two authors will independently review search results and consensus will be reached with assistance from a third author, as needed. Heterogeneity and publication bias will be assessed and reported. If possible and appropriate, a meta-analysis of the data will be conducted for quantitative data analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The proposed systematic review does not require ethical approval, as it is conducted at the study level and does not involve individual patient-level data. Results will be disseminated by data sharing via academically established means, presentation at local and national scientific meetings and publication as a peer-reviewed manuscript. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: The protocol has been submitted to International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews and is awaiting registration.