A survey of preferences for respiratory support in the intensive care unit for patients with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure

Author:

Aslam Tayyba N.123,Klitgaard Thomas L.4,Ahlstedt Christian A. O.5,Andersen Finn H.6,Chew Michelle S.7ORCID,Collet Marie O.8ORCID,Cronhjort Maria9,Estrup Stine10,Fossum Ole K.11,Frisvold Shirin K.12,Gillmann Hans‐Joerg13ORCID,Granholm Anders8ORCID,Gundem Trine M.14,Hauss Kristin15,Hollenberg Jacob16,Huanca Condori Maria E.17,Hästbacka Johanna18ORCID,Johnstad Bror A.19,Keus Eric20,Kjær Maj‐Brit N.8ORCID,Klepstad Pål21,Krag Mette22,Kvåle Reidar23,Malbrain Manu L. N. G.24ORCID,Meyhoff Christian S.25,Morgan Matt26,Møller Anders25ORCID,Pfortmueller Carmen A.27,Poulsen Lone M.28,Robertson Andrew C.29ORCID,Schefold Joerg C.30,Schjørring Olav L.4ORCID,Siegemund Martin31ORCID,Sigurdsson Martin I.32,Sjövall Fredrik33ORCID,Strand Kristian34,Stueber Thomas35,Szczeklik Wojciech36,Wahlin Rebecka R.3738,Wangberg Helge L.39,Wian Karl‐Andre40,Wichmann Sine41ORCID,Hofsø Kristin2,Møller Morten H.8ORCID,Perner Anders8,Rasmussen Bodil S.4ORCID,Laake Jon H.12ORCID,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Division of Emergencies and Critical Care, Rikshopitalet Oslo University Hospital Oslo Norway

2. Department of Research and Development, Division of Emergencies and Critical Care Oslo University Hospital Oslo Norway

3. Institute of Clinical Medicine University of Oslo Oslo Norway

4. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Aalborg University Hospital Aalborg Denmark

5. Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge Stockholm Sweden

6. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Ålesund Hospital Ålesund Norway

7. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Linköping University Hospital Linköping Sweden

8. Department of Intensive Care 4131 Rigshospitalet—Copenhagen University Hospital Copenhagen Denmark

9. Department of Clinical Science, Danderyds Sjukhus Karolinska Institutet Stockholm Sweden

10. Intensive Care Rigshospitalet Copenhagen Denmark

11. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Akershus University Hospital Nordbyhagen Norway

12. Anesthesiology and Intensive Care University Hospital of North Norway Tromsø Norway

13. Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine Hannover Medical School Hannover Germany

14. Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Ullevål Oslo University Hospital Oslo Norway

15. Acute‐ and Emergency Medicine Sykehuset Telemark Skien Norway

16. Department of Cardiology, Medical Intensive Care Unit Karolinska Institutet Stockholm Sweden

17. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Helse Fonna Haugesund Norway

18. Department of Perioperative and Intensive Care Medicine University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital Helsinki Finland

19. Acute Medicine Sykehuset Innlandet Hamar Hamar Norway

20. Critical Care University Medical Center Groningen Groningen Netherlands

21. Intensive Care Medicine St Olavs University Hospital Trondheim Norway

22. Department of Anaesthesiology Holbæk Hospital Holbæk Denmark

23. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Haukeland University Hospital Bergen Norway

24. First Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Therapy Medical University of Lublin Lublin Poland

25. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Copenhagen University Hospital—Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Copenhagen Denmark

26. Adult Intensive Care The Royal Perth Hospital Perth Western Australia Australia

27. Department of Intensive Care, Inselspital Bern University Hospital and University of Bern Bern Switzerland

28. Intensive Care Unit Zealand University Hospital Køge Denmark

29. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Bærum Hospital Bærum Norway

30. Department of Intensive Care Medicine Inselspital, University of Bern Bern Switzerland

31. Intensive Care University Hospital Basel Basel Switzerland

32. Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine Landspital—The National University Hospital of Iceland Reykjavik Iceland

33. Intensive and Perioperative Care Skane University Hospital Malmö Sweden

34. Intensive Care Stavanger University Hospital Stavanger Norway

35. Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Hannover Medical School Hannover Germany

36. Center for Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine Jagiellonian University Medical College Krakow Poland

37. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Södersjukhuset Karolinska Institutet Stockholm Sweden

38. Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset Karolinska Institutet Stockholm Sweden

39. Department of Anaesthesia Volda Hospital Volda Norway

40. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Vestfold Hospital Trust Tønsberg Norway

41. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Copenhagen University Hospital—North Zealand Hillerød Denmark

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundWhen caring for mechanically ventilated adults with acute hypoxaemic respiratory failure (AHRF), clinicians are faced with an uncertain choice between ventilator modes allowing for spontaneous breaths or ventilation fully controlled by the ventilator. The preferences of clinicians managing such patients, and what motivates their choice of ventilator mode, are largely unknown. To better understand how clinicians' preferences may impact the choice of ventilatory support for patients with AHRF, we issued a survey to an international network of intensive care unit (ICU) researchers.MethodsWe distributed an online survey with 32 broadly similar and interlinked questions on how clinicians prioritise spontaneous or controlled ventilation in invasively ventilated patients with AHRF of different severity, and which factors determine their choice.ResultsThe survey was distributed to 1337 recipients in 12 countries. Of these, 415 (31%) completed the survey either fully (52%) or partially (48%). Most respondents were identified as medical specialists (87%) or physicians in training (11%). Modes allowing for spontaneous ventilation were considered preferable in mild AHRF, with controlled ventilation considered as progressively more important in moderate and severe AHRF. Among respondents there was strong support (90%) for a randomised clinical trial comparing spontaneous with controlled ventilation in patients with moderate AHRF.ConclusionsThe responses from this international survey suggest that there is clinical equipoise for the preferred ventilator mode in patients with AHRF of moderate severity. We found strong support for a randomised trial comparing modes of ventilation in patients with moderate AHRF.

Funder

South East Regional Health Authority

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,General Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3