Chen Yun Goh, Herng Lee Tan, Yi-Jyun Ma, Apollo Bugarin Aguilan, Wen Cong Lee, Anuradha P Menon, Yee Hui Mok, Judith Ju-Ming Wong
{"title":"High-Risk Extubation Readiness Testing for Children With Cardiac Critical Illness.","authors":"Chen Yun Goh, Herng Lee Tan, Yi-Jyun Ma, Apollo Bugarin Aguilan, Wen Cong Lee, Anuradha P Menon, Yee Hui Mok, Judith Ju-Ming Wong","doi":"10.4187/respcare.11670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A protocolized extubation readiness test (ERT), including a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), is recommended for patients who are intubated. This quality-improvement project aimed to improve peri-extubation outcomes by using a high-risk ERT protocol in intubated cardiac patients in addition to a standard-risk protocol.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After baseline data collection, we implemented a standard-risk ERT protocol (pressure support plus PEEP), followed by a high-risk ERT protocol (PEEP alone) in cardiac subjects who were intubated. The primary outcome, a composite of extubation failure and rescue noninvasive respiratory support, was compared between phases. Ventilator duration and use of postextubation respiratory support were balancing measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 213 cardiac subjects who were intubated were studied, with extubation failure and rescue noninvasive respiratory support occurring in 10 of 213 (4.7%) and 8 of 213 (3.8%), respectively. We observed a reduction in the composite outcome among the 3 consecutive phases (5/29 [17.2%], 10/110 [9.1%] vs 3/74 [4.1%]; <i>P</i> = .10), but this did not reach statistical significance. In the logistic regression model when adjusting for admission type, the high-risk ERT protocol was associated with a significant reduction of the composite outcome (adjusted odds ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.04-0.091; <i>P</i> = .037), whereas the standard-risk ERT protocol was not (adjusted odds ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.15-1.53; <i>P</i> = .21). This was not accompanied by a longer ventilator duration (2.0 [1.0, 3.0], 2.0 [1.0-4.0], vs adjusted odds ratio 2.0 [95% [1.0-6.0]; <i>P</i> = .99) or an increased use of planned noninvasive respiratory support (10/29 [35.5%], 35/110 [31.8%], vs 25/74 [33.8%]; <i>P</i> > .99).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this quality-improvement project, a high-risk ERT protocol was implemented with improvement in peri-extubation outcomes among cardiac subjects.</p>","PeriodicalId":21125,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory care","volume":" ","pages":"1108-1115"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11349595/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.11670","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: A protocolized extubation readiness test (ERT), including a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT), is recommended for patients who are intubated. This quality-improvement project aimed to improve peri-extubation outcomes by using a high-risk ERT protocol in intubated cardiac patients in addition to a standard-risk protocol.
Methods: After baseline data collection, we implemented a standard-risk ERT protocol (pressure support plus PEEP), followed by a high-risk ERT protocol (PEEP alone) in cardiac subjects who were intubated. The primary outcome, a composite of extubation failure and rescue noninvasive respiratory support, was compared between phases. Ventilator duration and use of postextubation respiratory support were balancing measures.
Results: A total of 213 cardiac subjects who were intubated were studied, with extubation failure and rescue noninvasive respiratory support occurring in 10 of 213 (4.7%) and 8 of 213 (3.8%), respectively. We observed a reduction in the composite outcome among the 3 consecutive phases (5/29 [17.2%], 10/110 [9.1%] vs 3/74 [4.1%]; P = .10), but this did not reach statistical significance. In the logistic regression model when adjusting for admission type, the high-risk ERT protocol was associated with a significant reduction of the composite outcome (adjusted odds ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.04-0.091; P = .037), whereas the standard-risk ERT protocol was not (adjusted odds ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.15-1.53; P = .21). This was not accompanied by a longer ventilator duration (2.0 [1.0, 3.0], 2.0 [1.0-4.0], vs adjusted odds ratio 2.0 [95% [1.0-6.0]; P = .99) or an increased use of planned noninvasive respiratory support (10/29 [35.5%], 35/110 [31.8%], vs 25/74 [33.8%]; P > .99).
Conclusions: In this quality-improvement project, a high-risk ERT protocol was implemented with improvement in peri-extubation outcomes among cardiac subjects.
期刊介绍:
RESPIRATORY CARE is the official monthly science journal of the American Association for Respiratory Care. It is indexed in PubMed and included in ISI''s Web of Science.