Reducing Failed Extubations in the Intensive Care Unit

Peter J. Pronovost MD, PhD (Associate Professor), Mollie Jenckes MSc (Research Associate), May To RN (Nurse), Todd Dorman MD (Associate Professor), Pamela A. Lipsett MD (Associate Professor), Sean Berenholtz MD (Assistant Professor), Eric B. Bass MD, MPH (Associate Professor)
{"title":"Reducing Failed Extubations in the Intensive Care Unit","authors":"Peter J. Pronovost MD, PhD (Associate Professor),&nbsp;Mollie Jenckes MSc (Research Associate),&nbsp;May To RN (Nurse),&nbsp;Todd Dorman MD (Associate Professor),&nbsp;Pamela A. Lipsett MD (Associate Professor),&nbsp;Sean Berenholtz MD (Assistant Professor),&nbsp;Eric B. Bass MD, MPH (Associate Professor)","doi":"10.1016/S1070-3241(02)28063-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Failed extubation is associated with substantially increased morbidity, mortality, and costs for patients receiving mechanical ventilation. A study was designed in 1998 to identify risk factors for failed extubation and use a quality improvement model to reduce failed extubation rates in a surgical intensive care unit (SICU) in an academic hospital.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Study design involved a prospective cohort SICU with a concurrent control SICU. The primary outcome was rate of failed extubations per 1,000 ventilator days. Information on risk factors for failed extubations was also collected. Performance improvement staff identified failed extubation patients, and respiratory therapy provided information on ventilator days. The quality improvement model implemented three phases between October 1998 and June 2000: (1) identifying factors associated with failed extubation, (2) developing a guideline to reduce failed extubation, and (3) implementing the guideline.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Significant factors associated with failed extubation included suctioning more frequently than every 4<!--> <!-->hours versus the current model of “every 4<!--> <!-->hours or greater” (odds ratio [OR] 11.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5—88.3), being agitated or sedated versus being alert (OR 4.5, CI: 1.2—14.7), and oxygen saturation ≤ 95% versus ≥ 95% (OR 4.0; CI: 1.2–13). Failed extubation rate in the SICU decreased from 8/1,000 in October 1998 to 1.5/1,000 in June 2000, and control SICU rates remained unchanged (8/1,000).</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>The intervention significantly reduced the rate of failed extubation in the SICU. By employing a quality improvement model and identifying risk factors for failed extubation, providers should be able to decrease risk of failed extubation for SICU patients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":79382,"journal":{"name":"The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement","volume":"28 11","pages":"Pages 595-604"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S1070-3241(02)28063-3","citationCount":"26","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1070324102280633","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

Abstract

Background

Failed extubation is associated with substantially increased morbidity, mortality, and costs for patients receiving mechanical ventilation. A study was designed in 1998 to identify risk factors for failed extubation and use a quality improvement model to reduce failed extubation rates in a surgical intensive care unit (SICU) in an academic hospital.

Methods

Study design involved a prospective cohort SICU with a concurrent control SICU. The primary outcome was rate of failed extubations per 1,000 ventilator days. Information on risk factors for failed extubations was also collected. Performance improvement staff identified failed extubation patients, and respiratory therapy provided information on ventilator days. The quality improvement model implemented three phases between October 1998 and June 2000: (1) identifying factors associated with failed extubation, (2) developing a guideline to reduce failed extubation, and (3) implementing the guideline.

Results

Significant factors associated with failed extubation included suctioning more frequently than every 4 hours versus the current model of “every 4 hours or greater” (odds ratio [OR] 11.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5—88.3), being agitated or sedated versus being alert (OR 4.5, CI: 1.2—14.7), and oxygen saturation ≤ 95% versus ≥ 95% (OR 4.0; CI: 1.2–13). Failed extubation rate in the SICU decreased from 8/1,000 in October 1998 to 1.5/1,000 in June 2000, and control SICU rates remained unchanged (8/1,000).

Discussion

The intervention significantly reduced the rate of failed extubation in the SICU. By employing a quality improvement model and identifying risk factors for failed extubation, providers should be able to decrease risk of failed extubation for SICU patients.

减少重症监护病房拔管失败
背景:拔管失败与接受机械通气患者的发病率、死亡率和费用大幅增加有关。1998年设计了一项研究,以确定拔管失败的危险因素,并使用质量改进模型来降低某学术医院外科重症监护病房(SICU)的拔管失败率。方法研究设计包括前瞻性队列SICU和并发对照SICU。主要终点是每1000个呼吸机日拔管失败的比率。还收集了拔管失败的危险因素信息。绩效改进工作人员确定拔管失败的患者,呼吸治疗提供呼吸机天数的信息。质量改进模式在1998年10月至2000年6月期间实施了三个阶段:(1)识别与拔管失败相关的因素,(2)制定减少拔管失败的指导方针,(3)实施指导方针。结果与拔管失败相关的重要因素包括抽吸频率高于每4小时一次,而不是目前的“每4小时或更大”(优势比[or] 11.3;95%可信区间[CI] 1.5-88.3),激动或镇静与警觉(or 4.5, CI: 1.2-14.7),血氧饱和度≤95%与≥95% (or 4.0;置信区间:-13 - 1.2)。SICU拔管失败率从1998年10月的8/ 1000下降到2000年6月的1.5/ 1000,对照组SICU拔管失败率保持不变(8/ 1000)。讨论干预显著降低了SICU拔管失败率。通过采用质量改进模型和识别拔管失败的风险因素,提供者应该能够降低SICU患者拔管失败的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信