Intellectual ventilation modes in Russian Federation: a short questionnaire survey

R. D. Komnov, A. A. Eremenko
{"title":"Intellectual ventilation modes in Russian Federation: a short questionnaire survey","authors":"R. D. Komnov, A. A. Eremenko","doi":"10.21320/1818-474x-2023-1-83-90","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION: There are a lot of clinical trials about benefits of closed-loop ventilation modes, which are able to automatically adjust certain respiratory settings. These studies describe safety, reliability and advantages of intellectual modes over conventional ventilation modes. OBJECTIVE: To assess awareness of Russian intensive care practitioners about closed loop ventilation modes and availability of these modes in routine practice. The second aim was to explore difficulties and problems that arise for practitioners during work with these modes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A short survey conducted with online and offline questionnaire. The survey consisted of nine questions regarding the application of closed-loop modes, some question has open answers. RESULTS: The response rate of the survey was 33 % (248 of 750). Most of respondents (85 %) have heard about closed-loop modes, and 52 % had access to these technologies in routine practice. But only 23 % of respondents use Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) and analogues as primary mode in their routine practice, 9 % point to Intellivent-ASV®, less than 1 % point to PAV + TM (Proportional Assist Ventilation) and nobody point to NAVA (Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist) and Smart Care®. Over half of respondents (62 %) from clinicians who have access to this technology pointed to the lack of knowledge about closed loop modes; 60 % pointed to insufficient education and 40 % pointed to the lack of equipment. These facts demonstrate the necessity of additional educational programs for implementation of modern technologies in practice, need for organization of post customer service for respirators and provision of consumables in some hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: this questionnaire showed that 85 % of practitioners have heard about closed-loop ventilation modes, and half of them had access to these technologies in routine practice, but just 30 % regularly use one of these technologies.","PeriodicalId":93261,"journal":{"name":"Annals of pulmonary and critical care medicine","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of pulmonary and critical care medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21320/1818-474x-2023-1-83-90","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: There are a lot of clinical trials about benefits of closed-loop ventilation modes, which are able to automatically adjust certain respiratory settings. These studies describe safety, reliability and advantages of intellectual modes over conventional ventilation modes. OBJECTIVE: To assess awareness of Russian intensive care practitioners about closed loop ventilation modes and availability of these modes in routine practice. The second aim was to explore difficulties and problems that arise for practitioners during work with these modes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A short survey conducted with online and offline questionnaire. The survey consisted of nine questions regarding the application of closed-loop modes, some question has open answers. RESULTS: The response rate of the survey was 33 % (248 of 750). Most of respondents (85 %) have heard about closed-loop modes, and 52 % had access to these technologies in routine practice. But only 23 % of respondents use Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) and analogues as primary mode in their routine practice, 9 % point to Intellivent-ASV®, less than 1 % point to PAV + TM (Proportional Assist Ventilation) and nobody point to NAVA (Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist) and Smart Care®. Over half of respondents (62 %) from clinicians who have access to this technology pointed to the lack of knowledge about closed loop modes; 60 % pointed to insufficient education and 40 % pointed to the lack of equipment. These facts demonstrate the necessity of additional educational programs for implementation of modern technologies in practice, need for organization of post customer service for respirators and provision of consumables in some hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: this questionnaire showed that 85 % of practitioners have heard about closed-loop ventilation modes, and half of them had access to these technologies in routine practice, but just 30 % regularly use one of these technologies.
俄罗斯联邦的智力通风模式:一个简短的问卷调查
导论:有很多临床试验关于闭环通气模式的好处,它能够自动调整某些呼吸设置。这些研究描述了智能通风模式相对于传统通风模式的安全性、可靠性和优势。目的:评估俄罗斯重症监护医师对闭环通气模式的认知及在日常实践中这些模式的可用性。第二个目的是探索从业者在使用这些模式时出现的困难和问题。材料与方法:采用线上和线下问卷进行简短调查。调查包括九个关于闭环模式应用的问题,有些问题有开放的答案。结果:750名受访患者中有248名的回复率为33%。大多数受访者(85%)听说过闭环模式,52%的人在日常实践中使用过这些技术。但只有23%的受访者在日常实践中使用适应性支持通气(ASV)和类似物作为主要模式,9%的人使用intelligent -ASV®,不到1%的人使用PAV + TM(比例辅助通气),没有人使用NAVA(神经调节通气辅助)和智能护理®。超过一半的受访者(62%)表示缺乏对闭环模式的了解;60%的人指出教育不足,40%的人指出缺乏设备。这些事实表明,在实践中实施现代技术需要额外的教育计划,一些医院需要组织口罩的后期客户服务和提供消耗品。结论:该问卷调查显示,85%的执业医师听说过闭环通气模式,其中一半的执业医师在日常执业中接触过这些技术,但只有30%的执业医师经常使用其中一种技术。
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