儿科呼吸机解放研究缺口框架。

IF 9.5 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Chest Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-07 DOI:10.1016/j.chest.2024.05.012
Samer Abu-Sultaneh, Narayan Prabhu Iyer, Analía Fernández, Lyvonne N Tume, Martin C J Kneyber, Yolanda M López-Fernández, Guillaume Emeriaud, Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Robinder G Khemani
{"title":"儿科呼吸机解放研究缺口框架。","authors":"Samer Abu-Sultaneh, Narayan Prabhu Iyer, Analía Fernández, Lyvonne N Tume, Martin C J Kneyber, Yolanda M López-Fernández, Guillaume Emeriaud, Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Robinder G Khemani","doi":"10.1016/j.chest.2024.05.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The 2023 International Pediatric Ventilator Liberation Clinical Practice Guidelines provided evidence-based recommendations to guide pediatric critical care providers on how to perform daily aspects of ventilator liberation. However, because of the lack of high-quality pediatric studies, most recommendations were conditional based on very low to low certainty of evidence.</p><p><strong>Research question: </strong>What are the research gaps related to pediatric ventilator liberation that can be studied to strengthen the evidence for future updates of the guidelines?</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>We conducted systematic reviews of the literature in eight predefined Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation to generate recommendations. Subgroups responsible for each PICO question subsequently identified major research gaps by synthesizing the literature. These gaps were presented at an international symposium at the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators meeting in spring 2022 for open discussion. Feedback was incorporated, and final evaluation of research gaps are summarized herein. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent the highest level of evidence, the panel sought to highlight areas where alternative study designs also may be appropriate, given challenges with conducting large multicenter RCTs in children.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant research gaps were identified in six broad areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation. Several of these areas necessitate multicenter RCTs to provide definitive results, whereas other gaps can be addressed with multicenter observational studies or quality improvement initiatives. Furthermore, a need for some physiologic studies in several areas remains, particularly regarding newer diagnostic methods to improve identification of patients at high risk of extubation failure.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Although pediatric ventilator liberation guidelines have been created, the certainty of evidence remains low and multiple research gaps exist that should be bridged through high-quality RCTs, multicenter observational studies, and quality improvement initiatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":9782,"journal":{"name":"Chest","volume":" ","pages":"1056-1070"},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11562655/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framework for Research Gaps in Pediatric Ventilator Liberation.\",\"authors\":\"Samer Abu-Sultaneh, Narayan Prabhu Iyer, Analía Fernández, Lyvonne N Tume, Martin C J Kneyber, Yolanda M López-Fernández, Guillaume Emeriaud, Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Robinder G Khemani\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chest.2024.05.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The 2023 International Pediatric Ventilator Liberation Clinical Practice Guidelines provided evidence-based recommendations to guide pediatric critical care providers on how to perform daily aspects of ventilator liberation. However, because of the lack of high-quality pediatric studies, most recommendations were conditional based on very low to low certainty of evidence.</p><p><strong>Research question: </strong>What are the research gaps related to pediatric ventilator liberation that can be studied to strengthen the evidence for future updates of the guidelines?</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>We conducted systematic reviews of the literature in eight predefined Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation to generate recommendations. Subgroups responsible for each PICO question subsequently identified major research gaps by synthesizing the literature. These gaps were presented at an international symposium at the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators meeting in spring 2022 for open discussion. Feedback was incorporated, and final evaluation of research gaps are summarized herein. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent the highest level of evidence, the panel sought to highlight areas where alternative study designs also may be appropriate, given challenges with conducting large multicenter RCTs in children.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant research gaps were identified in six broad areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation. Several of these areas necessitate multicenter RCTs to provide definitive results, whereas other gaps can be addressed with multicenter observational studies or quality improvement initiatives. Furthermore, a need for some physiologic studies in several areas remains, particularly regarding newer diagnostic methods to improve identification of patients at high risk of extubation failure.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Although pediatric ventilator liberation guidelines have been created, the certainty of evidence remains low and multiple research gaps exist that should be bridged through high-quality RCTs, multicenter observational studies, and quality improvement initiatives.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chest\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1056-1070\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11562655/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chest\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2024.05.012\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chest","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2024.05.012","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:2023 年国际儿科呼吸机解放临床实践指南提供了循证建议,指导儿科重症监护人员如何进行呼吸机解放的日常工作。然而,由于缺乏高质量的儿科研究,大多数建议都是在证据确定性很低或很低的基础上提出的:与儿科呼吸机解脱相关的研究空白有哪些?我们对与儿科呼吸机解放相关的 8 个预定义 PICO 领域的文献进行了系统回顾,以提出建议。负责每个 PICO 问题的分组随后通过综合文献确定了主要的研究差距。在 2022 年春季召开的儿科急性肺损伤和败血症研究者 (PALISI) 会议的国际研讨会上,这些研究缺口被提交给会议进行公开讨论,会议采纳了反馈意见,并在本文件中总结了对研究缺口的最终评估。虽然随机试验(RCT)代表了最高水平的证据,但考虑到在儿童中开展大型多中心 RCT 所面临的挑战,专家小组试图强调其他研究设计也可能合适的领域:结果:在与儿科呼吸机解放相关的六大领域发现了重大研究缺口。其中几个领域需要进行多中心 RCT 研究才能得出明确结果,而其他领域则可以通过多中心观察研究或质量改进措施来解决。此外,在一些领域仍需要进行一些生理学研究,特别是关于更新的诊断方法,以更好地识别拔管失败的高风险患者:虽然已经制定了儿科呼吸机拔管指南,但证据的确定性仍然很低,而且还存在多个研究空白,应通过高质量的研究性试验、多中心观察研究和质量改进措施来填补这些空白。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Framework for Research Gaps in Pediatric Ventilator Liberation.

Background: The 2023 International Pediatric Ventilator Liberation Clinical Practice Guidelines provided evidence-based recommendations to guide pediatric critical care providers on how to perform daily aspects of ventilator liberation. However, because of the lack of high-quality pediatric studies, most recommendations were conditional based on very low to low certainty of evidence.

Research question: What are the research gaps related to pediatric ventilator liberation that can be studied to strengthen the evidence for future updates of the guidelines?

Study design and methods: We conducted systematic reviews of the literature in eight predefined Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation to generate recommendations. Subgroups responsible for each PICO question subsequently identified major research gaps by synthesizing the literature. These gaps were presented at an international symposium at the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators meeting in spring 2022 for open discussion. Feedback was incorporated, and final evaluation of research gaps are summarized herein. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent the highest level of evidence, the panel sought to highlight areas where alternative study designs also may be appropriate, given challenges with conducting large multicenter RCTs in children.

Results: Significant research gaps were identified in six broad areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation. Several of these areas necessitate multicenter RCTs to provide definitive results, whereas other gaps can be addressed with multicenter observational studies or quality improvement initiatives. Furthermore, a need for some physiologic studies in several areas remains, particularly regarding newer diagnostic methods to improve identification of patients at high risk of extubation failure.

Interpretation: Although pediatric ventilator liberation guidelines have been created, the certainty of evidence remains low and multiple research gaps exist that should be bridged through high-quality RCTs, multicenter observational studies, and quality improvement initiatives.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Chest
Chest 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
3.10%
发文量
3369
审稿时长
15 days
期刊介绍: At CHEST, our mission is to revolutionize patient care through the collaboration of multidisciplinary clinicians in the fields of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. We achieve this by publishing cutting-edge clinical research that addresses current challenges and brings forth future advancements. To enhance understanding in a rapidly evolving field, CHEST also features review articles, commentaries, and facilitates discussions on emerging controversies. We place great emphasis on scientific rigor, employing a rigorous peer review process, and ensuring all accepted content is published online within two weeks.
×
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