Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18846557›Full record

ArticlePediatric pulmonology2008

Measurement of maximal inspiratory pressure in ventilated children.

Gopinathannair Harikumar, John Moxham, Anne Greenough, Gerrard F Rafferty

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric pulmonology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Research advances in validity of predictors for extubation outcome in children receiving invasive mechanical ventilation].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2019
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gopinathannair HarikumarDivision of Asthma, Allergy and Lung Biology, King's College London, London, UK.
John MoxhamDivision of Asthma, Allergy and Lung Biology, King's College London, London, UK.
Anne GreenoughDivision of Asthma, Allergy and Lung Biology, King's College London, London, UK.
Gerrard F RaffertyDivision of Asthma, Allergy and Lung Biology, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GB

Funding

Department of HealthWellcome Trust 067882
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Maximal inspiratory pressure (PIMAX), the maximum negative pressure generated during temporary occlusion of the airway, is commonly used to measure inspiratory muscle strength in mechanically ventilated infants and children. There are, however, no guidelines as to how the PIMAX measurement should be made. We compared the maximum inspiratory pressure generated during airway occlusion (PIMAX(OCC)) to that when a unidirectional valve (PIMAX(UNI)), which allowed expiration, but not inspiration was used. Twenty-two mechanically ventilated children (mean (SD) age 4.8 (4.5) years) were studied. Three sets of end expiratory occlusions were performed for each method in random order. The expired volume during PIMAX(UNI) was assessed and related to the functional residual capacity (FRC) measured using a helium dilution technique.The mean (SD) PIMAX(UNI) (45.5 (15.2) cmH(2)O) was significantly greater than mean (SD) PIMAX(OCC) (30.9 (9.0) cmH(2)O) (P < 0.0001). The mean (SD) expired volume during PIMAX(UNI), was 98 ml (62.3), a mean reduction in FRC of 33.1% (SD 13.9). There were no significant differences between techniques in the baseline respiratory drive, the number of efforts required and the time to reach PIMAX. Regardless of technique, PIMAX was reached in 10 inspiratory efforts or 15 sec of airway occlusion.A unidirectional valve allowing expiration, but not inspiration yields greater PIMAX values in children. Occlusions should be maintained for 12 sec or eight breaths (99% CI of mean).

Indexed as

Inspiratory CapacityRespiration, ArtificialChildChild, PreschoolHumansInfantProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID18846557
PMCPMC2739366
OpenAlexW2153391854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.