Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19626185›Full record

ArticleDeutsches Arzteblatt international2008

Clinical practice guideline: non-invasive mechanical ventilation as treatment of acute respiratory failure.

Bernd Schönhofer, Ralf Kuhlen, Peter Neumann, Michael Westhoff, Christian Berndt, Helmut Sitter

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Conservative versus liberal oxygen therapy in mechanically ventilated patients: A systematic review with meta-analysis.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. [Acute heart failure].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2012
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Bernd SchönhoferKrankenhaus Oststadt-Heidehaus, Abteilung Pneumologie undinternistische Intensivmedizin, Klinikum Region Hannover, Podbielskistrasse 380, Hannover, Germany. Bernd.Schoenhofer@t-online.de
Ralf Kuhlen
Peter Neumann
Michael Westhoff
Christian Berndt
Helmut Sitter
Evangelisches Krankenhaus Göttingen-Weende · DEHelios Hospital Berlin-Buch · DEKlinikum Region Hannover · DEPhillips University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionNon-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) has been used to treat acute respiratory failure (ARF) for approximately 20 years. This guideline addresses the indications for, and limitations of, NIV as treatment for ARF according to evidence-based criteria.

methodsA panel of experts from 12 scientific medical societies reviewed circa 2900 publications. The panel judged the clinical relevance of these studies and assessed the evidence presented in each, then held two interdisciplinary consensus conferences to formulate guideline recommendations and algorithms.

resultsWhenever possible, NIV should be preferred to invasive mechanical ventilation, in order to avoid the risk of ventilator and tube-associated complications such as nosocomial pneumonia (grade of recommendation A). Particularly in patients with hypercapnic ARF, NIV reduces the rate of hospital-acquired pneumonia, the length of hospital stay and mortality in the intensive care unit and in the hospital (grade of recommendation A). NIV (or continuous positive airway pressure) is also recommended in cardiogenic pulmonary edema (grade of recommendation A), as treatment for ARF in immunocompromised patients (grade of recommendation A), to prevent postextubation failure, to facilitate weaning in patients with hypercapnic ARF (grade of recommendation A), and to improve dyspnea in palliative care (grade of recommendation C). NIV is not generally recommended in patients with hypoxic ARF because of its high failure rate of 30% to over 50% in such patients. DISCUSSION: Although evidence indicates that NIV can be used as the treatment of first choice for several indications, it is still underutilized in the acute setting. These guidelines provide evidence-based information about the indications for, and limitations of, NIV in the treatment of ARF.

Indexed as

acute respiratory distress syndromeevidence-based medicinenon-invasive positive pressure ventilationrespiratory insufficiencytherapy

Identifiers

PMID19626185
PMCPMC2696903
OpenAlexW2129306729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.