Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21233157›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2011

Use of weaning protocols for reducing duration of mechanical ventilation in critically ill adult patients: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis.

Bronagh Blackwood, Fiona Alderdice, Karen Burns, Chris Cardwell, Gavin Lavery, Peter O'Halloran

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 76 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03255109 completednot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

WEAN SAFE (WorldwidE AssessmeNt of Separation of pAtients From Ventilatory assistancE)

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorEuropean Society of Intensive Care MedicineRan2017 to 2018Enrolled11,000ConditionsAcute Severe Respiratory Failure, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
NCT03697785 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Weaning Algorithm for Mechanical VEntilation (WAVE Study): A Randomised Control Trial Comparing an Open-loop Decision Support System Versus Routine Care for Weaning From Mechanical Ventilation in the Cardiothoracic Intensive Care Unit

TypeinterventionalSponsorRoyal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation TrustRan2018 to 2021Enrolled286ConditionsRespiration, Artificial, Critical Care, Respiratory Insufficiency, Intensive Care (ICU) MyopathyArmsBeacon Care System
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

76 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. [S3 Guideline Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and aftercare : Long version].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020
    Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Brazilian recommendations of mechanical ventilation 2013. Part 2.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2014
    Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Bronagh BlackwoodNursing and Midwifery Research Unit, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, BT9 5BN, Northern Ireland. b.blackwood@qub.ac.uk
Fiona Alderdice
Karen Burns
Chris Cardwell
Gavin Lavery
Peter O'Halloran

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the effects of weaning protocols on the total duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality, adverse events, quality of life, weaning duration, and length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital.

designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, ISI Web of Science, ISI Conference Proceedings, Cambridge Scientific Abstracts, and reference lists of articles. We did not apply language restrictions. Review methods We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of weaning from mechanical ventilation with and without protocols in critically ill adults. Data selection Three authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. A priori subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. We contacted study authors for additional information.

resultsEleven trials that included 1971 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with usual care, the geometric mean duration of mechanical ventilation in the weaning protocol group was reduced by 25% (95% confidence interval 9% to 39%, P=0.006; 10 trials); the duration of weaning was reduced by 78% (31% to 93%, P=0.009; six trials); and stay in the intensive care unit length by 10% (2% to 19%, P=0.02; eight trials). There was significant heterogeneity among studies for total duration of mechanical ventilation (I(2)=76%, P<0.01) and duration of weaning (I(2)=97%, P<0.01), which could not be explained by subgroup analyses based on type of unit or type of approach.

conclusionThere is evidence of a reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning, and stay in the intensive care unit when standardised weaning protocols are used, but there is significant heterogeneity among studies and an insufficient number of studies to investigate the source of this heterogeneity. Some studies suggest that organisational context could influence outcomes, but this could not be evaluated as it was outside the scope of this review.

Indexed as

AdultClinical ProtocolsCosts and Cost AnalysisCritical CareCritical IllnessHospital MortalityHumansLength of StayRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsSelection BiasTime FactorsVentilator Weaning

Identifiers

PMID21233157
PMCPMC3020589

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.