ArticleCritical care (London, England)2014
Neurally adjusted non-invasive ventilation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: does patient-ventilator synchrony matter?
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Noninvasive Neurally Adjusted Ventilator Assist Ventilation in the Postoperative Period Produces Better Patient-Ventilator Synchrony but Not Comfort.Pulmonary medicine · 2020Trial
- A randomized clinical trial of neurally adjusted ventilatory assist versus conventional weaning mode in patients with COPD and prolonged mechanical ventilation.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2016Trial
- [Hypercapnic respiratory failure. Pathophysiology, indications for mechanical ventilation and management].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2016Review
- Noninvasive ventilation-neurally adjusted ventilator assist for management of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-ventilator interaction represents an important clinical challenge during non-invasive ventilation (NIV). Doorduin and colleagues' study shows that non-invasive neurally adjusted ventilatory assist (NAVA) improves patient-ventilator interaction compared with pressure support ventilation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. There is no doubt nowadays that NAVA is the most effective mode of improving the synchrony between patient and machine, but the key question for the clinicians is whether or not this will make a difference to the patient's outcome. The results of the study still do not clarify this issue because of the very low clinically important dyssynchrony, like wasted efforts, in the population studied. Air leaks play an important role in determining patient-ventilator interaction and therefore NIV success or failure. Apart from the use of a dedicated NIV ventilator or specific modes of ventilation like NAVA, the clinicians should be aware that the choice of interface, the humidification system and the appropriate sedation are key factors in improving patient-ventilator synchrony.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.