Trial reportGlobal journal of health science2015
Comparison of Two Levels of Pressure Support Ventilation on Success of Extubation in Preterm Neonates: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Global journal of health science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Peri-extubation settings in preterm neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024Pooled it
- Using machine-learning models to predict extubation failure in neonates with bronchopulmonary dysplasia.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- Development and Validation of a Machine-Learning Model for Prediction of Extubation Failure in Intensive Care Units.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPressure Support Ventilation (PSV) is one of the modes of mechanical ventilation that can be used alone as a weaning strategy in neonates. However, studies on the appropriate pressure level for this mode in neonates are limited.
objectivesBecause the use of adequate pressure support in this mode, keeping the appropriate neonate's tidal volume, and preventing the respiratory complications, this study was aimed to compare extubation failure in the two levels of pressure support ventilation of 10 and 14 cmH2O when removing the neonates from the ventilator. MATERIALS &
methodsIn this randomized clinical trial 50 premature infants of 27-37 weeks with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) were under mechanical ventilation for at least 48 hours, were randomly assigned to two groups. One group was extubated in PSV mode with pressure of 14 cmH2O and the other with 10 cmH2O. Extubation failure rate and complications such as pneumothorax, death and respiratory parameters were compared in the two groups.
resultsTwenty five neonates in each group were assessed. Weaning time, extubation failure rate, and mean airway pressure was lesser in PSV of 10 cmH2O group than Level of 14 cmH2O and those differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Difference between work of breathing, ventilation time, pneumothorax and mortality rate between two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05).
conclusionThe results of our study show that extubation of the neonates using 10 CmH2O in PSV mode increases the success rate of extubation. Although when Volume- assured PSV can be used, it is more logical to use it for guaranteeing tidal volume, but using the appropriate level of pressure support when the PSV mode is used alone is inevitable and further studies are necessary to demonstrate the level of pressure in this mode.
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.