Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32650350›Full record

ArticleGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2020

[Quality of Care for People with Home Mechanical Ventilation in Germany: A Scoping Review].

Hanna Klingshirn, Laura Gerken, Peter Heuschmann, Kirsten Haas, Martha Schutzmeier, Lilly Brandstetter, Stephanie Stangl, Thomas Wurmb, Maximilian Kippnich, Bernd Reuschenbach

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hanna Klingshirn *Katholische Stiftungshochschule München, München.
Laura Gerken *Katholische Stiftungshochschule München, München.
Peter HeuschmannInstitut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg.
Kirsten HaasInstitut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg.
Martha SchutzmeierInstitut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg.
Lilly BrandstetterInstitut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg.
Stephanie StanglInstitut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg.
Thomas WurmbSektion Notfall- und Katastrophenmedizin, Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg.
Maximilian KippnichSektion Notfall- und Katastrophenmedizin, Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg.
Bernd ReuschenbachKatholische Stiftungshochschule München, München.
University of Würzburg · DEKatholische Stiftungsfachhochschule München · DEUniversitätsklinikum Würzburg · DE

Funding

01VSF17008. Innovationsfonds zur Förderung von Versorgungsforschung
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOutpatient intensive care for people with long-term mechanical ventilation is a rapidly growing area with a wide range of care demands. The aim of this Scoping Review is to present the current state of research on the quality of care for people with home mechanical ventilation in Germany and to identify research gaps.

methodsBased on predefined inclusion criteria, 4 databases were searched for publications dealing with the care of people with home ventilation in Germany. The method of "data driven thematic analysis" led the data extraction and analysis. Distinction was made between research and expert opinion.

resultsThe search resulted in 493 matches of which 68 publications were included in the this study: two guidelines (3%), 45 (66%) research papers and 21 (31%) expert opinions. The following topics were identified: Organization and control of ventilation (n=43; 63%), nursing (n=23; 34%), medical (n=39; 57%), therapeutic (n=7; 10%) and assistive technologies care (n=24; 35%), as well as the perspective of people with home mechanical ventilation and their relatives (n=33; 49%) and other topics (n=13; 19%).

conclusionAlthough the debate on the quality of care for people living with home mechanical ventilation is conducted broadly, studies focusing on individual care demands, autonomy and participation depending on the living situation or on the role of specific health professionals within the interprofessional team are missing.

Indexed as

Critical CareQuality of Health CareRespiration, ArtificialGermanyHealth PersonnelHumans

Identifiers

PMID32650350
PMCPMC7518336
OpenAlexW3041257111

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.