ArticleCritical care explorations2021
Lung-Protective Ventilation Over 6 Years at a Large Academic Medical Center: An Evaluation of Trends, Adherence, and Perceptions of Benefit.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2021. 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.
- Review
- Using a clinical decision support system to reduce excess driving pressure: the ALARM trial.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Trends in Return of Spontaneous Circulation and Survival to Hospital Discharge for In-Intensive Care Unit Cardiac Arrests.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Observational
- Initiation of a Lung Protective Ventilation Strategy in the Emergency Department: Does an Emergency Department-Based ICU Make a Difference?Critical care explorations · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to evaluate trends in set tidal volumes across all adult ICUs at a large academic medical center over 6 years, with a focus on adherence to lung-protective ventilation (≤ 8-cc/kg ideal body weight). A secondary objective was to survey providers on their perceptions of lung-protective ventilation and barriers to its implementation.
designRetrospective observational analysis (primary objective) and cross-sectional survey study (secondary objective), both at a single center.
participantsMechanically ventilated adult patients with a set tidal volume (primary objective) and providers rotating through the Medical and Neurosciences ICUs (secondary objective).
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsFrom 2013 to 2018, the average initial set tidal volume (cc/kg ideal body weight) decreased from 8.99 ± 2.19 to 7.45±1.34 (
conclusionsDespite a trend toward lower tidal volumes over the years, in 2018, over a quarter of mechanically ventilated adult patients were being ventilated with tidal volumes greater than 8 cc/kg. Survey data indicate that despite respondents acknowledging the benefits of lung-protective ventilation, there are barriers to its optimal implementation. Future modifications of the electronic medical record, including a calculator to set tidal volume in cc/kg and the use of default set tidal volumes, may help facilitate the delivery of and adherence to lung-protective ventilation.
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.