ArticleCritical care explorations2021
Impact of Height Estimation on Tidal Volume Calculation for Protective Ventilation-A Prospective Observational Study.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recorded body height and sex differences in lung-protective ventilation among adults with ARDS: an 11-year single-centre cohort study.Journal of intensive care · 2026Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe current standard of care to deliver invasive mechanical ventilation support is the protective ventilation approach. One pillar of this approach is the limitation of tidal volume to less than 6 mL/Kg of predicted body weight. Predicted body weight is calculated from patient's height. Yet, little is known about the potential impact of errors arising from visual height estimation, a common practice, to calculate tidal volumes. The aim of this study was to evaluate that impact on tidal volume calculation to use during protective ventilation.
designProspective observational study.
settingAn eight-bed polyvalent ICU. PATIENTS: Adult patients (≥ 18 yr).
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsTidal volumes were calculated from visual height estimates made by physicians, nurses, and patients themselves and compared with tidal volumes calculated from measured heights. Comparisons were made using the paired t test. Modified Bland-Altman plots were used to assess agreement between height estimates and measurements. One-hundred patients were recruited. Regardless of the height estimator, all the mean tidal volumes would be greater than 6 mL/Kg predicted body weight (all
conclusionsThe clinical benefit of the protective ventilation strategy can be offset by using visual height estimates to calculate tidal volumes. Additionally, this approach can be harmful and potentially increase mortality by exposing patients to tidal volumes greater than or equal to 6.5 mL/Kg predicted body weight. In the interest of patient safety, every ICU patient should have his or her height accurately measured.
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.