Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34362165›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021

Airway Care Interventions for Invasively Ventilated Critically Ill Adults-A Dutch National Survey.

Willemke Stilma, Sophia M van der Hoeven, Wilma J M Scholte Op Reimer, Marcus J Schultz, Louise Rose, Frederique Paulus

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Willemke StilmaCenter of Expertise Urban Vitality, Faculty of Health, Amsterdam University of Applied Science, 1105 BD Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Sophia M van der HoevenDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location AMC, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Wilma J M Scholte Op ReimerDepartment of Cardiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location AMC, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcus J SchultzDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location AMC, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3969-7792
Louise RoseFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London WC2R 2LS, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1700-3972
Frederique PaulusCenter of Expertise Urban Vitality, Faculty of Health, Amsterdam University of Applied Science, 1105 BD Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLKing's College London · GBMahidol University · TH

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 023.011.016.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Airway care interventions may prevent accumulation of airway secretions and promote their evacuation, but evidence is scarce. Interventions include heated humidification, nebulization of mucolytics and/or bronchodilators, manual hyperinflation and use of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E). Our aim is to identify current airway care practices for invasively ventilated patients in intensive care units (ICU) in the Netherlands. A self-administered web-based survey was sent to a single pre-appointed representative of all ICUs in the Netherlands. Response rate was 85% (72 ICUs). We found substantial heterogeneity in the intensity and combinations of airway care interventions used. Most (81%) ICUs reported using heated humidification as a routine prophylactic intervention. All (100%) responding ICUs used nebulized mucolytics and/or bronchodilators; however, only 43% ICUs reported nebulization as a routine prophylactic intervention. Most (81%) ICUs used manual hyperinflation, although only initiated with a clinical indication like difficult oxygenation. Few (22%) ICUs used MI-E for invasively ventilated patients. Use was always based on the indication of insufficient cough strength or as a continuation of home use. In the Netherlands, use of routine prophylactic airway care interventions is common despite evidence of no benefit. There is an urgent need for evidence of the benefit of these interventions to inform evidence-based guidelines.

Indexed as

heated humidificationintensive careinvasive ventilationmanual hyperinflationmechanical in-exsufflationnebulization therapy

Identifiers

PMID34362165
PMCPMC8347919
OpenAlexW3188847122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.