ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Airway Care Interventions for Invasively Ventilated Critically Ill Adults-A Dutch National Survey.
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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physiological and clinical effects of selected airway clearance techniques in mechanically ventilated adult ICU patients: a systematic review and synthesis without meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Practice of airway clearance in critically ill patients: a cross-sectional survey of respiratory therapists and physiotherapists in China.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Clinical Efficacy of In-Line Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation in Patients with Invasive Mechanical Ventilation After Cardiopulmonary Bypass.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Consensus Statements on Airway Clearance Interventions in Intubated Critically Ill Patients-Protocol for a Delphi Study.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Nursing Practice of Airway Care Interventions and Prone Positioning in ICU Patients with COVID-19-A Dutch National Survey.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Open Versus Closed Suctioning in Invasively Ventilated Critically Ill Patients for Sustainability of ICU Care: A Life-Cycle Assessment Comparison.Respiratory care · 2024Article
- Airway Mucus in Invasively Ventilated Critically Ill Patients.Respiratory care · 2023Article
- Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation: Considerations for Improving Clinical Practice.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- 2022 Year in Review: Mechanical Insufflation-Exsufflation.Respiratory care · 2023Review
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 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
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
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.