SynthesisRevista Brasileira de terapia intensiva
Cough peak flow to predict extubation outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Revista Brasileira de terapia intensiva. 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.
- Implementing the Pediatric Ventilator Liberation Guidelines Using the Most Current Evidence.Respiratory care · 2024Review
- Assessing the reproducibility and predictive value of objective cough measurement for successful withdrawal of invasive ventilatory support in adult patients.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis systematic review was designed to assess the usefulness of cough peak flow to predict the extubation outcome in subjects who passed a spontaneous breathing trial.
methodsThe search covered the scientific databases MEDLINE, Lilacs, Ibecs, Cinahl, SciELO, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science and gray literature. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies was used to assess the methodological quality and risk of study bias. The statistical heterogeneity of the likelihood (LR) and diagnostic odds ratios were evaluated using forest plots and Cochran's Q statistic, and a crosshair summary Receiver Operating Characteristic plot using the multiple cutoffs model was calculated.
resultsWe initially retrieved 3,522 references from the databases; among these, 12 studies including 1,757 subjects were selected for the qualitative analysis. Many studies presented an unclear risk of bias in the "patient selection" and "flow and time" criteria. Among the 12 included studies, seven presented "high risk" and five "unclear risk" for the item "reference standard." The diagnostic performance of the cough peak flow for the extubation outcome was low to moderate when we considered the results from all included studies, with a +LR of 1.360 (95%CI 1.240 - 1.530), -LR of 0.218 (95%CI 0.159 - 0.293) and a diagnostic odds ratio of 6.450 (95%CI 4.490 - 9.090). A subgroup analysis including only the studies with a cutoff between 55 and 65 L/minute showed a slightly better, although still moderate, performance.
conclusionA cough peak flow assessment considering a cutoff between 55 and 65L/minute may be useful as a complementary measurement prior to extubation. Additional well-designed studies are necessary to identify the best method and equipment to record the cough peak flow as well as the best cutoff.
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.