ReviewEnfermeria intensiva
[Adjuvant treatments to invasive mechanical ventilation in the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome secondary to COVID-19].
Review in Enfermeria intensiva. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This bibliographic review is carried out in order to obtain answers about aspects related to techniques and treatments, as well as care associated with the critically ill patient diagnosed with COVID-19. Objective: To analyze the available scientific evidence on the effectiveness of the use of invasive mechanical ventilation together with other adjuvant techniques, in reducing the mortality rate in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and clinical trial of COVID-19 treated in intensive care units. Methodology: A systematized bibliographic review was carried out in the PubMed, CUIDEN, LILACS, Medline, CINAHL and Google Scholar databases, using MeSH terms (adult respiratory distress syndrome, mechanical ventilation, prone position, nitric oxide, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, nursing care) and the corresponding Boolean operators. The selected studies underwent a critical reading carried out between December 6, 2020 and March 27, 2021 using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool in Spanish and a cross-sectional epidemiological studies evaluation instrument. Results: A total of 85 articles were selected. After performing the critical reading, a total of 7 articles were included in the review, 6 being descriptive studies and one a cohort study. After analyzing these studies, it appears that the technique that has obtained the best results is extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, with the care provided by qualified and trained nursing staff being very important. Conclusion: Mortality from COVID-19 increases in patients treated with invasive mechanical ventilation compared to patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Nursing care and specialization can have an impact on improving patient outcomes.
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.