Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38435993›Full record

Trial reportPeerJ2024

The application of two drainage angles in neurocritical care patients with complicated pneumonia: a randomized controlled trial.

Anna Zhao, Huangrong Zeng, Hui Yin, Jinlin Wang, Wenming Yuan, Chao Li, Yan Zhong, Lanlan Ma, Chongmao Liao, Hong Zeng and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anna ZhaoDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Huangrong ZengDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Hui YinDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Jinlin WangDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Wenming YuanDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Chao LiDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Yan ZhongDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Lanlan MaDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Chongmao LiaoDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Hong ZengDepartment of Neurocritical Care Unit, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Yan LiDepartment of Nursing, Guangdong Sanjiu Brain Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Guangdong 999 Brain Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Although head elevation is an early first-line treatment for elevated intracranial pressure (ICP), the use of the head-down or prone position in managing neurocritical patients is controversial because a change in a position directly affects the intracranial and cerebral perfusion pressure, which may cause secondary brain injury and affect patient outcomes. This study compared the effects of two postural drainage positions (30° head-up tilt and 0° head flat) on the prognosis of neurocritical care patients with complicated pneumonia and a clinical pulmonary infection score (CPIS) ≥5 points to provide a reference for selecting appropriate postural drainage positions for patients with pneumonia in neurocritical care units. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled study was conducted with 62 neurocritical care patients with complicated pneumonia. The patients were categorized into control (=31) and experimental (=31) groups in a 1:1 ratio using a simple randomized non-homologous pairing method. Emphasis was placed on matching the baseline characteristics of the two groups, including patient age, sex, height, weight, Glasgow Coma Scale score, heart rate, mean arterial pressure, cough reflex, and mechanical ventilation usage to ensure comparability. Both groups received bundled care for artificial airway management. The control group maintained a standard postural drainage position of 0° head-flat, whereas the experimental group maintained a 30° head-up tilt. The efficacy of the nursing intervention was evaluated by comparing the CPIS and other therapeutic indicators between the two groups after postural drainage. Results: After the intervention, the within-group comparison showed a significant decrease in the CPIS ( Conclusion: Postural drainage positions of 30° head-up tilt and 0° head-flat can improve the CPIS and oxygenation in patients without adverse effects. Therefore, we recommend that patients under neurological intensive care and having pneumonia be drained in a 30° head-up tilt position with good centralized care of the lung infection. Trial registration: The study, "Study of Angles of Postural Drainage in Neurocritical Patients with Pneumonia," was registered in the Protocol Registration Data Element Definitions for Interventional Study database (# ChiCTR2100042155); date of registration: 2021-01-14.

Indexed as

PneumoniaAirway ManagementDrainage, PosturalHumansOxygenProspective StudiesOxygenIntensive care unitsMucusNeurologyNursingPneumoniaPositional drainageRandomized controlled trialsVibration technique

Identifiers

PMID38435993
PMCPMC10909356
OpenAlexW4392294092

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.