SynthesisRespiratory care2024
Nocturnal Pressure Controlled Ventilation Improves Sleep Efficiency in Patients Receiving Mechanical Ventilation.
Synthesis in Respiratory care, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Severe anxiety, depression, and sleep disorders worsen prognosis in patients with septic shock.World journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
- Nocturnal Pressure Support Ventilation: Truth or Dare?Respiratory care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients receiving mechanical ventilation commonly experience sleep fragmentation. The present meta-analysis compared the effects of pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) and pressure support ventilation (PSV) on sleep quality.
methodsWe conducted a search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published before November 2023. In this meta-analysis, individual effect sizes were standardized, and the pooled effect size was determined by using random-effects models. The primary outcome was sleep efficiency. The secondary outcomes were wakefulness, percentages of REM (rapid eye movement) sleep and stages 3 and 4 non-REM sleep, the fragmentation index, and the incidence of apneic events.
resultsThis meta-analysis examined 4 trials that involved 67 subjects. Sleep efficiency was significantly higher in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference 15.57%, 95% CI 8.54%-22.59%). Wakefulness was significantly lower in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference -18.67%, 95% CI -30.29% to -7.04%). The percentage of REM sleep was significantly higher in the PCV group than in the PSV group (mean difference 2.32%, 95% CI 0.20%-4.45%). Among the subjects with a tendency to develop sleep apnea, the fragmentation index was significantly lower in those receiving PCV than PSV (mean difference -40.00%, 95% CI -51.12% to -28.88%). The incidence of apneic events was significantly lower in the PCV group than in the PSV group (risk ratio 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.45).
conclusionsCompared with PSV, PCV may improve sleep quality in patients receiving nocturnal mechanical ventilation.
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.