ReviewJournal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association2025
Unplanned Extubation in the Burn Unit: A Retrospective Review.
Review in Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Risk Prediction of Unplanned Extubation in Inpatients Using Random Forest and Logistic Regression Models.Journal of patient safety · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unplanned extubation rates in burn patients were previously reported at 27% (3 cases per 100 ventilator days). As facial burns pose a unique challenge to tube securement, patients in our unit have surgically placed bite blocks to secure the endotracheal tube at the provider's discretion. Herein, we assessed unplanned extubation rates at our burn center. We performed a retrospective cohort study including burn patients who required mechanical ventilation from 7/01/2015 to 6/30/2023. Demographics, comorbidities, injuries, and hospital course information were collected and compared between patients who had an unplanned extubation and those who did not. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with unplanned extubation and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) complication. P < 0.05 was considered significant. Of 360 patients, 17 (4.7%) had unplanned extubations, representing 0.7 cases per 100 ventilator days. There were no significant differences in demographics, comorbidities, or burn injury characteristics between groups. Patients with unplanned extubation were more likely to have an inhalation injury (70.6% vs 42.6%, P = .001), paCO2 ≥ 50 (70.6% vs 39.1%, P = .031), more ventilator days (6 [2-15] vs 2 [1-4] days, P < .001), and more hospital days (14 [8.5-25.5] vs 8 [2-20], P = .020). Ventilator-associated pneumonia rate tended to be higher in the unplanned extubation group (17.6% vs 5.5%, P = .077). On multivariate analysis, inhalation injury was associated with an increased risk of unplanned extubation (odds ratio (OR) = 4.68 [1.59-13.81], P = .005). No patients with bite blocks had an unplanned extubation. Further study on the utility of advanced securement devices is recommended.
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.