ArticleImplementation science communications2025
Normalizing daily awakening and breathing coordination at 15 heterogenous ICUs: a multicenter post-implementation survey.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2025. 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.
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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite high post-implementation adherence, clinicians may have unresolved questions or concerns regarding use of a protocol to standardize routine daily coordination of the spontaneous awakening trial (SAT) and spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) on ventilated patients. Unresolved questions or concerns may unwittingly curtail practice normalization, impacting practice sustainment when implementation support is withdrawn. The objective of this study was to identify unresolved questions or concerns that may persist following successful implementation of a coordinated SAT/SBT (C-SAT/SBT) protocol.
methodsWe used an attributed, cross-sectional survey of physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses and respiratory therapists likely to have participated in a C-SAT/SBT in 12 hospitals (15 intensive care units) in Utah and Idaho. We evaluated clinician perceptions of acceptability, including ease of use, usefulness and confidence, along with perceived practice normalization, six months post implementation of a protocol to routinize C-SAT/SBT use.
resultsC-SAT/SBT adherence was 83.1% at the 6th month post implementation. 606 clinicians completed the survey (response rate: 50.0%). Perceived individual usefulness, ease of use, and confidence using the C-SAT/SBT protocol were high [range: 72.1%-88.1% agree/strongly agree], though individuals not performing an SAT or SBT in more than six months and respiratory therapists scored lower. Perceived practice normalization was similar with 82.0% aggregate agreement [agree/strongly agree]. However, when stratifying respondents into four categories based upon respondent percentage agreement with all statements, 71% did not agree with at least one practice normalization statement and 27% agreed with less than 80% of statements, varying by role and site. Sets of observable characteristics or phenotypes regarding the degree of practice normalization begin to emerge by subgroup.
conclusionsUnresolved questions or concerns may persist regarding implementation of a C-SAT/SBT protocol among certain population subgroups despite current high practice adherence and high levels of perceived acceptability, including ease of use, usefulness and confidence. It is not clear what impact these unresolved questions or concerns may have on practice normalization and multi-year practice sustainment systemwide, including whether targeted late post-implementation strategies are needed to mitigate concerns and promote sustainment when implementation support is withdrawn.
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.