Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42568095›Full record

Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2026

The impact of an intensive care telemedicine program on weaning from invasive ventilation: a secondary analysis of the ERIC trial.

Moritz F Adam, Julius J Grunow, Andreas Edel, Karin Steinecke, Friederike S Schuster, Claudia D Spies, Björn Weiss, Nicolas Paul

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03671447 (Enhanced Recovery After Intensive Care), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03671447 nacompletednot on this map

Enhanced Recovery After Intensive Care (ERIC) - a Multi-Center Stepped Wedge Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorCharite University, Berlin, GermanyRan2018 to 2020Enrolled1,463ConditionsCritical IllnessArmsICU Usual Care, Tele-ICU
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

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

8 authors.

Moritz F AdamDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (CCM/CVK), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-2497-743X
Julius J GrunowDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (CCM/CVK), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4164-0138
Andreas EdelDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (CCM/CVK), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9951-7223
Karin SteineckeDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (CCM/CVK), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-4239-6680
Friederike S SchusterDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (CCM/CVK), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5447-7929
Claudia D SpiesDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (CCM/CVK), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1062-0495
Björn WeissDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (CCM/CVK), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3139-595X
Nicolas PaulDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (CCM/CVK), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin, 13353, Germany. nicolas.paul@charite.de.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2228-3980

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundICU patients commonly require invasive mechanical ventilation. Although weaning from ventilation is crucial for patient outcomes, it is commonly not performed according to guideline recommendations. We investigated if a complex telemedicine intervention improves the weaning process and outcomes.

methodsThis is a secondary analysis of the stepped-wedge cluster-randomized controlled Enhanced Recovery after Intensive Care (ERIC) trial, which was conducted among ten clusters of ICUs in the metropolitan area of Berlin, Germany. ERIC examined the impact of a complex telemedicine intervention, which included daily telemedicine rounding by an intensivist and ICU nurse, on the adherence to eight quality indicators of ICU care. We analyzed patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation for at least two consecutive days and at least one spontaneous breathing trial (SBT). We investigated the impact of the intervention on the weaning process and weaning outcomes using descriptive statistics and mixed-effects regressions.

resultsOf 1,463 patients enrolled in the trial, 308 patients were analyzed (control condition: 55; intervention condition: 253). Patients in the intervention group received significantly more SBTs than patients in the control group (51% vs 27% of the patient days; p < 0.001). There was no difference between the groups with respect to the weaning classification (p = 0.21), weaning success rate (28% vs 36%; p = 0.32), and time from the first SBT to successful weaning (2 [IQR 1, 5] vs 4 [IQR 1, 13] days; p = 0.12). The median time of invasive mechanical ventilation of successfully weaned patients was significantly shorter in the intervention than in the control group (7 [IQR 4, 10] vs 9 [IQR 6, 20] days; p = 0.031). In our multivariable regressions, the intervention was not associated with weaning success (OR for weaning failure: 1.45 [95%-CI 0.71-2.95]; p = 0.302), but with a shorter time between the first SBT and successful weaning (β = 0.56 [0.32-0.98]; p = 0.042).

conclusionsAlthough ICU telemedicine did not improve the weaning success rate, our findings indicate that it facilitates the exploitation of existing weaning potential by ensuring more frequent SBTs and thereby shortening ventilation duration of successfully weaned patients. The study is the first to highlight the potential of telemedicine to enhance ICU weaning practices. REGISTRATION: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (Identifier: NCT03671447; first submitted on August 22, 2018).

Indexed as

Respiration, ArtificialVentilator WeaningAgedCritical CareFemaleGermanyHumansIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedTelemedicineCritical careICUMechanical ventilationRespiratory careTelemedicineWeaning

Identifiers

PMID42568095
PMCPMC13449835

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.