ArticleAcute and critical care2026
Challenges and strategies for the identification and correction of patient-ventilator asynchronies in daily practice: a scoping review.
Article in Acute and critical care, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-ventilator asynchronies (PVA) are associated with adverse clinical outcomes, including prolonged ventilatory support and increased mortality both in the intensive care unit (ICU) and at the hospital level. Despite their clinical relevance, the detection and management of PVA remain challenging in daily practice because of multiple factors, such as the lack of continuous monitoring and the low recognition by healthcare professionals. The aim of this review is to map and synthesize the available evidence on the main challenges in the identification and management of PVA and to describe the strategies proposed to overcome them. We conducted a scoping review following Joanna Briggs Institute guidance and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). PubMed/ Medline, Scopus, ScienceDirect, LILACS, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2025. Two reviewers independently screened records and selected eligible studies. Data were charted using a standardized extraction form, and findings were synthesized descriptively. The identified challenges were categorized into three main groups, and the proposed strategies were classified according to the type of challenge addressed. The scoping review included 33 studies published between 2000 and 2025. Of these, 18 provided explanatory evidence, whereas 16 described strategies for addressing challenges in daily clinical practice. Overall, this scoping review identified 15 distinct challenges. This review highlights the multifaceted challenges affecting the recognition and management of PVA in adult ICU patients. By mapping challenges across clinical, structural, and cultural domains and summarizing strategies to address them, this review provides professionals with a practical framework to improve patient-ventilator interaction.
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.