Managing patient–ventilator asynchrony with a twice-daily screening protocol: A retrospective cohort study. Issue 6 (November 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: See, Kay Choong; Sahagun, Juliet; Cove, Matthew; Sum, Chew Lai; Garcia, Bimbo; Chanco, David; Misanes, Sherill; Abastillas, Emily; Taculod, Juvel
• Is Part Of: Australian critical care. Volume 34:Issue 6(2021)
• Page Start: 539
• Page End: 546
• Publication Date: 2021-11
• Subjects: Intensive care units -- Intermittent positive-pressure ventilation -- Positive-pressure respiration -- Respiration -- Artificial -- Patient–ventilator asynchrony; Intensive care nursing -- Periodicals; Intensive care nursing -- Australia -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 616.028
• DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2020.11.008
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1036-7314

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: Severe patient–ventilator asynchrony (PVA) might be associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation and mortality. It is unknown if systematic screening and application of conventional methods for PVA management can modify these outcomes. We therefore constructed a twice-daily bedside PVA screening and management protocol and investigated its effect on patient outcomes. Materials and methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients who were intubated in the emergency department and directly admitted to the medical intensive care unit (ICU). In phase 1 (6 months; August 2016 to January 2017), patients received usual care comprising lung protective ventilation and moderate analgesia/sedation. In phase 2 (6 months; February 2017 to July 2017), patients were additionally managed with a PVA protocol on ICU admission and twice daily (7 am, 7 pm). Results: A total of 280 patients (160 in phase 1, 120 in phase 2) were studied (age = 64.5 ± 21.4 years, 107 women [38.2%], Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score = 27.1 ± 8.5, 271 [96.8%] on volume assist-control ventilation initially). Phase 2 patients had lower hospital mortality than phase 1 patients (20.0% versus 34.4%, respectively, P = 0.011), even after adjustment for age and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (odds ratio = 0.46, 95% confidence interval = 0.25–0.84). Conclusions: Application of a bedside PVA protocol for mechanically ventilated patients on ICU admission and twice daily was associated with decreased hospital mortality. There was however no association with sedation-free days or mechanical ventilation–free days through day 28 or length of hospital stay.