Freeman Bradley D, Kennedy Carie, Coopersmith Craig M, Buchman Timothy G
Departmentsof Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA.
Crit Care Med. 2009 Dec;37(12):3070-8. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181bc7b96.
To gain insight into nonclinical factors potentially influencing tracheostomy practice and determine whether a specialized consultation form impacts tracheostomy utilization.
Prospective, observational.
Surgical intensive care unit (SICU).
Patients requiring mechanical ventilatory support. Data abstracted from the Project Impact administrative database served as a practice benchmark.
Prospective data collection, completion of online survey, and implementation of specialized tracheostomy consultation form.
Data were prospectively collected on 539 patients and 13 attending intensivists. Our SICU tracheostomy rate (54.2%) exceeded that of 18 comparable ICUs participating in Project Impact (13.9%, p < .001). We attempted to identify factors that might account for liberal tracheostomy use. In 41.5% (+/-0.6%) of patients undergoing tracheostomy, extubation had not occurred despite successful completion of spontaneous breathing trial on >or=1 occasion, a rate that varied significantly among attending intensivists responsible for decision making for this procedure (p < .001). Attending intensivists and postgraduate surgical trainees with SICU experience were surveyed to better understand perceptions of tracheostomy practice. Most respondents (96.1%) reported relying on spontaneous breathing trial to guide decision for extubation, 72.6% estimated that <or=25% of patients successfully completed spontaneous breathing trial but did not proceed to immediate extubation, 86.3% estimated that <or=25% of such patients undergo tracheostomy, and 58.8% felt an acceptable benchmark for this practice was <or=10%. In most survey domains, respondents' perceptions underestimated actual practice. Implementation of a specialized tracheostomy consultation form did not impact tracheostomy utilization.
We identified variation among clinicians with respect to tracheostomy practice as well as discrepancies between perceptions of this practice and actual utilization. These factors may underlie the liberal use of this procedure in our SICU. Processes for providing accurate physician feedback may assist in optimizing tracheostomy use.
深入了解可能影响气管切开术实施的非临床因素,并确定一份专门的会诊表格是否会影响气管切开术的使用情况。
前瞻性观察研究。
外科重症监护病房(SICU)。
需要机械通气支持的患者。从“影响项目”管理数据库中提取的数据作为实践基准。
前瞻性数据收集、在线调查的完成以及专门气管切开术会诊表格的实施。
前瞻性收集了539例患者和13名主治重症医学专家的数据。我们SICU的气管切开率(54.2%)超过了参与“影响项目”的18个类似ICU的气管切开率(13.9%,p <.001)。我们试图确定可能导致气管切开术使用较为随意的因素。在41.5%(±0.6%)接受气管切开术的患者中,尽管在≥1次的情况下成功完成了自主呼吸试验,但仍未拔管,这一比例在负责该手术决策的主治重症医学专家中差异显著(p <.001)。对有SICU经验的主治重症医学专家和外科研究生进行了调查,以更好地了解他们对气管切开术实践的看法。大多数受访者(96.1%)报告依靠自主呼吸试验来指导拔管决策,72.6%的人估计≤25%的患者成功完成了自主呼吸试验但未立即拔管,86.3%的人估计≤25%的此类患者接受了气管切开术,58.8%的人认为这种做法的可接受基准是≤10%。在大多数调查领域,受访者的看法低估了实际做法。专门气管切开术会诊表格的实施并未影响气管切开术的使用情况。
我们发现临床医生在气管切开术实践方面存在差异,以及对该实践的认知与实际使用情况之间存在差异。这些因素可能是我们SICU中该手术使用较为随意的原因。提供准确医生反馈的流程可能有助于优化气管切开术的使用。