Chittawatanarat Kaweesak, Thongchai Chaweewan
Division of Critical Care and Trauma, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
J Med Assoc Thai. 2009 Oct;92(10):1306-12.
Compare the effectiveness between spontaneous breathing trial with low-pressure support protocol and liberal or non-protocol directed method.
The authors conducted a retrospective study involving 577 patients who were arranged and appropriate to weaning from mechanical ventilation on general surgical intensive care unit between July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2007. Two hundred and twenty two patients were weaned by their host surgeons or team (liberal group). Three hundred and fifty five patients underwent once daily spontaneous breathing trial with low-pressure support protocol. Patients assigned to this protocol had the pressure support level decreased to 5-7 cm of water for up to two hours each day. If signs of intolerance occurred, the process was restrained while patients who tolerated the two-hour trial without signs of distress were extubated. The authors collected demographic data, cause of ICU admission, APACHE II score at arranged time to weaning, weaning process time, ventilator day, and ICU length of stay.
There was statistical difference between liberal and protocol in age (59.2 +/- 19.3 vs. 55.6 +/- 19.8; p = 0.03) but there was no statistical difference in gender (male 74.3 vs. 67.9%; p = 0.2) and APACHE II score at arranged time to wean (14.7 +/- 7.4 vs. 15.3 +/- 6.3; p = 0.2). The median (inter-quartile) range duration of weaning process (29.5 (48) vs. 2.25 (2.9), p < 0.001), ventilator day (3 (4) vs. 2 (3), p < 0.001), and length of ICU stay (5 (5) vs. 3 (3), p < 0.001) were shorter in the protocol group than the liberal group. Multivariate linear regression model also revealed significantly less duration of weaning process in the protocol group than the liberal group in terms of weaning time (-63.6 (-74.7 to -2.6) hours), ventilator day (-3.0 (-3.7 to -2.2) days), and length of ICU stay (-2.9 days (-3.7 to -2.0); p < 0.001) (95% confidence interval).
Spontaneous breathing trial with low-pressure support protocol for liberal from mechanical ventilator was effective to reduce weaning time, ventilator day, and length of ICU stay in general surgical intensive care units.
比较采用低压支持方案的自主呼吸试验与宽松或非方案指导方法之间的有效性。
作者进行了一项回顾性研究,纳入了2004年7月1日至2007年6月30日期间在普通外科重症监护病房安排并适合从机械通气撤机的577例患者。222例患者由其主管外科医生或团队进行撤机(宽松组)。355例患者每天进行一次采用低压支持方案的自主呼吸试验。分配至该方案的患者每天将压力支持水平降至5 - 7厘米水柱,持续长达两小时。如果出现不耐受迹象,则中止该过程,而耐受两小时试验且无不适迹象的患者则进行拔管。作者收集了人口统计学数据、入住重症监护病房的原因、安排撤机时的急性生理与慢性健康状况评分系统(APACHE II)评分、撤机过程时间、呼吸机使用天数以及重症监护病房住院时间。
宽松组和方案组在年龄方面存在统计学差异(59.2±19.3 vs. 55.6±19.8;p = 0.03),但在性别方面无统计学差异(男性74.3% vs. 67.9%;p = 0.2),且在安排撤机时的APACHE II评分方面也无统计学差异(14.7±7.4 vs. 15.3±6.3;p = 0.2)。方案组的撤机过程中位(四分位间距)持续时间(29.5(48) vs. 2.25(2.9),p < 0.001)、呼吸机使用天数(3(4) vs. 2(3),p < 0.001)以及重症监护病房住院时间(5(5) vs. 3(3),p < 0.001)均短于宽松组。多变量线性回归模型还显示,在撤机时间(-63.6(-74.7至-2.6)小时)、呼吸机使用天数(-3.0(-3.7至-2.2)天)以及重症监护病房住院时间(-2.9天(-3.7至-2.0);p < 0.001)(95%置信区间)方面,方案组的撤机过程持续时间显著短于宽松组。
在普通外科重症监护病房,采用低压支持方案进行自主呼吸试验以从机械通气中宽松撤机,对于缩短撤机时间、呼吸机使用天数以及重症监护病房住院时间是有效的。