Suppr超能文献

延长机械通气定义的差异。

Variation in Definition of Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation.

作者信息

Rose Louise, McGinlay Michael, Amin Reshma, Burns Karen Ea, Connolly Bronwen, Hart Nicholas, Jouvet Philippe, Katz Sherri, Leasa David, Mawdsley Cathy, McAuley Danny F, Schultz Marcus J, Blackwood Bronagh

机构信息

Department of Critical Care Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre; the Lawrence S Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing and the Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto; and the Provincial Centre of Weaning Excellence, Toronto East General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

出版信息

Respir Care. 2017 Oct;62(10):1324-1332. doi: 10.4187/respcare.05485. Epub 2017 Jun 13.

Abstract

Consistency of definitional criteria for terminology applied to describe subject cohorts receiving mechanical ventilation within ICU and post-acute care settings is important for understanding prevalence, risk stratification, effectiveness of interventions, and projections for resource allocation. Our objective was to quantify the application and definition of terms for prolonged mechanical ventilation. We conducted a scoping review of studies (all designs except single-case study) reporting a study population (adult and pediatric) using the term prolonged mechanical ventilation or a synonym. We screened 5,331 references, reviewed 539 full-text references, and excluded 120. Of the 419 studies (representing 38 countries) meeting inclusion criteria, 297 (71%) reported data on a heterogeneous subject cohort, and 66 (16%) included surgical subjects only (46 of those 66, 70% cardiac surgery). Other studies described COPD (16, 4%), trauma (22, 5%), neuromuscular (17, 4%), and sepsis (1, 0.2%) cohorts. A total of 741 terms were used to refer to the 419 study cohorts. The most common terms were: prolonged mechanical ventilation (253, 60%), admission to specialized unit (107, 26%), and long-term mechanical ventilation (79, 19%). Some authors (282, 67%) defined their cohorts based on duration of mechanical ventilation, with 154 studies (55%) using this as the sole criterion. We identified 37 different durations of ventilation ranging from 5 h to 1 y, with > 21 d being the most common (28 of 282, 7%). For studies describing a surgical cohort, minimum ventilation duration required for inclusion was ≥ 24 h for 20 of 66 studies (30%). More than half of all studies (237, 57%) did not provide a reason/rationale for definitional criteria used, with only 28 studies (7%) referring to a consensus definition. We conclude that substantial variation exists in the terminology and definitional criteria for cohorts of subjects receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation. Standardization of terminology and definitional criteria is required for study data to be maximally informative.

摘要

在重症监护病房(ICU)和急性后期护理环境中,用于描述接受机械通气的受试者队列的术语定义标准的一致性,对于了解患病率、风险分层、干预措施的有效性以及资源分配预测至关重要。我们的目标是量化延长机械通气术语的应用和定义。我们对研究(除单病例研究外的所有设计)进行了范围综述,这些研究报告了使用术语“延长机械通气”或同义词的研究人群(成人和儿童)。我们筛选了5331篇参考文献,审查了539篇全文参考文献,并排除了120篇。在符合纳入标准的419项研究(代表38个国家)中,297项(71%)报告了关于异质性受试者队列的数据,66项(16%)仅纳入了手术受试者(66项中的46项,70%为心脏手术)。其他研究描述了慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD,16项,4%)、创伤(22项,5%)、神经肌肉疾病(17项,4%)和脓毒症(1项,0.2%)队列。总共使用了741个术语来指代419个研究队列。最常用的术语是:延长机械通气(253个,60%)、入住专科病房(107个,26%)和长期机械通气(79个,19%)。一些作者(282位,67%)根据机械通气持续时间定义他们的队列,154项研究(55%)将此作为唯一标准。我们确定了37种不同的通气持续时间,范围从5小时到1年,超过21天是最常见的(282项中的28项,7%)。对于描述手术队列的研究,66项研究中有20项(30%)纳入所需的最低通气持续时间为≥24小时。超过一半的研究(237项,57%)没有提供所使用定义标准的理由/基本原理,只有28项研究(7%)参考了共识定义。我们得出结论,接受延长机械通气的受试者队列的术语和定义标准存在很大差异。为了使研究数据具有最大信息量,需要对术语和定义标准进行标准化。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验