Department of Medicine, Division of Critical Care Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States; Department of Emergency Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, United States.
Department of Emergency Medicine, St. David's South Austin Medical Center, Austin, TX, United States.
J Crit Care. 2019 Aug;52:40-47. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.03.008. Epub 2019 Mar 23.
To measure effects of ED crowding on lung-protective ventilation (LPV) utilization in critically ill ED patients.
This is a retrospective cohort study of adult mechanically ventilated ED patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU), over a 3.5-year period at a single academic tertiary care hospital. Clinical data, including reason for intubation, severity of illness (MPM-III), acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) risk score (EDLIPS), and ventilator settings were extracted via electronic query of electronic health record and standardized chart abstraction. Crowding metrics were obtained at 5-min intervals and averaged over the ED stay, stratified by acuity and disposition. Multivariate logistic regression was used to predict likelihood of LPV prior to ED departure.
Mechanical ventilation was used in 446 patients for a median ED duration of 3.7 h (interquartile ratio, IQR, 2.3, 5.6). Mean MPM-III score was 32.5 ± 22.7, with high risk for ARDS (EDLIPS ≥5) seen in 373 (82%) patients. Initial and final ED ventilator settings differed in 134 (30.0%) patients, of which only 47 (35.1%) involved tidal volume changes. Higher percentages of active ED patients (workup in-progress) and those requiring eventual admission were associated with lower odds of LPV utilization by ED departure (OR 0.97, 95%CI 0.94-1.00; OR 0.97, 95%CI 0.94-1.00, respectively). In periods of high volume, ventilator adjustments to settings other than the tidal volume were associated with higher odds of LPV utilization. Reason for intubation, MPM-III, and EDLIPS were not associated with LPV utilization, with no interactions detected in times of crowding.
ED patients remain on suboptimal tidal volume settings with infrequent ventilator adjustments during the ED stay. Hospitals should focus on both systemic factors and bedside physician and/or respiratory therapist interventions to increase LPV utilization in times of ED boarding and crowding for all patients.
测量急诊拥挤对危重症患者肺保护性通气(LPV)应用的影响。
这是一项回顾性队列研究,纳入了在一家学术性三级护理医院的重症监护病房(MICU)接受机械通气的成年急诊患者,研究时间为 3.5 年。通过电子查询电子病历和标准化图表提取临床数据,包括插管原因、疾病严重程度(MPM-III)、急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)风险评分(EDLIPS)和呼吸机设置。在 ED 停留期间,每隔 5 分钟获得拥挤度指标,并进行平均分层,根据急性病程度和处置情况进行分层。使用多变量逻辑回归来预测 ED 离开前 LPV 的可能性。
446 例患者接受机械通气,中位 ED 持续时间为 3.7 小时(四分位距 IQR,2.3,5.6)。平均 MPM-III 评分为 32.5±22.7,ARDS 高危(EDLIPS≥5)患者为 373 例(82%)。134 例(30.0%)患者初始和最终 ED 呼吸机设置不同,其中仅 47 例(35.1%)涉及潮气量变化。活动中的 ED 患者(正在进行检查)和需要最终入院的患者比例较高与 ED 离开时 LPV 使用率降低相关(OR 0.97,95%CI 0.94-1.00;OR 0.97,95%CI 0.94-1.00,分别)。在高容量期,除潮气量以外的呼吸机设置调整与 LPV 使用率增加相关。插管原因、MPM-III 和 EDLIPS 与 LPV 使用率无关,在拥挤时期未检测到相互作用。
在 ED 停留期间,ED 患者仍处于不理想的潮气量设置,呼吸机调整频率较低。医院应关注系统因素和床边医生和/或呼吸治疗师的干预措施,以增加所有患者在 ED 住院和拥挤时 LPV 的使用率。