• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

针对成年非重症监护病房住院患者,由医生主导的呼吸治疗与呼吸治疗咨询服务主导的呼吸护理的随机对照试验。

Randomized controlled trial of physician-directed versus respiratory therapy consult service-directed respiratory care to adult non-ICU inpatients.

作者信息

Stoller J K, Mascha E J, Kester L, Haney D

机构信息

Section of Respiratory Therapy, Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, and Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

出版信息

Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998 Oct;158(4):1068-75. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.158.4.9709076.

DOI:10.1164/ajrccm.158.4.9709076
PMID:9769262
Abstract

Although current evidence suggests that respiratory care protocols can enhance allocation of respiratory care services while conserving costs, a randomized trial is needed to address shortcomings of available studies. We therefore conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing respiratory care for adult non-ICU inpatients directed by a Respiratory Therapy Consult Service (RTCS) versus respiratory care by managing physicians. Eligible subjects were adult non-ICU inpatients whose physicians had prescribed specific respiratory care services. Consecutive eligible patients were approached for consent, after which a blocked randomization strategy was used to assign patients to (1) Physician-directed respiratory care, in which the prescribed physician respiratory care orders were maintained (n = 74), or (2) RTCS-directed respiratory care, in which the physician's respiratory care orders were preempted by a respiratory care plan generated by the RTCS (n = 71). Specifically, these patients were evaluated by an RTCS therapist evaluator whose respiratory care plan was based on sign/symptom-based algorithms drafted to comply with the American Association for Respiratory Care (AARC) Clinical Practice Guidelines. Appropriateness of respiratory care orders was assessed as agreement between the prescribed respiratory care plan and an algorithm-based "standard care plan" generated by an expert therapist who was blind to the patient's actual orders. The compared groups were similar at baseline regarding demographic features, admission diagnostic category, smoking status, and Triage Score (mean, 3.8 +/- 0.9 SD [RTCS] versus 3.7 +/- 1.0). Similarly, no differences were observed between RTCS-directed and physician-directed respiratory care regarding hospital mortality rate (5.7 versus 5.6%), hospital length of stay (7.9 +/- 9.0 versus 7.7 +/- 7.3 d), total number of respiratory care treatments delivered (30.3 +/- 30 versus 31.6 +/- 30.5), or days requiring respiratory care (4.2 +/- 5.2 versus 4.1 +/- 3.6). Notably, using both a stringent (S) and a liberal (L) criterion for agreement, RTCS-directed respiratory care demonstrated better agreement with the "standard care plan" (82 +/- 17% [S] and 86 +/- 16% [L]) than did physician-directed respiratory care (64 +/- 21% [S] and 72 +/- 23% [L]) (p < 0.001). Finally, the true cost of respiratory care treatments was slightly lower with RTCS-directed respiratory care (mean, $235.70 versus $255.70/pt, p = 0.61). We conclude that (1) compared with physician-directed respiratory care, the RTCS prescribed a similar number and duration of respiratory care services at a slight savings (that did not achieve statistical significance) and without any increased adverse events; and (2) compared with physician-directed respiratory care, RTCS-directed respiratory care showed greater agreement with Clinical Practice Guideline-based algorithms.

摘要

尽管目前的证据表明,呼吸护理方案可以在节约成本的同时提高呼吸护理服务的分配效率,但仍需要进行一项随机试验来解决现有研究的不足之处。因此,我们进行了一项随机对照试验,比较了由呼吸治疗咨询服务(RTCS)指导的成年非重症监护病房住院患者的呼吸护理与主治医生提供的呼吸护理。符合条件的受试者为其医生已开出特定呼吸护理服务处方的成年非重症监护病房住院患者。连续符合条件的患者被邀请签署同意书,之后采用区组随机化策略将患者分配到:(1)医生指导的呼吸护理组,即维持医生开出的呼吸护理医嘱(n = 74);或(2)RTCS指导的呼吸护理组,即RTCS生成的呼吸护理计划优先于医生的呼吸护理医嘱(n = 71)。具体而言,这些患者由一名RTCS治疗师评估,该治疗师的呼吸护理计划基于为符合美国呼吸护理协会(AARC)临床实践指南而起草的基于体征/症状的算法。呼吸护理医嘱的适当性通过比较开出的呼吸护理计划与由一名对患者实际医嘱不知情的专家治疗师生成的基于算法的“标准护理计划”之间的一致性来评估。在人口统计学特征、入院诊断类别、吸烟状况和分诊评分方面,两组在基线时相似(平均值,3.8±0.9标准差[RTCS]对3.7±1.0)。同样,在医院死亡率(5.7%对5.6%)、住院时间(7.9±9.0对7.7±7.3天)、提供的呼吸护理治疗总数(30.3±30对31.6±30.5)或需要呼吸护理的天数(4.2±5.2对4.1±3.6)方面,RTCS指导的呼吸护理与医生指导的呼吸护理之间未观察到差异。值得注意的是,使用严格(S)和宽松(L)两种一致性标准时,RTCS指导的呼吸护理与“标准护理计划”的一致性(分别为82±17%[S]和86±16%[L])优于医生指导的呼吸护理(分别为64±21%[S]和72±23%[L])(p < 0.001)。最后,RTCS指导的呼吸护理治疗的实际成本略低(平均值,235.70美元对255.70美元/患者,p = 0.61)。我们得出结论:(1)与医生指导的呼吸护理相比,RTCS开出的呼吸护理服务数量和持续时间相似,略有节省(未达到统计学显著性)且无任何不良事件增加;(2)与医生指导的呼吸护理相比,RTCS指导的呼吸护理与基于临床实践指南的算法的一致性更高。

相似文献

1
Randomized controlled trial of physician-directed versus respiratory therapy consult service-directed respiratory care to adult non-ICU inpatients.针对成年非重症监护病房住院患者,由医生主导的呼吸治疗与呼吸治疗咨询服务主导的呼吸护理的随机对照试验。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998 Oct;158(4):1068-75. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.158.4.9709076.
2
Physician-ordered respiratory care vs physician-ordered use of a respiratory therapy consult service. Results of a prospective observational study.医生开具医嘱的呼吸护理与医生开具医嘱使用呼吸治疗咨询服务。一项前瞻性观察性研究的结果。
Chest. 1996 Aug;110(2):422-9. doi: 10.1378/chest.110.2.422.
3
Physician-ordered respiratory care vs physician-ordered use of a respiratory therapy consult service: early experience at The Cleveland Clinic Foundation.医嘱的呼吸护理与医嘱的呼吸治疗会诊服务使用情况对比:克利夫兰诊所基金会的早期经验
Respir Care. 1993 Nov;38(11):1143-54.
4
Policy versus practice: comparison of prescribing therapy and durable medical equipment in medical and educational settings.政策与实践:医疗和教育环境中处方治疗与耐用医疗设备的比较
Pediatrics. 2004 Nov;114(5):e612-25. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1063.
5
Reassessing a Respiratory Therapy Consult Service After 20 Years.20 年后重新评估呼吸治疗咨询服务
Respir Care. 2019 Aug;64(8):875-882. doi: 10.4187/respcare.06710. Epub 2019 Apr 30.
6
The effect of respiratory therapist-initiated treatment protocols on patient outcomes and resource utilization.呼吸治疗师启动的治疗方案对患者预后及资源利用的影响。
Chest. 2000 Feb;117(2):467-75. doi: 10.1378/chest.117.2.467.
7
An assessment of the appropriateness of respiratory care delivered at a 450-bed acute care Veterans affairs hospital.
Respir Care. 2004 Aug;49(8):907-16.
8
The effects of therapist-evaluation of orders and interaction with physicians on the appropriateness of respiratory care.
Respir Care. 1989 Mar;34(3):185-90.
9
Physician-ordered aerosol therapy versus respiratory therapist-driven aerosol protocol: the effect on resource utilization.医生下单的雾化治疗与呼吸治疗师驱动的雾化方案:对资源利用的影响。
Respir Care. 2013 Mar;58(3):431-7. doi: 10.4187/respcare.01907.
10
The scientific basis for protocol-directed respiratory care.协议导向型呼吸治疗的科学基础。
Respir Care. 2013 Oct;58(10):1662-8. doi: 10.4187/respcare.02195.

引用本文的文献

1
Lung ultrasound in respiratory therapy: a global reflective survey.呼吸治疗中的肺部超声:一项全球范围的反思性调查。
Multidiscip Respir Med. 2024 Jul 2;19(1):980. doi: 10.5826/mrm.2024.980.
2
A Data-Driven Analysis of Ward Capacity Strain Metrics That Predict Clinical Outcomes Among Survivors of Acute Respiratory Failure.基于数据的急性呼吸衰竭幸存者临床结局预测的病房容量紧张指标分析。
J Med Syst. 2023 Aug 5;47(1):83. doi: 10.1007/s10916-023-01978-5.
3
With Great Clinical Practice Guidelines Comes Great (or at Least Better) Resource Allocation.
优秀的临床实践指南带来出色(或至少更好)的资源分配。
Respir Care. 2023 May;68(5):706-707. doi: 10.4187/respcare.11002.
4
The Respiratory Therapy Practice-Based Outcomes Initiative (RT-PBOI): Developing a framework to explore the value added by respiratory therapists to health care in Alberta.呼吸治疗基于实践的结果倡议(RT-PBOI):构建一个框架,以探索呼吸治疗师为艾伯塔省医疗保健带来的附加价值。
Can J Respir Ther. 2021 Jul 20;57:99-104. doi: 10.29390/cjrt-2021-010. eCollection 2021.
5
Staffing patterns of respiratory therapists in critical care units of Canadian teaching hospitals.加拿大教学医院重症监护病房呼吸治疗师的人员配置模式。
Can J Respir Ther. 2016 Fall;52(3):75-80. Epub 2016 Sep 1.
6
Successful Use of Noninvasive Ventilation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. How Do High-Performing Hospitals Do It?无创通气在慢性阻塞性肺疾病中的成功应用。高绩效医院是如何做到的?
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017 Nov;14(11):1674-1681. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201612-1005OC.
7
Economics of ICU organization and management.重症监护病房组织与管理经济学。
Crit Care Clin. 2012 Jan;28(1):25-37, v. doi: 10.1016/j.ccc.2011.09.004. Epub 2011 Oct 22.
8
A screening, prevention, and restoration model for saving the injured brain in intensive care unit survivors.在重症监护病房幸存者中拯救受伤大脑的筛查、预防和恢复模型。
Crit Care Med. 2010 Oct;38(10 Suppl):S683-91. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181f245d3.
9
Decreased mortality resulting from a multicomponent intervention in a tertiary care medical intensive care unit.多组分干预对三级医疗重症监护病房死亡率的影响。
Crit Care Med. 2011 Feb;39(2):284-93. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181ffdd2f.
10
Physiotherapy for adult patients with critical illness: recommendations of the European Respiratory Society and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Task Force on Physiotherapy for Critically Ill Patients.成年危重症患者的物理治疗:欧洲呼吸学会和欧洲重症监护医学学会危重症患者物理治疗特别工作组的建议
Intensive Care Med. 2008 Jul;34(7):1188-99. doi: 10.1007/s00134-008-1026-7. Epub 2008 Feb 19.