Consensus on identifying and ranking ventilator asynchronies in invasively ventilated ICU patients: a modified Delphi study (SYNAPsE)
Authors' conclusion
This Delphi study provides a consensus-based framework for identifying and ranking patient-ventilator asynchronies at the bedside, highlighting those most likely to be clinically relevant
Study context
- Population
- Invasively ventilated ICU patients (ARDS, without ARDS, after cardiac surgery)
- Participants
- 11 panelists
- Outcome
- Identification, clinical relevance and severity ranking of patient-ventilator asynchronies detectable from ventilator waveforms
Methodological detailsiterative Delphi rounds, multiple-choice questions and 5-point Likert-scale statements
- Iterative Delphi rounds
- Multiple-choice questions and 5-point Likert-scale statements
Recommendations
As reported in the abstract
Consensus on patient-ventilator asynchronies
- Clinically relevant asynchronies: ineffective triggering, reverse triggering, double triggering, auto-triggering, insufficient flow, premature cycling, delayed cycling
- Auto-triggering and delayed cycling deemed unlikely to be detectable from ventilator waveforms alone
- Double triggering and ineffective triggering most clinically relevant across all three patient groups
- ARDS: double, ineffective and reverse triggering all judged clinically relevant
- Without ARDS and after cardiac surgery: asynchronies classified as severe or mild and combined into two composite groups
Original publication
Consensus on identifying and ranking ventilator asynchronies in invasively ventilated ICU patients: a modified Delphi study (SYNAPsE). Intensive Care Med. Published 13 February 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →