Respiratory failure & ventilation
Determining respiratory rate using measured expiratory time constant: A prospective observational study
Main finding · Absolute mean difference between set RR and RRPResult — go to the resultAbsolute mean difference 2.8 bpm 95% CI 2.3–3.2Authors' conclusion
Use of RRP based on measured RCEXP revealed that the clinician-set RR exceeded that predicted by RCEXP in the majority of patients.
Study context
- Population
- ICU patients receiving pressure-controlled ventilation
- Participants
- 56 patients
- Exposure
- Clinician-set RR vs RR predicted with RCEXP
- Outcome
- Difference between set RR and RR predicted with RCEXP (RRP)
Methodological detailsmulticentre
- Multicentre
Main finding
Absolute mean difference between set RR and RRP
Absolute mean difference
2.8 bpm
95% CI 2.3–3.2
Set RR vs RRP
absolute mean difference 2.8 bpm (95% CI 2.3–3.2)
As reported in the abstract
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
| Outcome | Mean difference (bpm) (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Set RR vs RRP, subgroup with prolonged RCEXP (>0.8 s) (subgroup)29 (52%) patients had prolonged RCEXP | 3.1 (2.3–3.8) | P < 0.0001 | |
| −2024Difference, bpm (linear scale) |
PEEPi, prolonged RCEXP (>0.8 s) vs RCEXP ≤ 0.8 s (subgroup) · significantly higher PEEPi with prolonged RCEXP
P < 0.0001
Original publication
Determining respiratory rate using measured expiratory time constant: A prospective observational study. J Crit Care. Published 19 October 2022. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →