Respiratory failure & ventilation
Driving pressure during routine ventilation in the ICU: Is the ICU-team as driven as they should be?
Authors' conclusion
These results suggest that ICU staff training could lead to more adequate respiratory support provided during controlled mechanical ventilation.
Study context
- Population
- ICU patients continuously mechanically ventilated in a controlled mode for at least 6 h from admission
- Participants
- 248 participants
- Exposure
- Baseline vs 0–6 months and 6–12 months after completion of structured staff training on DP
- Outcome
- Pdiff (Ppeak - PEEPtot) not lung protective (> 15 cm H2O)
Methodological detailsstaff training intervention, prospective evaluation
- Staff training intervention
- Prospective evaluation
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Pdiff not lung protective (> 15 cm H2O), % of cases
- Baseline period
- 39%
- First follow-up period
- 25%
- Second follow-up period
- 17%
- Relative decrease vs training period
- 56%
- Patients with a safe Pdiff, during training vs end of evaluation
- 58% to 82% (χ2 = p 0.005)
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
| Outcome | Baseline | 6–12 months | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proportion of patients with safe Pdiff · end of evaluation6–12 months vs Baseline · χ2 | 58% | 82% | p 0.005 |
Original publication
Driving pressure during routine ventilation in the ICU: Is the ICU-team as driven as they should be? J Crit Care. Published 13 June 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →