Respiratory failure & ventilation
Transcutaneous electrical diaphragmatic stimulation in mechanically ventilated patients: a randomised study
Primary result · Diaphragm thickening fraction > 30% at the SBTResult — go to the resultOdds ratio 1.55 95% CI 0.47–5.1Authors' conclusion
TEDS did not prevent diaphragm dysfunction or improve inspiratory muscle strength in mechanically ventilated patients.
Study context
- Population
- Mechanically ventilated ICU patients during weaning
- Participants
- 66 participants
- Comparison
- Daily active TEDS vs sham stimulation
- Primary endpoint
- Diaphragm dysfunction: ultrasound diaphragm thickening fraction > 30% during SBT
Methodological detailssham-controlled, 1:1 randomisation, Mean duration of mechanical ventilation 10 ± 6.8 days
- Sham-controlled
- 1:1 randomisation
- Mean duration of mechanical ventilation 10 ± 6.8 days
Primary result
Diaphragm thickening fraction > 30% at the SBT
Odds ratio
1.55
95% CI 0.47–5.1
P = 0.47
By group
TEDS vs Sham
OR 1.55 (95% CI 0.47–5.1); P = 0.47
As reported in the abstract
Further findings
Maximal inspiratory muscle pressure (MIP) · similar
P = 0.469
Peak cough flow (PEF) · similar
P = 0.83
Extubation failure
- Rate of extubation failure not different between groups
Original publication
Transcutaneous electrical diaphragmatic stimulation in mechanically ventilated patients: a randomised study. Crit Care. Published 30 August 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →