Dataset Information

An evidence-based recommendation on bed head elevation for mechanically ventilated patients.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

A semi-upright position in ventilated patients is recommended to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and is one of the components in the Ventilator Bundle of the Institute for Health Care Improvement. This recommendation, however, is not an evidence-based one.

Methods

A systematic review on the benefits and disadvantages of semi-upright position in ventilated patients was done according to PRISMA guidelines. Then a European expert panel developed a recommendation based on the results of the systematic review and considerations beyond the scientific evidence in a three-round electronic Delphi procedure.

Results

Three trials (337 patients) were included in the review. The results showed that it was uncertain whether a 45° bed head elevation was effective or harmful with regard to the occurrence of clinically suspected VAP, microbiologically confirmed VAP, decubitus and mortality, and that it was unknown whether 45° elevation for 24 hours a day increased the risk for thromboembolism or hemodynamic instability. A group of 22 experts recommended elevating the head of the bed of mechanically ventilated patients to a 20 to 45° position and preferably to a ? 30° position as long as it does not pose risks or conflicts with other nursing tasks, medical interventions or patients' wishes.

Conclusions

Although the review failed to prove clinical benefits of bed head elevation, experts prefer this position in ventilated patients. They made clear that the position of a ventilated patient in bed depended on many determinants. Therefore, given the scientific uncertainty about the benefits and harms of a semi-upright position, this position could only be recommended as the preferred position with the necessary restrictions.

SUBMITTER: Niel-Weise BS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3219392 | biostudies-literature | 2011

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An evidence-based recommendation on bed head elevation for mechanically ventilated patients.

Niël-Weise Barbara S BS Gastmeier Petra P Kola Axel A Vonberg Ralf P RP Wille Jan C JC van den Broek Peterhans J PJ

Critical care (London, England) 20110411 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>A semi-upright position in ventilated patients is recommended to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and is one of the components in the Ventilator Bundle of the Institute for Health Care Improvement. This recommendation, however, is not an evidence-based one.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review on the benefits and disadvantages of semi-upright position in ventilated patients was done according to PRISMA guidelines. Then a European expert panel developed a recommend ...[more]

PMID: 21481251

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionNosocomial pneumonia is the most important infectious complication in patients admitted to intensive care units. Kinetic bed therapy may reduce the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients. The objective of this study was to investigate whether kinetic bed therapy reduces the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia and improves outcomes in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients.MethodsWe searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and AMED for studies, as well as reviewed abstracts of conference proceedings, bibliographies of included studies and review articles and contacted the manufacturers of medical beds. Studies included were randomized or pseudo-randomized clinical trials of kinetic bed therapy compared to standard manual turning in critically ill mechanically ventilated adult patients. Two reviewers independently applied the study selection criteria and extracted data regarding study validity, type of bed used, intensity of kinetic therapy, and population under investigation. Outcomes assessed included the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia, mortality, duration of ventilation, and intensive care unit and hospital length of stay.ResultsFifteen prospective clinical trials were identified, which included a total of 1,169 participants. No trial met all the validity criteria. There was a significant reduction in the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia (pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.53), but no reduction in mortality (pooled OR 0.96, 95%CI 0.66 to 1.14), duration of mechanical ventilation (pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.14 days, 95%CI, -0.29 to 0.02), duration of intensive care unit stay (pooled SMD -0.064 days, 95% CI, -0.21 to 0.086) or duration of hospital stay (pooled SMD 0.05 days, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.27).ConclusionWhile kinetic bed therapy has been purported to reduce the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients, the overall body of evidence is insufficient to support this conclusion. There appears to be a reduction in the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia, but no effect on mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, or intensive care or hospital length of stay. Given the lack of consistent benefit and the poor methodological quality of the trials included in this analysis, definitive recommendations regarding the use of this therapy cannot be made at this time.

Project description:ObjectivesThe determinants of decisions to limit life support (withholding or withdrawal) in ventilated stroke patients have been evaluated mainly for patients with intracranial hemorrhages. We aimed to evaluate the frequency of life support limitations in ventilated ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke patients compared with a nonbrain-injured population and to determine factors associated with such decisions.DesignMulticenter prospective French observational study.SettingFourteen ICUs of the French OutcomeRea network.PatientsFrom 2005 to 2016, we included stroke patients and nonbrain-injured patients requiring invasive ventilation within 24 hours of ICU admission.InterventionNone.Measurements and main resultsWe identified 373 stroke patients (ischemic, n = 167 [45%]; hemorrhagic, n = 206 [55%]) and 5,683 nonbrain-injured patients. Decisions to limit life support were taken in 41% of ischemic stroke cases (vs nonbrain-injured patients, subdistribution hazard ratio, 3.59 [95% CI, 2.78-4.65]) and in 33% of hemorrhagic stroke cases (vs nonbrain-injured patients, subdistribution hazard ratio, 3.9 [95% CI, 2.97-5.11]). Time from ICU admission to the first limitation was longer in ischemic than in hemorrhagic stroke (5 [3-9] vs 2 d [1-6] d; p < 0.01). Limitation of life support preceded ICU death in 70% of ischemic strokes and 45% of hemorrhagic strokes (p < 0.01). Life support limitations in ischemic stroke were increased by a vertebrobasilar location (vs anterior circulation, subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.01-2.59]) and a prestroke modified Rankin score greater than 2 (2.38 [1.27-4.55]). In hemorrhagic stroke, an age greater than 70 years (2.29 [1.43-3.69]) and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 8 (2.15 [1.08-4.3]) were associated with an increased risk of limitation, whereas a higher nonneurologic admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was associated with a reduced risk (per point, 0.89 [0.82-0.97]).ConclusionsIn ventilated stroke patients, decisions to limit life support are more than three times more frequent than in nonbrain-injured patients, with different timing and associated risk factors between ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes.

Project description:BackgroundMechanical ventilation (MV) is vital for critically ill ICU patients but carries significant mortality risks. This study aims to develop a predictive model to estimate hospital mortality among MV patients, utilizing comprehensive health data to assist ICU physicians with early-stage alerts.MethodsWe developed a Machine Learning (ML) framework to predict hospital mortality in ICU patients receiving MV. Using the MIMIC-III database, we identified 25,202 eligible patients through ICD-9 codes. We employed backward elimination and the Lasso method, selecting 32 features based on clinical insights and literature. Data preprocessing included eliminating columns with over 90% missing data and using mean imputation for the remaining missing values. To address class imbalance, we used the Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE). We evaluated several ML models, including CatBoost, XGBoost, Decision Tree, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Logistic Regression, using a 70/30 train-test split. The CatBoost model was chosen for its superior performance in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, AUROC metrics, and calibration plots.ResultsThe study involved a cohort of 25,202 patients on MV. The CatBoost model attained an AUROC of 0.862, an increase from an initial AUROC of 0.821, which was the best reported in the literature. It also demonstrated an accuracy of 0.789, an F1-score of 0.747, and better calibration, outperforming other models. These improvements are due to systematic feature selection and the robust gradient boosting architecture of CatBoost.ConclusionThe preprocessing methodology significantly reduced the number of relevant features, simplifying computational processes, and identified critical features previously overlooked. Integrating these features and tuning the parameters, our model demonstrated strong generalization to unseen data. This highlights the potential of ML as a crucial tool in ICUs, enhancing resource allocation and providing more personalized interventions for MV patients.

Dataset Information

An evidence-based recommendation on bed head elevation for mechanically ventilated patients.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

An evidence-based recommendation on bed head elevation for mechanically ventilated patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets