Dataset Information

Mortality outcomes of patients on chronic mechanical ventilation in different care settings: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To determine the outcomes of chronically ventilated patients outside the setting of intensive care units.

Design

Systematic review.

Setting and participants

Studies evaluating patients on chronic invasive mechanical ventilation in different care settings.

Methods

A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), LILACS and Scopus databases from inception to March 27, 2020. Studies reporting mortality outcomes of patients ≥18 years of age on chronic invasive mechanical ventilation in intensive care units and other care settings were eligible for inclusion.

Results

Sixty studies were included in the systematic review. Mortality rates ranged from 13.7% to 77.8% in ICUs (n = 17 studies), 7.8%-51.0% in non-ICUs including step-down units and inpatient wards (n = 26 studies), and 12.0%-91.8% in home or nursing home settings (n = 19 studies). Age was associated with mortality in all care settings. Weaning rates ranged from 10.0% to 78.2% across non-ICU studies. Studies reporting weaning as their primary outcome demonstrated higher success rates in weaning. Home care studies reported low incidences of ventilator failure. None of the studies reported ventilator malfunction as the primary cause of death.

Conclusions and implications

Mortality outcomes across various settings were disparate due to methodological and clinical heterogeneity among studies. However, there is evidence to suggest non-ICU venues of care as a comparable alternative to ICUs for stable, chronically ventilated patients, with the additional benefit of providing specialized weaning programs. By synthesizing the global data on managing chronically ventilated patients in various care settings, this study provides health care systems and providers alternative venue options for the delivery of prolonged ventilatory care in the context of limited ICU resources.

SUBMITTER: Sison SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7880845 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInsight into COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) patient characteristics, rates and risks of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and associated outcomes as well as any regional discrepancies is critical in this pandemic for individual case management and overall resource planning.Methods and findingsElectronic searches were performed for reports through May 1 2020 and reports on COVID-19 ICU admissions and outcomes were included using predefined search terms. Relevant data was subsequently extracted and pooled using fixed or random effects meta-analysis depending on heterogeneity. Study quality was assessed by the NIH tool and heterogeneity was assessed by I2 and Q tests. Baseline patient characteristics, ICU and IMV outcomes were pooled and meta-analyzed. Pooled odds ratios (pOR) were calculated for clinical features against ICU, IMV mortality. Subgroup analysis was carried out based on patient regions. A total of twenty-eight studies comprising 12,437 COVID-19 ICU admissions from seven countries were meta-analyzed. Pooled ICU admission rate was 21% [95% CI 0.12-0.34] and 69% of cases needed IMV [95% CI 0.61-0.75]. ICU and IMV mortality were 28.3% [95% CI 0.25-0.32], 43% [95% CI 0.29-0.58] and ICU, IMV duration was 7.78 [95% CI 6.99-8.63] and 10.12 [95% CI 7.08-13.16] days respectively. Besides confirming the significance of comorbidities and clinical findings of COVID-19 previously reported, we found the major correlates with ICU mortality were IMV [pOR 16.46, 95% CI 4.37-61.96], acute kidney injury (AKI) [pOR 12.47, 95% CI 1.52-102.7], and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) [pOR 6.52, 95% CI 2.66-16.01]. Subgroup analyses confirm significant regional discrepancies in outcomes.ConclusionsThis is a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of COVID-19 ICU and IMV cases and associated outcomes. The significant association of AKI, ARDS and IMV with mortality has implications for ICU resource planning for AKI and ARDS as well as suggesting the need for further research into optimal ventilation strategies for COVID-19 patients in the ICU setting. Regional differences in outcome implies a need to develop region specific protocols for ventilatory support as well as overall treatment.

Project description:ObjectiveWe aimed to determine whether enhanced physical rehabilitation following intensive care unit (ICU) discharge improves activities-of-daily-living function, quality of life (QOL) and mortality among patients who received mechanical ventilation in the ICU.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, PEDro and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform searched through January 2019.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesWe included randomised controlled trials assessing the effect of post-ICU rehabilitation designed to either commence earlier and/or be more intensive than the protocol employed in the control group. Only adults who received mechanical ventilation for >24?hours were included.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Standard mean differences (SMDs) with 95% CIs were calculated for QOL, and pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs are provided for mortality. We assessed heterogeneity based on I² and the certainty of evidence based on the GRADE approach.ResultsTen trials (enrolling 1110 patients) compared physical rehabilitation with usual care or no intervention after ICU discharge. Regarding QOL, the SMD (95%?CI) between the intervention and control groups for the physical and mental component summary scores was 0.06 (-0.12 to 0.24) and -0.04 (-0.20 to 0.11), respectively. Rehabilitation did not significantly decrease long-term mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.66). The analysed trials did not report activities-of-daily-living data. The certainty of the evidence for QOL and mortality was moderate.ConclusionsEnhanced physical rehabilitation following ICU discharge may make little or no difference to QOL or mortality among patients who received mechanical ventilation in the ICU. Given the wide CIs, further studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of intensive post-ICU rehabilitation in selected populations.Prospero registration numberCRD42017080532.

Project description:BackgroundA culture of improvement is an important feature of high-quality health care systems. However, health care teams often need support to translate quality improvement (QI) activities into practice. One method of support is consultation from a QI coach. The literature suggests that coaching interventions have a positive impact on clinical outcomes. However, the impact of coaching on specific process outcomes, like adoption of clinical care activities, is unknown. Identifying the process outcomes for which QI coaching is most effective could provide specific guidance on when to employ this strategy.MethodsWe searched multiple databases from inception through July 2021. Studies that addressed the effects of QI coaching on process of care outcomes were included. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and assessed risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.ResultsWe identified 1983 articles, of which 23 cluster-randomized trials met eligibility criteria. All but two took place in a primary care setting. Overall, interventions typically targeted multiple simultaneous processes of care activities. We found that coaching probably has a beneficial effect on composite process of care outcomes (n = 9) and ordering of labs and vital signs (n = 6), and possibly has a beneficial effect on changes in organizational process of care (n = 5), appropriate documentation (n = 5), and delivery of appropriate counseling (n = 3). We did not perform meta-analyses because of conceptual heterogeneity around intervention design and outcomes; rather, we synthesized the data narratively. Due to imprecision, inconsistency, and high risk of bias of the included studies, we judged the certainty of these results as low or very low.ConclusionQI coaching interventions may affect certain processes of care activities such as ordering of labs and vital signs. Future research that advances the identification of when QI coaching is most beneficial for health care teams seeking to implement improvement processes in pursuit of high-quality care will support efficient use of QI resources.Protocol registrationThis study was registered and followed a published protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42020165069).