Identifying and managing patient–ventilator asynchrony: An international survey / Identificación y manejo de la asincronía paciente-ventilador: encuesta internacional

Objective To describe the main factors associated with proper recognition and management of patient–ventilator asynchrony (PVA). Design An analytical cross-sectional study was carried out. Setting An international study conducted in 20 countries through an online survey. Participants Physicians, respiratory therapists, nurses and physiotherapists currently working in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Main variables of interest Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to establish associations between all variables (profession, training in mechanical ventilation, type of training program, years of experience and ICU characteristics) and the ability of HCPs to correctly identify and manage 6 PVA. Results A total of 431 healthcare professionals answered a validated survey. The main factors associated to proper recognition of PVA were: specific training program in mechanical ventilation (MV) (OR 2.27; 95%CI 1.14–4.52; p=0.019), courses with more than 100h completed (OR 2.28; 95%CI 1.29–4.03; p=0.005), and the number of ICU beds (OR 1.037; 95%CI 1.01–1.06; p=0.005). The main factor influencing the management of PVA was the correct recognition of 6 PVAs (OR 118.98; 95%CI 35.25–401.58; p<0.001). Conclusion Identifying and managing PVA using ventilator waveform analysis is influenced by many factors, including specific training programs in MV, the number of ICU beds, and the number of recognized PVAs. (AU)

Objetivo Describir los factores asociados al correcto reconocimiento y manejo de la asincronía paciente-ventilador (APV). Diseño Estudio analítico transversal. Ámbito Estudio internacional realizado en 20 países mediante una encuesta a través de Internet. Participantes Médicos, terapeutas respiratorios, enfermeras/os y fisioterapeutas que trabajan actualmente en unidades de cuidados intensivos (UCI). Principales variables de interés Se utilizó un análisis uni y multivariado para describir la asociación entre todas las variables (profesión, formación en ventilación mecánica, tipo de programa de formación, años de experiencia y características de la UCI en la cual trabajan los profesionales) con la correcta identificación y manejo de 6 APV. Resultados Un total de 431 profesionales respondieron una encuesta validada previamente. Los factores asociados a una correcta identificación de 6 APV fueron: haber completado un programa de formación específico sobre ventilación mecánica (OR: 2,27; IC 95%: 1,14-4,52; p=0,019), programa de formación con más de 100h (OR: 2,28; IC 95%: 1,29-4,03; p=0,005) y el número de camas de UCI (OR: 1,037; IC 95%: 1,01-1,06; p=0,005). El principal factor asociado a un adecuado manejo de la APV fue la correcta identificación de 6 APV (OR: 118,98; IC 95%: 35,25-401,58; p<0,001). Conclusiones La identificación y el manejo de la asincronía paciente-ventilador, mediante el análisis de las curvas del ventilador está influenciada por programas de formación, específicos sobre ventilación mecánica, el número de camas de la UCI y el número de asincronías identificadas. (AU)

Identifying and managing patient-ventilator asynchrony: An international survey.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the main factors associated with proper recognition and management of patient-ventilator asynchrony (PVA). DESIGN: An analytical cross-sectional study was carried out. SETTING: An international study conducted in 20 countries through an online survey. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians, respiratory therapists, nurses and physiotherapists currently working in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to establish associations between all variables (profession, training in mechanical ventilation, type of training program, years of experience and ICU characteristics) and the ability of HCPs to correctly identify and manage 6 PVA. RESULTS: A total of 431 healthcare professionals answered a validated survey. The main factors associated to proper recognition of PVA were: specific training program in mechanical ventilation (MV) (OR 2.27; 95%CI 1.14-4.52; p=0.019), courses with more than 100h completed (OR 2.28; 95%CI 1.29-4.03; p=0.005), and the number of ICU beds (OR 1.037; 95%CI 1.01-1.06; p=0.005). The main factor influencing the management of PVA was the correct recognition of 6 PVAs (OR 118.98; 95%CI 35.25-401.58; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Identifying and managing PVA using ventilator waveform analysis is influenced by many factors, including specific training programs in MV, the number of ICU beds, and the number of recognized PVAs.

Impacto de las asincronías en el pronóstico del paciente bajo ventilación mecánica invasiva / Prognosis impact of the asynchronies in the mechanical ventilated patient / Impacto das assincronias no prognóstico do paciente com ventilação mecânica invasiva

Resumen: La ventilación mecánica es común en pacientes críticos. La asincronía paciente-ventilador existe cuando las fases de la respiración administradas por el ventilador no coinciden con las del paciente. Las asincronías son frecuentes e infradiagnosticadas, éstas se han asociado con desenlaces desfavorables como son: mayor duración de ventilación mecánica, estancia en la unidad de terapia intensiva, mortalidad, incomodidad del paciente, alteraciones del sueño y disfunción diafragmática. Esta revisión describe los desenlaces adversos reportados que se han asociado a la presencia de asincronías en pacientes adultos bajo ventilación mecánica invasiva. La evidencia actual sugiere que el mejor enfoque para manejar las asincronías es ajustar la configuración del ventilador y mejorar su detección. Si bien la mayoría de la evidencia proviene de estudios observacionales y ensayos clínicos aleatorizados realizados en poblaciones heterogéneas y con un número limitado de pacientes, los resultados sugieren desenlaces desfavorables clínicamente significativos en los pacientes que experimentan un índice de asincronía elevado. Por lo anterior, es necesario generar mayor evidencia en este tópico.

Abstract: Mechanical ventilation is common in critically ill patients. Patient-ventilator asynchrony exists when the breathing phases administered by the ventilator do not match those of the patient. They are frequent but underdiagnosed, and have been associated with worse outcomes because they negatively affect patient comfort, length of mechanical ventilation, length of stay in the intensive care unit and mortality. This review describes the negative outcomes associated with the presence of asynchronies in adult patients with invasive mechanical ventilation. Current evidence suggests that the best approach to handle asynchronies is to adjust the fan settings and improve the quality of detection. While most of this evidence comes from observational studies and randomized clinical trials which were done with heterogeneous populations and a limited number of patients, the results suggest less favorable clinically significant outcomes in patients with asynchronies. So it is necessary to generate more evidence in this topic.

Resumo: A ventilação mecânica é comum em pacientes críticos. A assincronia paciente-ventilador existe quando as fases da respiração fornecida pelo ventilador não coincidem com as do paciente. As assincronas são frequentes e subdiagnosticadas, tendo sido associadas a desfechos desfavoráveis como: maior tempo de ventilação mecânica, permanência em unidade de terapia intensiva, mortalidade, desconforto do paciente, distúrbios do sono e disfunção diafragmática. Esta revisão descreve os resultados adversos relatados que foram associados à presença de assincronia em pacientes adultos sob ventilação mecânica invasiva. A evidência atual sugere que a melhor abordagem para gerenciar assincronias é ajustar as configurações do ventilador e melhorar a detecção do ventilador. Embora a maioria das evidências provenha de estudos observacionais e ensaios clínicos randomizados conduzidos em populações heterogêneas e com um número limitado de pacientes, os resultados sugerem resultados clinicamente desfavoráveis significativos em pacientes que apresentam uma alta taxa de assincronia. Portanto, é necessário gerar mais evidências sobre este tema.

[Successful weaning and extubation in the premature newborn using neurally adjusted ventilatory assist]. / La ventilación ajustada neuralmente es eficaz en el destete y la extubación del recién nacido prematuro.

Invasive and non-invasive ventilation of the preterm newborn may be associated with local and systemic complications due to mechanical trauma to lung tissues and their inflammatory response. A key objective of any type of mechanical ventilation, therefore, is to reduce its duration and the side effects related to it. Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist (NAVA) may improve synchronization between patient and ventilator and optimize the gas volume delivered to the lungs, according to the patient needs, eventually reducing volu- and biotrauma. Two preterm babies with severe respiratory distress syndrome are presented, who were successfully weaned and extubated with the help of this ventilatory system. Further studies are needed to assess whether short-term benefits are reflected in better outcomes in the long run.

Clinical factors associated with success of proportional assist ventilation in the acute phase of critical illness: pilot study.

REASON: Proportional assist ventilation plus (PAV+) applies pressure depending on the patient's inspiratory effort, automatically adjusting flow and volume assist to changes in respiratory mechanics. We aimed to assess the clinical factors associated with the success of PAV+ as first-line support in the acute phase of critical illness. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was carried out. Mechanically ventilated patients>24h were switched from assist-control ventilation to PAV+ as soon as they regained spontaneous breathing activity. PAV+ was set to deliver the highest assistance. We compared patients in whom PAV+ succeeded versus those in whom it failed. RESULTS: PAV+ succeeded in 12 (63%) patients, but failed in 7 (37%) due to tachypnea (n=4), hypercapnia (n=2), and metabolic acidosis (n=1), but without statistical significance. Both groups had similar clinical parameters. On the day of inclusion, total work of breathing per breath was lower in the successful PAV+ group (WOBTOT: 0.95 [0.8-1.35] vs. 1.6 [1.4-1.8] J/L; P<.007). The area under the ROC curve was 0.89 ± 0.08 for WOBTOT. The best cut-off for predicting PAV+ success was WOBTOT<1.4 J/L (sensitivity: 1 [0.7-1], specificity: 0.6 [0.4-0.6], PPV: 0.7 [0.5-0.7], and NPV: 1 [0.6-1]). CONCLUSION: PAV+ proved feasible as first-line ventilatory support in 63% of the patients, mostly in individuals without extreme derangements in WOBTOT. Tachypnea and hypercapnia were the clinical factors associated with failure, though statistical significance was not reached.