RESUMO
Objective:To analyze the effect of transtracheal pressure (TTP) on the application of a speaking valve in critically ill patients after tracheostomy.Methods:A retrospective analysis was conducted of 50 patients wearing a speaking valve after tracheostomy. Patients who had been wearing a speaking valve for 30min or more were the tolerance group, while those with less than 30min were the intolerance group. Transtracheal pressure was monitored during resting breathing, forced expiration and speaking. Linear regression models were evaluated to isolate the factors best predicting tolerance. The changes in respiratory muscle contraction before and after wearing a speaking valvs were evaluated using ultrasound. The patients′ satisfaction with wearing a speaking valve was also recorded.Results:TTP during speaking significantly predicted tolerance. The baseline values of diaphragmatic thickening fraction and physical functioning also positively predicted tolerance. Acute physiology and chronic health (APACHE II) score was a significant negative predictor. After wearing the speaking valve, the average contraction of the rectus abdominis, external oblique, internal oblique and transverse abdominis muscles increased significantly. Both groups expressed high satisfaction with the speaking valves.Conclusions:Transtracheal pressure during speaking can help predict the tolerance for wearing a speaking valve among critically ill patients after a tracheostomy. Baseline diaphragmatic thickening fraction, physical functioning and APACHE II score can predict the duration of speaking valve tolerance.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Early mobilization is part of the rehabilitation process for critically ill patients and is currently considered a means of preventing ICU-acquired muscle deterioration and worsening of physical function. We sought to determine whether the use of speaking valves in tracheostomized patients would improve their mobility. We evaluated the changes in mobility performance with the use of speaking valves in tracheostomized subjects. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of a series of subjects who were tracheostomized and were being weaned from mechanical ventilation between April 2016 and May 2018. The subjects were those able to tolerate a speaking valve for a minimum of 30 min. Demographic data, comorbidities, cause of ICU admission, days in the ICU, duration of mechanical ventilation before tracheostomy, and days free from mechanical ventilation before tracheostomy were collected. Mobility status was evaluated using daily measurements of the Perme Intensive Care Unit Mobility Score. RESULTS: During the study period, 63 patients were tracheostomized. Patients with deficiencies in language (n = 2) or cognitive deficits (n = 36) and patients in exclusive palliative care (n = 7) were excluded. Eighteen subjects were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the subjects was 64.6 ± 14.2 y (55.5% were male), and the most common reason for ICU admission was pneumonia (n = 7; 38.8%). Perme scores increased from 11.3 (interquartile range 10.1-12.0) on the day before initiation of the speaking valve to 18.2 (IQR 16.2-20.1) immediately after the initiation of a speaking valve (P < .01). These changes were maintained during all periods of speaking valve use. CONCLUSIONS: The use of speaking valves in tracheostomized subjects improved mobility.
