Airway clearance therapy (ACT) is used in a variety of settings for a variety of ailments. These guidelines were developed from a systematic review with the purpose of determining whether the use of nonpharmacologic ACT improves oxygenation, reduces length of time on the ventilator, reduces stay in the ICU, resolves atelectasis/consolidation, and/or improves respiratory mechanics, versus usual care in 3 populations. For hospitalized, adult and pediatric patients without cystic fibrosis, 1) chest physiotherapy (CPT) is not recommended for the routine treatment of uncomplicated pneumonia; 2) ACT is not recommended for routine use in patients with COPD; 3) ACT may be considered in patients with COPD with symptomatic secretion retention, guided by patient preference, toleration, and effectiveness of therapy; 4) ACT is not recommended if the patient is able to mobilize secretions with cough, but instruction in effective cough technique may be useful. For adult and pediatric patients with neuromuscular disease, respiratory muscle weakness, or impaired cough, 1) cough assist techniques should be used in patients with neuromuscular disease, particularly when peak cough flow is < 270 L/min; CPT, positive expiratory pressure, intrapulmonary percussive ventilation, and high-frequency chest wall compression cannot be recommended, due to insufficient evidence. For postoperative adult and pediatric patients, 1) incentive spirometry is not recommended for routine, prophylactic use in postoperative patients, 2) early mobility and ambulation is recommended to reduce postoperative complications and promote airway clearance, 3) ACT is not recommended for routine postoperative care. The lack of available high-level evidence related to ACT should prompt the design and completion of properly designed studies to determine the appropriate role for these therapies.
The development and evolution of the endotracheal tube (ETT) have been closely related to advances in surgery and anesthesia. Modifications were made to accomplish many tasks, including minimizing gross aspiration, isolating a lung, providing a clear facial surgical field during general anesthesia, monitoring laryngeal nerve damage during surgery, preventing airway fires during laser surgery, and administering medications. In critical care management, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a major concern, as it is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and cost. It is increasingly appreciated that the ETT itself is a primary causative risk for developing VAP. Unfortunately, contaminated oral and gastric secretions leak down past the inflated ETT cuff into the lung. Bacteria can also grow within the ETT in biofilm and re-enter the lung. Modifications to the ETT that attempt to prevent bacteria from entering around the ETT include maintaining an adequate cuff pressure against the tracheal wall, changing the material and shape of the cuff, and aspirating the secretions that sit above the cuff. Attempts to reduce bacterial entry through the tube include antimicrobial coating of the ETT and mechanically scraping the biofilm from within the ETT. Studies evaluating the effectiveness of these modifications and techniques demonstrate mixed results, and clear recommendations for which modification should be implemented are weak.
Mechanical ventilation is a life-saving supportive therapy, but it can also cause lung injury, diaphragmatic dysfunction, and lung infection. Ventilator liberation should be attempted as soon as clinically indicated, to minimize morbidity and mortality. The most effective method of liberation follows a systematic approach that includes a daily assessment of weaning readiness, in conjunction with interruption of sedation infusions and spontaneous breathing trials. Protocols and checklists are decision support tools that help ensure consistent application of key elements of evidence-based practice. A majority of studies of weaning protocols applied by non-physician healthcare providers suggest faster weaning and shorter duration of ventilation and ICU stay, and some suggest reduced failed extubation and ventilator-associated pneumonia rates. Checklists can be used to reinforce application of the protocol, or possibly in lieu of one, particularly in environments where the caregiver-to-patient ratio is high and clinicians are well versed in and dedicated to applying evidence-based care. There is support for integrating best-evidence rules for weaning into the mechanical ventilator so that a substantial portion of the weaning process can be automated, which may be most effective in environments with low caregiver-to-patient ratios or those in which it is challenging to consistently apply evidence-based care. This paper reviews evidence for ventilator liberation protocols and discusses issues of implementation and ongoing monitoring.
Objective: Mechanical ventilation with low tidal volumes is recommended for all patients with ARDS, and may be beneficial to other intubated patients, yet consistent implementation remains difficult to obtain. Using detailed electronic health record data, we examined patterns of tidal volume administration, the effect on clinical outcomes, and alternate metrics for evaluating low tidal volume compliance in clinical practice. Design: Observational cohort study. Setting: Six intensive care units in a single hospital system. Patients: Adult patients who received invasive mechanical ventilation more than 12 hours. Intervention: none Measurements and Main Results: Tidal volumes were analyzed across 1,905 hospitalizations. Although mean tidal volume was 6.8 mL/kg predicted body weight (PBW), 40% of patients were exposed to tidal volumes > 8 mL/kg PBW, with 11% for more than 24 hours. At a patient level, exposure to 24 total hours of tidal volumes > 8 mL/kg PBW was associated with increased mortality (odds ratio = 1.82, 95% CI 1.20 – 2.78), while mean tidal volume exposure was not (odds ratio = 0.87 per 1 mL/kg increase, 95% CI 0.74 – 1.02). Initial tidal volume settings strongly predicted exposure to volumes > 8 mL/kg for 24 hours, the adjusted rate was 21.5% when initial volumes were > 8 mL/kg PBW and 7.1% when initial volumes were < 8 mL/kg PBW. Across ICUs, correlation of mean tidal volume with alternative measures of low tidal volume delivery ranged from 0.38 to 0.66. Conclusion: Despite low mean tidal volume in the cohort, a significant percentage of patients were exposed to a prolonged duration of high tidal volumes which was correlated with higher mortality. Detailed ventilator records in the electronic health record provide a unique window for evaluating low tidal volume delivery and targets for improvement.
Aerosolized medications are used as airway clearance therapy to treat a variety of airway diseases. These guidelines were developed from a systematic review with the purpose of determining whether the use of these medications to promote airway clearance improves oxygenation and respiratory mechanics, reduces ventilator time and ICU stay, and/or resolves atelectasis/consolidation compared with usual care. Recombinant human dornase alfa should not be used in hospitalized adult and pediatric patients without cystic fibrosis. The routine use of bronchodilators to aid in secretion clearance is not recommended. The routine use of aerosolized N-acetylcysteine to improve airway clearance is not recommended. Aerosolized agents to change mucus biophysical properties or promote airway clearance are not recommended for adult or pediatric patients with neuromuscular disease, respiratory muscle weakness, or impaired cough. Mucolytics are not recommended to treat atelectasis in postoperative adult or pediatric patients, and the routine administration of bronchodilators to postoperative patients is not recommended. There is no high-level evidence related to the use of bronchodilators, mucolytics, mucokinetics, and novel therapy to promote airway clearance in these populations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.