Home > Riviste > Minerva Anestesiologica > Fascicoli precedenti > Minerva Anestesiologica 2018 January;84(1) > Minerva Anestesiologica 2018 January;84(1):58-67

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Estratti
Permessi
Per citare questo articolo

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE   Freefree

Minerva Anestesiologica 2018 January;84(1):58-67

DOI: 10.23736/S0375-9393.17.11963-2

Copyright © 2017 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Closed loop ventilation mode in Intensive Care Unit: a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the numbers of manual ventilator setting changes

Jean-Michel ARNAL 1, 2 , Aude GARNERO 1, Dominik NOVOTNI 2, Gaëlle CORNO 1, Stéphane-Yannis DONATI 1, Didier DEMORY 1, Gabrielle QUINTANA 1, Laurent DUCROS 1, Thomas LAUBSCHER 2, Jacques DURAND-GASSELIN 1

1 Multipurpose Intensive Care Service, Sainte Musse Hospital, Toulon, France; 2 Department of Research and Development, Hamilton Medical AG, Bonaduz, Switzerland


PDF


BACKGROUND: There is an equipoise regarding closed-loop ventilation modes and the ability to reduce workload for providers. On one hand some settings are managed by the ventilator but on another hand the automatic mode introduces new settings for the user.
METHODS: This randomized controlled trial compared the number of manual ventilator setting changes between a full closed loop ventilation and oxygenation mode (INTELLiVENT-ASV®) and conventional ventilation modes (volume assist control and pressure support) in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. The secondary endpoints were to compare the number of arterial blood gas analysis, the sedation dose and the user acceptance. Sixty subjects with an expected duration of mechanical ventilation of at least 48 hours were randomized to be ventilated using INTELLiVENT-ASV® or conventional modes with a protocolized weaning. All manual ventilator setting changes were recorded continuously from inclusion to successful extubation or death. Arterial blood gases were performed upon decision of the clinician in charge. User acceptance score was assessed for nurses and physicians once daily using a Likert Scale.
RESULTS: The number of manual ventilator setting changes per 24 h-period per subject was lower in INTELLiVENT-ASV® as compared to conventional ventilation group (5 [4-7] versus 10 [7-17]) manuals settings per subject per day [P<0.001]). The number of arterial blood gas analysis and the sedation doses were not significantly different between the groups. Nurses and physicians reported that INTELLiVENT-ASV® was significantly easier to use as compared to conventional ventilation (P<0.001 for nurses and P<0.01 for physicians).
CONCLUSIONS: For mechanically ventilated ICU patients, INTELLiVENT-ASV® significantly reduces the number of manual ventilator setting changes with the same number of arterial blood gas analysis and sedation dose, and is easier to use for the caregivers as compared to conventional ventilation modes.


KEY WORDS: Critical care - Respiratory insufficiency - Respiratory distress syndrome, adult - Respiration, artificial - Ventilators, mechanical - Automation

inizio pagina