1
|
Airway Care Interventions for Invasively Ventilated Critically Ill Adults-A Dutch National Survey. J Clin Med 2021; 10:jcm10153381. [PMID: 34362165 PMCID: PMC8347919 DOI: 10.3390/jcm10153381] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2021] [Revised: 07/11/2021] [Accepted: 07/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Airway care interventions may prevent accumulation of airway secretions and promote their evacuation, but evidence is scarce. Interventions include heated humidification, nebulization of mucolytics and/or bronchodilators, manual hyperinflation and use of mechanical insufflation-exsufflation (MI-E). Our aim is to identify current airway care practices for invasively ventilated patients in intensive care units (ICU) in the Netherlands. A self–administered web-based survey was sent to a single pre–appointed representative of all ICUs in the Netherlands. Response rate was 85% (72 ICUs). We found substantial heterogeneity in the intensity and combinations of airway care interventions used. Most (81%) ICUs reported using heated humidification as a routine prophylactic intervention. All (100%) responding ICUs used nebulized mucolytics and/or bronchodilators; however, only 43% ICUs reported nebulization as a routine prophylactic intervention. Most (81%) ICUs used manual hyperinflation, although only initiated with a clinical indication like difficult oxygenation. Few (22%) ICUs used MI-E for invasively ventilated patients. Use was always based on the indication of insufficient cough strength or as a continuation of home use. In the Netherlands, use of routine prophylactic airway care interventions is common despite evidence of no benefit. There is an urgent need for evidence of the benefit of these interventions to inform evidence-based guidelines.
Collapse
|
2
|
Anand R, McAuley DF, Blackwood B, Yap C, ONeill B, Connolly B, Borthwick M, Shyamsundar M, Warburton J, Meenen DV, Paulus F, Schultz MJ, Dark P, Bradley JM. Mucoactive agents for acute respiratory failure in the critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thorax 2020; 75:623-631. [PMID: 32513777 PMCID: PMC7402561 DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2019-214355] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2019] [Revised: 04/08/2020] [Accepted: 04/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is a common cause of admission to intensive care units (ICUs). Mucoactive agents are medications that promote mucus clearance and are frequently administered in patients with ARF, despite a lack of evidence to underpin clinical decision making. The aim of this systematic review was to determine if the use of mucoactive agents in patients with ARF improves clinical outcomes. METHODS We searched electronic and grey literature (January 2020). Two reviewers independently screened, selected, extracted data and quality assessed studies. We included trials of adults receiving ventilatory support for ARF and involving at least one mucoactive agent compared with placebo or standard care. Outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation. Meta-analysis was undertaken using random-effects modelling and certainty of the evidence was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. RESULTS Thirteen randomised controlled trials were included (1712 patients), investigating four different mucoactive agents. Mucoactive agents showed no effect on duration of mechanical ventilation (seven trials, mean difference (MD) -1.34, 95% CI -2.97 to 0.29, I2=82%, very low certainty) or mortality, hospital stay and ventilator-free days. There was an effect on reducing ICU length of stay in the mucoactive agent groups (10 trials, MD -3.22, 95% CI -5.49 to -0.96, I2=89%, very low certainty). CONCLUSION Our findings do not support the use of mucoactive agents in critically ill patients with ARF. The existing evidence is of low quality. High-quality randomised controlled trials are needed to determine the role of specific mucoactive agents in critically ill patients with ARF. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42018095408.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rohan Anand
- Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Daniel F McAuley
- Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Bronagh Blackwood
- Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Chee Yap
- Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - Brenda ONeill
- Centre for Health and Rehabilitation Technologies, Institute of Nursing and Health Research, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, UK
| | - Bronwen Connolly
- Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.,Department of Physiotherapy, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Lane Fox Respiratory Unit, Guy's and Saint Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Mark Borthwick
- Oxford Critical Care, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Murali Shyamsundar
- Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - John Warburton
- Bristol Royal Infirmary, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - David van Meenen
- University of Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
| | - Frederique Paulus
- University of Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
| | - Marcus J Schultz
- University of Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands.,Mahidol University, Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Bangkok, Thailand.,Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford University, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK
| | - Paul Dark
- Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Judy M Bradley
- Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van Meenen DMP, van der Hoeven SM, Binnekade JM, de Borgie CAJM, Merkus MP, Bosch FH, Endeman H, Haringman JJ, van der Meer NJM, Moeniralam HS, Slabbekoorn M, Muller MCA, Stilma W, van Silfhout B, Neto AS, ter Haar HFM, Van Vliet J, Wijnhoven JW, Horn J, Juffermans NP, Pelosi P, Gama de Abreu M, Schultz MJ, Paulus F. Effect of On-Demand vs Routine Nebulization of Acetylcysteine With Salbutamol on Ventilator-Free Days in Intensive Care Unit Patients Receiving Invasive Ventilation: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2018; 319:993-1001. [PMID: 29486489 PMCID: PMC5885882 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.0949] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE It remains uncertain whether nebulization of mucolytics with bronchodilators should be applied for clinical indication or preventively in intensive care unit (ICU) patients receiving invasive ventilation. OBJECTIVE To determine if a strategy that uses nebulization for clinical indication (on-demand) is noninferior to one that uses preventive (routine) nebulization. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized clinical trial enrolling adult patients expected to need invasive ventilation for more than 24 hours at 7 ICUs in the Netherlands. INTERVENTIONS On-demand nebulization of acetylcysteine or salbutamol (based on strict clinical indications, n = 471) or routine nebulization of acetylcysteine with salbutamol (every 6 hours until end of invasive ventilation, n = 473). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the number of ventilator-free days at day 28, with a noninferiority margin for a difference between groups of -0.5 days. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, mortality rates, occurrence of pulmonary complications, and adverse events. RESULTS Nine hundred twenty-two patients (34% women; median age, 66 (interquartile range [IQR], 54-75 years) were enrolled and completed follow-up. At 28 days, patients in the on-demand group had a median 21 (IQR, 0-26) ventilator-free days, and patients in the routine group had a median 20 (IQR, 0-26) ventilator-free days (1-sided 95% CI, -0.00003 to ∞). There was no significant difference in length of stay or mortality, or in the proportion of patients developing pulmonary complications, between the 2 groups. Adverse events (13.8% vs 29.3%; difference, -15.5% [95% CI, -20.7% to -10.3%]; P < .001) were more frequent with routine nebulization and mainly related to tachyarrhythmia (12.5% vs 25.9%; difference, -13.4% [95% CI, -18.4% to -8.4%]; P < .001) and agitation (0.2% vs 4.3%; difference, -4.1% [95% CI, -5.9% to -2.2%]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among ICU patients receiving invasive ventilation who were expected to not be extubated within 24 hours, on-demand compared with routine nebulization of acetylcysteine with salbutamol did not result in an inferior number of ventilator-free days. On-demand nebulization may be a reasonable alternative to routine nebulization. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02159196.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David M. P. van Meenen
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jan M. Binnekade
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Maruschka P. Merkus
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Frank H. Bosch
- Department of Intensive Care, Rijnstate, Arnhem, the Netherlands
| | - Henrik Endeman
- Department of Intensive Care, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Hazra S. Moeniralam
- Department of Intensive Care, Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Mathilde Slabbekoorn
- Department of Intensive Care, Haaglanden Medical Center, The Hague, the Netherlands
| | | | - Willemke Stilma
- Department of Intensive Care, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bart van Silfhout
- Department of Intensive Care, Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Ary Serpa Neto
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
| | | | - Jan Van Vliet
- Department of Intensive Care, Rijnstate, Arnhem, the Netherlands
| | | | - Janneke Horn
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Nicole P. Juffermans
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Paolo Pelosi
- Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics, San Martino Policlinico Hospital, IRCCS for Oncology, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
| | - Marcelo Gama de Abreu
- Pulmonary Engineering Group, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus; Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Marcus J. Schultz
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Mahidol Oxford Research Unit (MORU), Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Frederique Paulus
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Nakstad ER, Opdahl H, Heyerdahl F, Borchsenius F, Skjønsberg OH. Manual ventilation and open suction procedures contribute to negative pressures in a mechanical lung model. BMJ Open Respir Res 2017; 4:e000176. [PMID: 28725445 PMCID: PMC5501241 DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2016-000176] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2016] [Revised: 02/22/2017] [Accepted: 03/03/2017] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Removal of pulmonary secretions in mechanically ventilated patients usually requires suction with closed catheter systems or flexible bronchoscopes. Manual ventilation is occasionally performed during such procedures if clinicians suspect inadequate ventilation. Suctioning can also be performed with the ventilator entirely disconnected from the endotracheal tube (ETT). The aim of this study was to investigate if these two procedures generate negative airway pressures, which may contribute to atelectasis. METHODS The effects of device insertion and suctioning in ETTs were examined in a mechanical lung model with a pressure transducer inserted distal to ETTs of 9 mm, 8 mm and 7 mm internal diameter (ID). A 16 Fr bronchoscope and 12, 14 and 16 Fr suction catheters were used at two different vacuum levels during manual ventilation and with the ETTs disconnected. RESULTS During manual ventilation with ETTs of 9 mm, 8 mm and 7 mm ID, and bronchoscopic suctioning at moderate suction level, peak pressure (PPEAK) dropped from 23, 22 and 24.5 cm H2O to 16, 16 and 15 cm H2O, respectively. Maximum suction reduced PPEAK to 20, 17 and 11 cm H2O, respectively, and the end-expiratory pressure fell from 5, 5.5 and 4.5 cm H2O to -2, -6 and -17 cm H2O. Suctioning through disconnected ETTs (open suction procedure) gave negative model airway pressures throughout the duration of the procedures. CONCLUSIONS Manual ventilation and open suction procedures induce negative end-expiratory pressure during endotracheal suctioning, which may have clinical implications in patients who need high PEEP (positive end-expiratory pressure).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Espen Rostrup Nakstad
- Department of Acute Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevaal, Norway.,Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevaal, Norway
| | - Helge Opdahl
- Department of Acute Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevaal, Norway
| | - Fridtjof Heyerdahl
- Department of Anesthesiology, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevaal, Norway
| | - Fredrik Borchsenius
- Department of Pulmonary Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevaal, Norway
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Aerosol therapy in intensive and intermediate care units: prospective observation of 2808 critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med 2015; 42:192-201. [PMID: 26602786 DOI: 10.1007/s00134-015-4114-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2015] [Accepted: 10/18/2015] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Unlike in the outpatient setting, delivery of aerosols to critically ill patients may be considered complex, particularly in ventilated patients, and benefits remain to be proven. Many factors influence aerosol delivery and recommendations exist, but little is known about knowledge translation into clinical practice. METHODS Two-week cross-sectional study to assess the prevalence of aerosol therapy in 81 intensive and intermediate care units in 22 countries. All aerosols delivered to patients breathing spontaneously, ventilated invasively or noninvasively (NIV) were recorded, and drugs, devices, ventilator settings, circuit set-up, humidification and side effects were noted. RESULTS A total of 9714 aerosols were administered to 678 of the 2808 admitted patients (24 %, CI95 22-26 %), whereas only 271 patients (10 %) were taking inhaled medication before admission. There were large variations among centers, from 0 to 57 %. Among intubated patients 22 % (n = 262) received aerosols, and 50 % (n = 149) of patients undergoing NIV, predominantly (75 %) inbetween NIV sessions. Bronchodilators (n = 7960) and corticosteroids (n = 1233) were the most frequently delivered drugs (88 % overall), predominantly but not exclusively (49 %) administered to patients with chronic airway disease. An anti-infectious drug was aerosolized 509 times (5 % of all aerosols) for nosocomial infections. Jet-nebulizers were the most frequently used device (56 %), followed by metered dose inhalers (23 %). Only 106 (<1 %) mild side effects were observed, despite frequent suboptimal set-ups such as an external gas supply of jet nebulizers for intubated patients. CONCLUSIONS Aerosol therapy concerns every fourth critically ill patient and one-fifth of ventilated patients.
Collapse
|
6
|
van der Hoeven SM, Binnekade JM, de Borgie CAJM, Bosch FH, Endeman H, Horn J, Juffermans NP, van der Meer NJM, Merkus MP, Moeniralam HS, van Silfhout B, Slabbekoorn M, Stilma W, Wijnhoven JW, Schultz MJ, Paulus F. Preventive nebulization of mucolytic agents and bronchodilating drugs in invasively ventilated intensive care unit patients (NEBULAE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2015; 16:389. [PMID: 26329352 PMCID: PMC4557315 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-015-0865-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2015] [Accepted: 07/14/2015] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Preventive nebulization of mucolytic agents and bronchodilating drugs is a strategy aimed at the prevention of sputum plugging, and therefore atelectasis and pneumonia, in intubated and ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The present trial aims to compare a strategy using the preventive nebulization of acetylcysteine and salbutamol with nebulization on indication in intubated and ventilated ICU patients. Methods/Design The preventive nebulization of mucolytic agents and bronchodilating drugs in invasively ventilated intensive care unit patients (NEBULAE) trial is a national multicenter open-label, two-armed, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial in the Netherlands. Nine hundred and fifty intubated and ventilated ICU patients with an anticipated duration of invasive ventilation of more than 24 hours will be randomly assigned to receive either a strategy consisting of preventive nebulization of acetylcysteine and salbutamol or a strategy consisting of nebulization of acetylcysteine and/or salbutamol on indication. The primary endpoint is the number of ventilator-free days and surviving on day 28. Secondary endpoints include ICU and hospital length of stay, ICU and hospital mortality, the occurrence of predefined pulmonary complications (acute respiratory distress syndrome, pneumonia, large atelectasis and pneumothorax), and the occurrence of predefined side effects of the intervention. Related healthcare costs will be estimated in a cost-benefit and budget-impact analysis. Discussion The NEBULAE trial is the first randomized controlled trial powered to investigate whether preventive nebulization of acetylcysteine and salbutamol shortens the duration of ventilation in critically ill patients. Trial registration NCT02159196, registered on 6 June 2014. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0865-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophia M van der Hoeven
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Jan M Binnekade
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | - Frank H Bosch
- Department of Intensive Care, Rijnstate, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
| | - Henrik Endeman
- Department of Intensive Care, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Janneke Horn
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L E I C A), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Nicole P Juffermans
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L E I C A), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Nardo J M van der Meer
- Department of Intensive Care, Amphia Hospital, Breda, Oosterhout and Etten-Leur, The Netherlands. .,Tias/Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
| | | | - Hazra S Moeniralam
- Department of Intensive Care, Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Bart van Silfhout
- Department of Intensive Care, Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
| | - Mathilde Slabbekoorn
- Department of Intensive Care, Medical Center Haaglanden and Leidschendam, The Hague, The Netherlands.
| | - Willemke Stilma
- Department of Intensive Care, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Jan Willem Wijnhoven
- Department of Intensive Care, Amphia Hospital, Breda, Oosterhout and Etten-Leur, The Netherlands.
| | - Marcus J Schultz
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology (L E I C A), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Frederique Paulus
- Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Functional residual capacity-guided alveolar recruitment strategy after endotracheal suctioning in cardiac surgery patients. Crit Care Med 2011; 39:1042-9. [DOI: 10.1097/ccm.0b013e31820eb736] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
8
|
Larsson A. Inhale, suction and close the lung: a common clinical practice in Scandinavian intensive care units? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2009; 53:699-700. [PMID: 19563571 DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2009.01987.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|