IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0229935.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maximal expiratory pressure is associated with reinstitution of mechanical ventilation after successful unassisted breathing trials in tracheostomized patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation

Author

Listed:
  • Shwu-Jen Lin
  • Jih-Shuin Jerng
  • Yao-Wen Kuo
  • Chao-Ling Wu
  • Shih-Chi Ku
  • Huey-Dong Wu

Abstract

Objective: Reinstitution of mechanical ventilation (MV) for tracheostomized patients after successful weaning may occur as the care setting changes from critical care to general care. We aimed to investigate the occurrence, consequence and associated factors of MV reinstitution. Methods: We analyzed the clinical data and physiological measurements of tracheostomized patients with prolonged MV discharged from the weaning unit to general wards after successful weaning to compare between those with and without in-hospital MV reinstitution within 60 days. Results: Of 454 patients successfully weaned, 116 (25.6%) reinstituted MV at general wards within 60 days; at hospital discharge, 42 (36.2%) of them were eventually liberated from MV, 51 (44.0%) remained MV dependent, and 33 (28.4%) died. Of the 338 patients without reinstitution within 60 days, only 3 (0.9%) were later reinstituted with MV before discharge (on day 67, 89 and 136 at general wards, respectively), and 322 (95.2%) were successfully weaned again at discharge, while 13 (3.8%) died. Patients with MV reinstitution had a significantly lower level of maximal expiratory pressure (PEmax) before unassisted breathing trial compared to those without reinstitution. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed fever at RCC discharge (hazard ratio [HR] 14.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.2–61.9) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 2.37, 95% CI 1.34–4.18), renal replacement therapy at the ICU (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.50–3.49) and extubation failure before tracheostomy (HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.18–2.63) were associated with increased risks of reinstitution, while PEmax > 30 cmH2O (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35–0.76) was associated with a decreased risk of reinstitution. Conclusions: The reinstitution of MV at the general ward is significant, with poor outcomes. The PEmax measured before unassisted breathing trial was significantly associated with the risk of reinstituting MV at the general wards.

Suggested Citation

  • Shwu-Jen Lin & Jih-Shuin Jerng & Yao-Wen Kuo & Chao-Ling Wu & Shih-Chi Ku & Huey-Dong Wu, 2020. "Maximal expiratory pressure is associated with reinstitution of mechanical ventilation after successful unassisted breathing trials in tracheostomized patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-12, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0229935
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229935
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0229935
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0229935&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0229935?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0229935. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.