1997Critical Care MedicineRequires access

A randomized, controlled trial of protocol-directed versus physician-directed weaning from mechanical ventilation

Marin H. Kollef, Steven D. Shapiro, Patricia Silver, Robert John, Donna Prentice, Sharon Sauer, Tom S. Ahrens, William D. Shannon, Darnetta Baker-Clinkscale

Open publisher page 843 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare a practice of protocol-directed weaning from mechanical ventilation implemented by nurses and respiratory therapists with traditional physician-directed weaning. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Medical and surgical intensive care units in two university-affiliated teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients requiring mechanical ventilation (n = 357). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either protocol-directed (n = 179) or physician-directed (n = 178) weaning from mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was the duration of mechanical ventilation from tracheal intubation until discontinuation of mechanical ventilation. Other outcome measures included need for reintubation, length of hospital stay, hospital mortality rate, and hospital costs. The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 35 hrs for the protocol-directed group (first quartile 15 hrs; third quartile 114 hrs) compared with 44 hrs for the physician-directed group (first quartile 21 hrs; third quartile 209 hrs). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that patients randomized to protocol-directed weaning had significantly shorter durations of mechanical ventilation compared with patients randomized to physician-directed weaning (chi 2 = 3.62, p = .057, log-rank test; chi 2 = 5.12, p = .024, Wilcoxon test). Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis, adjusting for other covariates, showed that the rate of successful weaning was significantly greater for patients receiving protocol-directed weaning compared with patients receiving physician-directed weaning (risk ratio 1.31; 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 1.50; p = .039). The hospital mortality rates for the two treatment groups were similar (protocol-directed 22.3% vs. physician-directed 23.6%; p = .779). Hospital cost savings for patients in the protocol-directed group were $42,960 compared with hospital costs for patients in the physician-directed group. CONCLUSION: Protocol-guided weaning of mechanical ventilation, as performed by nurses and respiratory therapists, is safe and led to extubation more rapidly than physician-directed weaning.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To compare a practice of protocol-directed weaning from mechanical ventilation implemented by nurses and respiratory therapists with traditional physician-directed weaning. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Medical and surgical intensive care units in two university-affiliated teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients requiring mechanical ventilation (n = 357). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either protocol-directed (n = 179) or physician-directed (n = 178) weaning from mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was the duration of mechanical ventilation from tracheal intubation until discontinuation of mechanical ventilation. Other outcome measures included need for reintubation, length of hospital stay, hospital mortality rate, and hospital costs. The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 35 hrs for the protocol-directed group (first quartile 15 hrs; third quartile 114 hrs) compared with 44 hrs for the physician-directed group (first quartile 21 hrs; third quartile 209 hrs). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that patients randomized to protocol-directed weaning had significantly shorter durations of mechanical ventilation compared with patients randomized to physician-directed weaning (chi 2 = 3.62, p = .057, log-rank test; chi 2 = 5.12, p = .024, Wilcoxon test). Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis, adjusting for other covariates, showed that the rate of successful weaning was significantly greater for patients receiving protocol-directed weaning compared with patients receiving physician-directed weaning (risk ratio 1.31; 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 1.50; p = .039). The hospital mortality rates for the two treatment groups were similar (protocol-directed 22.3% vs. physician-directed 23.6%; p = .779). Hospital cost savings for patients in the protocol-directed group were $42,960 compared with hospital costs for patients in the physician-directed group. CONCLUSION: Protocol-guided weaning of mechanical ventilation, as performed by nurses and respiratory therapists, is safe and led to extubation more rapidly than physician-directed weaning.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 843 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare a practice of protocol-directed weaning from mechanical ventilation implemented by nurses and respiratory therapists with traditional physician-directed weaning. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Medical and surgical intensive care units in two university-affiliated teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients requiring mechanical ventilation (n = 357). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either protocol-directed (n = 179) or physician-directed (n = 178) weaning from mechanical ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was the duration of mechanical ventilation from tracheal intubation until discontinuation of mechanical ventilation. Other outcome measures included need for reintubation, length of hospital stay, hospital mortality rate, and hospital costs. The median duration of mechanical ventilation was 35 hrs for the protocol-directed group (first quartile 15 hrs; third quartile 114 hrs) compared with 44 hrs for the physician-directed group (first quartile 21 hrs; third quartile 209 hrs). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that patients randomized to protocol-directed weaning had significantly shorter durations of mechanical ventilation compared with patients randomized to physician-directed weaning (chi 2 = 3.62, p = .057, log-rank test; chi 2 = 5.12, p = .024, Wilcoxon test). Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis, adjusting for other covariates, showed that the rate of successful weaning was significantly greater for patients receiving protocol-directed weaning compared with patients receiving physician-directed weaning (risk ratio 1.31; 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 1.50; p = .039). The hospital mortality rates for the two treatment groups were similar (protocol-directed 22.3% vs. physician-directed 23.6%; p = .779). Hospital cost savings for patients in the protocol-directed group were $42,960 compared with hospital costs for patients in the physician-directed group. CONCLUSION: Protocol-guided weaning of mechanical ventilation, as performed by nurses and respiratory therapists, is safe and led to extubation more rapidly than physician-directed weaning.

Key concepts: Medicine, Mechanical ventilation, Quartile, Weaning, Randomized controlled trial, Hazard ratio, Confidence interval, Interquartile range

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A randomized, controlled trial of protocol-directed versus physician-directed weaning from mechanical ventilation — Research Paper | ScholarLens