Cargando…

Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?

In this issue of Critical Care, Bollen and colleagues present the results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial, comparing high-frequency oscillatory ventilation with conventional ventilation as the primary ventilation mode for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. The study was st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singh, Jeffrey M, Ferguson, Niall D
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1269471/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16137379
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc3761
_version_ 1782125957394464768
author Singh, Jeffrey M
Ferguson, Niall D
author_facet Singh, Jeffrey M
Ferguson, Niall D
author_sort Singh, Jeffrey M
collection PubMed
description In this issue of Critical Care, Bollen and colleagues present the results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial, comparing high-frequency oscillatory ventilation with conventional ventilation as the primary ventilation mode for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. The study was stopped early after recruiting only 61 patients because of declining enrolment, and although no differences were detected in any primary or secondary endpoint, this trial only had sufficient power to detect extreme differences in outcomes between groups. This editorial attempts to put these results in context with previous work and highlights challenges to be addressed in future studies.
format Text
id pubmed-1269471
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-12694712005-10-28 Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation? Singh, Jeffrey M Ferguson, Niall D Crit Care Commentary In this issue of Critical Care, Bollen and colleagues present the results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial, comparing high-frequency oscillatory ventilation with conventional ventilation as the primary ventilation mode for adults with acute respiratory distress syndrome. The study was stopped early after recruiting only 61 patients because of declining enrolment, and although no differences were detected in any primary or secondary endpoint, this trial only had sufficient power to detect extreme differences in outcomes between groups. This editorial attempts to put these results in context with previous work and highlights challenges to be addressed in future studies. BioMed Central 2005 2005-06-24 /pmc/articles/PMC1269471/ /pubmed/16137379 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc3761 Text en Copyright © 2005 BioMed Central Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Singh, Jeffrey M
Ferguson, Niall D
Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?
title Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?
title_full Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?
title_fullStr Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?
title_full_unstemmed Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?
title_short Is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?
title_sort is it time to increase the frequency of use of high-frequency oscillatory ventilation?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1269471/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16137379
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc3761
work_keys_str_mv AT singhjeffreym isittimetoincreasethefrequencyofuseofhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilation
AT fergusonnialld isittimetoincreasethefrequencyofuseofhighfrequencyoscillatoryventilation