Cargando…
Maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors of successful ventilator weaning
[Purpose] To investigate the predictive value of maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP) and the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in a ventilator weaning protocol and to evaluate the differences between clinical and surgical patients in the intensive care unit. [Subjects and Methods] Patients aged ≥1...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Society of Physical Therapy Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4713778/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26834339 http://dx.doi.org/10.1589/jpts.27.3723 |
_version_ | 1782410196049461248 |
---|---|
author | Bien, Umilson dos Santos Souza, Gerson Fonseca Campos, Elisangela Siqueira Farah de Carvalho, Etiene Fernandes, Matheus Guedes Santoro, Ilka Costa, Dirceu Arena, Ross Sampaio, Luciana Maria Malosá |
author_facet | Bien, Umilson dos Santos Souza, Gerson Fonseca Campos, Elisangela Siqueira Farah de Carvalho, Etiene Fernandes, Matheus Guedes Santoro, Ilka Costa, Dirceu Arena, Ross Sampaio, Luciana Maria Malosá |
author_sort | Bien, Umilson dos Santos |
collection | PubMed |
description | [Purpose] To investigate the predictive value of maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP) and the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in a ventilator weaning protocol and to evaluate the differences between clinical and surgical patients in the intensive care unit. [Subjects and Methods] Patients aged ≥15 years who underwent orotracheal intubation for mechanical ventilation and who met the criteria of the weaning protocol were included in the study. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for the analysis of each index. [Results] Logistic regression analysis was also performed. MIP showed greater sensitivity and specificity [area under the curve (AUC): 0.95 vs. 0.89] and likelihood ratios (LR) (positive(+): 20.85 vs. 9.45; negative(−): 0.07 vs. 0.17) than RSBI in the overall sample (OS) as well as in clinical patients (CP) (AUC: 0.99 vs. 0.90; LR+: 24.66 vs. 7.22; LR-: 0.01 vs. 0.15) and surgical patients (SP) (AUC: 0.99 vs. 0.87; LR+: 9.33 vs. 5.86; LR−: 0.07 vs. 0.14). The logistic regression analysis revealed that both parameters were significantly associated with the weaning success. The MIP showed greater accuracy than the RSBI (OS: 0.93 vs. 0.85; CP: 0.98 vs. 0.87; SP: 0.93 vs. 0.87). [Conclusion] Both parameters are good predictors of successful ventilator weaning. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4713778 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | The Society of Physical Therapy Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47137782016-01-29 Maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors of successful ventilator weaning Bien, Umilson dos Santos Souza, Gerson Fonseca Campos, Elisangela Siqueira Farah de Carvalho, Etiene Fernandes, Matheus Guedes Santoro, Ilka Costa, Dirceu Arena, Ross Sampaio, Luciana Maria Malosá J Phys Ther Sci Original Article [Purpose] To investigate the predictive value of maximum inspiratory pressure (MIP) and the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in a ventilator weaning protocol and to evaluate the differences between clinical and surgical patients in the intensive care unit. [Subjects and Methods] Patients aged ≥15 years who underwent orotracheal intubation for mechanical ventilation and who met the criteria of the weaning protocol were included in the study. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for the analysis of each index. [Results] Logistic regression analysis was also performed. MIP showed greater sensitivity and specificity [area under the curve (AUC): 0.95 vs. 0.89] and likelihood ratios (LR) (positive(+): 20.85 vs. 9.45; negative(−): 0.07 vs. 0.17) than RSBI in the overall sample (OS) as well as in clinical patients (CP) (AUC: 0.99 vs. 0.90; LR+: 24.66 vs. 7.22; LR-: 0.01 vs. 0.15) and surgical patients (SP) (AUC: 0.99 vs. 0.87; LR+: 9.33 vs. 5.86; LR−: 0.07 vs. 0.14). The logistic regression analysis revealed that both parameters were significantly associated with the weaning success. The MIP showed greater accuracy than the RSBI (OS: 0.93 vs. 0.85; CP: 0.98 vs. 0.87; SP: 0.93 vs. 0.87). [Conclusion] Both parameters are good predictors of successful ventilator weaning. The Society of Physical Therapy Science 2015-12-28 2015-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4713778/ /pubmed/26834339 http://dx.doi.org/10.1589/jpts.27.3723 Text en 2015©by the Society of Physical Therapy Science. Published by IPEC Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd) License. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Bien, Umilson dos Santos Souza, Gerson Fonseca Campos, Elisangela Siqueira Farah de Carvalho, Etiene Fernandes, Matheus Guedes Santoro, Ilka Costa, Dirceu Arena, Ross Sampaio, Luciana Maria Malosá Maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors of successful ventilator weaning |
title | Maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors
of successful ventilator weaning |
title_full | Maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors
of successful ventilator weaning |
title_fullStr | Maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors
of successful ventilator weaning |
title_full_unstemmed | Maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors
of successful ventilator weaning |
title_short | Maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors
of successful ventilator weaning |
title_sort | maximum inspiratory pressure and rapid shallow breathing index as predictors
of successful ventilator weaning |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4713778/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26834339 http://dx.doi.org/10.1589/jpts.27.3723 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bienumilsondossantos maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning AT souzagersonfonseca maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning AT camposelisangelasiqueira maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning AT farahdecarvalhoetiene maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning AT fernandesmatheusguedes maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning AT santoroilka maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning AT costadirceu maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning AT arenaross maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning AT sampaiolucianamariamalosa maximuminspiratorypressureandrapidshallowbreathingindexaspredictorsofsuccessfulventilatorweaning |