Cargando…

Feasibility of implementing Extubation Advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the ICU: a mixed-methods observational study

OBJECTIVES: Although spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) are standard of care to extubation readiness, no tool exists that optimises prediction and standardises assessment. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility and clinical impressions of Extubation Advisor (EA), a comprehensive clinical extub...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sarti, Aimee J, Zheng, Katina, Herry, Christophe L, Sutherland, Stephanie, Scales, Nathan B, Watpool, Irene, Porteous, Rebecca, Hickey, Michael, Anstee, Caitlin, Fazekas, Anna, Ramsay, Tim, Burns, Karen EA, Seely, Andrew JE
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8362728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34385234
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045674
_version_ 1783738224312582144
author Sarti, Aimee J
Zheng, Katina
Herry, Christophe L
Sutherland, Stephanie
Scales, Nathan B
Watpool, Irene
Porteous, Rebecca
Hickey, Michael
Anstee, Caitlin
Fazekas, Anna
Ramsay, Tim
Burns, Karen EA
Seely, Andrew JE
author_facet Sarti, Aimee J
Zheng, Katina
Herry, Christophe L
Sutherland, Stephanie
Scales, Nathan B
Watpool, Irene
Porteous, Rebecca
Hickey, Michael
Anstee, Caitlin
Fazekas, Anna
Ramsay, Tim
Burns, Karen EA
Seely, Andrew JE
author_sort Sarti, Aimee J
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Although spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) are standard of care to extubation readiness, no tool exists that optimises prediction and standardises assessment. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility and clinical impressions of Extubation Advisor (EA), a comprehensive clinical extubation decision support (CDS) tool. DESIGN: Phase I mixed-methods observational study. SETTING: Two Canadian intensive care units (ICUs). PARTICIPANTS: We included patients on mechanical ventilation for ≥24 hours and clinicians (respiratory therapists and intensivists) responsible for extubation decisions. INTERVENTIONS: Components included a predictive model assessment, feasibility evaluation, questionnaires and interviews with clinicians. RESULTS: We enrolled 117 patients, totalling 151 SBTs and 80 extubations. The incidence of extubation failure was 11% in low-risk patients and 21% in high-risk patients stratified by the predictive model; 38% failed extubation when both the model and clinical impression were at high risk. The tool was well rated: 94% and 75% rated the data entry and EA report as average or better, respectively. Interviews (n=15) revealed favourable impressions regarding its user interface and functionality, but unexpectedly, also concerns regarding EA’s potential impact on respiratory therapists’ job security. CONCLUSIONS: EA implementation was feasible, and users perceived it to have potential to support extubation decision-making. This study helps to understand bedside implementation of CDS tools in a multidisciplinary ICU. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02988167.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8362728
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83627282021-08-30 Feasibility of implementing Extubation Advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the ICU: a mixed-methods observational study Sarti, Aimee J Zheng, Katina Herry, Christophe L Sutherland, Stephanie Scales, Nathan B Watpool, Irene Porteous, Rebecca Hickey, Michael Anstee, Caitlin Fazekas, Anna Ramsay, Tim Burns, Karen EA Seely, Andrew JE BMJ Open Intensive Care OBJECTIVES: Although spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) are standard of care to extubation readiness, no tool exists that optimises prediction and standardises assessment. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility and clinical impressions of Extubation Advisor (EA), a comprehensive clinical extubation decision support (CDS) tool. DESIGN: Phase I mixed-methods observational study. SETTING: Two Canadian intensive care units (ICUs). PARTICIPANTS: We included patients on mechanical ventilation for ≥24 hours and clinicians (respiratory therapists and intensivists) responsible for extubation decisions. INTERVENTIONS: Components included a predictive model assessment, feasibility evaluation, questionnaires and interviews with clinicians. RESULTS: We enrolled 117 patients, totalling 151 SBTs and 80 extubations. The incidence of extubation failure was 11% in low-risk patients and 21% in high-risk patients stratified by the predictive model; 38% failed extubation when both the model and clinical impression were at high risk. The tool was well rated: 94% and 75% rated the data entry and EA report as average or better, respectively. Interviews (n=15) revealed favourable impressions regarding its user interface and functionality, but unexpectedly, also concerns regarding EA’s potential impact on respiratory therapists’ job security. CONCLUSIONS: EA implementation was feasible, and users perceived it to have potential to support extubation decision-making. This study helps to understand bedside implementation of CDS tools in a multidisciplinary ICU. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02988167. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8362728/ /pubmed/34385234 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045674 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Intensive Care
Sarti, Aimee J
Zheng, Katina
Herry, Christophe L
Sutherland, Stephanie
Scales, Nathan B
Watpool, Irene
Porteous, Rebecca
Hickey, Michael
Anstee, Caitlin
Fazekas, Anna
Ramsay, Tim
Burns, Karen EA
Seely, Andrew JE
Feasibility of implementing Extubation Advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the ICU: a mixed-methods observational study
title Feasibility of implementing Extubation Advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the ICU: a mixed-methods observational study
title_full Feasibility of implementing Extubation Advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the ICU: a mixed-methods observational study
title_fullStr Feasibility of implementing Extubation Advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the ICU: a mixed-methods observational study
title_full_unstemmed Feasibility of implementing Extubation Advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the ICU: a mixed-methods observational study
title_short Feasibility of implementing Extubation Advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the ICU: a mixed-methods observational study
title_sort feasibility of implementing extubation advisor, a clinical decision support tool to improve extubation decision-making in the icu: a mixed-methods observational study
topic Intensive Care
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8362728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34385234
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045674
work_keys_str_mv AT sartiaimeej feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT zhengkatina feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT herrychristophel feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT sutherlandstephanie feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT scalesnathanb feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT watpoolirene feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT porteousrebecca feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT hickeymichael feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT ansteecaitlin feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT fazekasanna feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT ramsaytim feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT burnskarenea feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT seelyandrewje feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT feasibilityofimplementingextubationadvisoraclinicaldecisionsupporttooltoimproveextubationdecisionmakingintheicuamixedmethodsobservationalstudy