4.5 Article

Testing the prognostic value of the rapid shallow breathing index in predicting successful weaning in patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation

Journal

HEART & LUNG
Volume 41, Issue 6, Pages 546-552

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2012.06.003

Keywords

Mechanical ventilation; Prolonged mechanical ventilation; Rapid shallow breathing index; Respiratory failure; Spontaneous breathing trial; Weaning

Funding

  1. NIA NIH HHS [P30 AG028747] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to assess the prognostic value of the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) in predicting successful weaning of patients from prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) in long-term acute care (LTAC) facilities. The RSBI predicts successful ventilator weaning in acutely ill patients. However, its value in PMV is unclear. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients receiving PMV in LTAC facilities was performed. RSBI was measured daily, with weaning per protocol. Initial, mean, and final RSBI; RSBI <= 105; rate of change; and variability were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-five of 52 patients were weaned from PMV. Only the mean RSBI and the RSBI on the last day of weaning predicted success (78.7 +/- 14.2 vs 99.3 +/- 30.2, P = .007; 71.7 +/- 31.2 vs 123.3 +/- 92.5, P = .005, respectively). RSBI variability and rate of change were different between groups (coefficient of variation, .37 +/- .12 vs .51 +/- .30, P = .02, rate of change: -3.40 +/- 9:40 vs 4.40 +/- 11.1 RSBI points/day, P = .005, weaned vs failed). CONCLUSION: Although isolated RSBI measurements do not predict successful weaning from PMV, RSBI trends may have prognostic value. Cite this article: Verceles, A. C., Diaz-Abad, M., Geiger-Brown, J., & Scharf, S. M. (2012, NOVEMBER-DECEMBER). Testing the prognostic value of the rapid shallow breathing index in predicting successful weaning in patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation. Heart & Lung, 41(6), 546-552. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2012.06.003.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available