Michele C Balas1, Judith Tate1, Alai Tan2, Brennon Pinion3, Matthew Exline4. 1. College of Nursing, Center for Healthy Aging, Self-Management, and Complex Care, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 2. College of Nursing, Center for Research and Health Analytics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 3. Medical Intensive Care Unit, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA. 4. Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) are an evidence-based way of identifying patients ready for mechanical ventilation (MV) liberation. Despite their effectiveness, global SBT performance rates remain suboptimal, and many patients who demonstrate the ability to breathe on their own remain on MV. The factors that influence clinicians' decision to discontinue MV following a successful SBT remain unclear. AIMS: The aim of this study was to explore the underlying causes of extubation delays in the intensive care unit (ICU) from an interprofessional perspective. METHODS: An exploratory, descriptive, cross-sectional design was used. An online survey was administered in December 2019 to clinicians practicing in three ICUs at a single medical center in the U.S. Survey questions focused on clinicians' perceptions of current MV liberation practices and perceived barriers or facilitators to timely extubation after a successful SBT. RESULTS: Of 425 eligible clinicians, 135 completed the survey (31.7% response rate). The majority of clinicians believed the current SBT and extubation process took too long (n = 108; 80.0%) and that this delay negatively affected patient outcomes. While professional groups differed in their rankings of importance, factors perceived to contribute to extubation delays most commonly included SBT timing, low provider confidence levels in making extubation decisions, and patient-specific factors. Potential strategies to overcome these barriers included developing an automated extubation protocol, performing SBTs when the provider responsible for final extubation decisions is physically present, and decreasing clinician perception of reprimand or condemnation for failed extubations. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: The MV liberation process is complex and dependent on the decisions of various ICU professionals. Clinicians perceive a number of potentially modifiable provider- and organizational-level factors that cause extubation delays in everyday practice. Understanding and addressing these barriers is essential for improving ICU quality and patient outcomes. Future research should explore the effect of nurse and respiratory therapist-driven extubation protocols on MV liberation rates.
BACKGROUND: Spontaneous breathing trials (SBTs) are an evidence-based way of identifying patients ready for mechanical ventilation (MV) liberation. Despite their effectiveness, global SBT performance rates remain suboptimal, and many patients who demonstrate the ability to breathe on their own remain on MV. The factors that influence clinicians' decision to discontinue MV following a successful SBT remain unclear. AIMS: The aim of this study was to explore the underlying causes of extubation delays in the intensive care unit (ICU) from an interprofessional perspective. METHODS: An exploratory, descriptive, cross-sectional design was used. An online survey was administered in December 2019 to clinicians practicing in three ICUs at a single medical center in the U.S. Survey questions focused on clinicians' perceptions of current MV liberation practices and perceived barriers or facilitators to timely extubation after a successful SBT. RESULTS: Of 425 eligible clinicians, 135 completed the survey (31.7% response rate). The majority of clinicians believed the current SBT and extubation process took too long (n = 108; 80.0%) and that this delay negatively affected patient outcomes. While professional groups differed in their rankings of importance, factors perceived to contribute to extubation delays most commonly included SBT timing, low provider confidence levels in making extubation decisions, and patient-specific factors. Potential strategies to overcome these barriers included developing an automated extubation protocol, performing SBTs when the provider responsible for final extubation decisions is physically present, and decreasing clinician perception of reprimand or condemnation for failed extubations. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: The MV liberation process is complex and dependent on the decisions of various ICU professionals. Clinicians perceive a number of potentially modifiable provider- and organizational-level factors that cause extubation delays in everyday practice. Understanding and addressing these barriers is essential for improving ICU quality and patient outcomes. Future research should explore the effect of nurse and respiratory therapist-driven extubation protocols on MV liberation rates.
Authors: Karen E A Burns; Francois Lellouche; France Loisel; Arthur S Slutsky; Aleksander Meret; Orla Smith; Refik Saskin; Maureen Meade Journal: Can J Anaesth Date: 2009-07-07 Impact factor: 5.063
Authors: Timothy D Girard; Waleed Alhazzani; John P Kress; Daniel R Ouellette; Gregory A Schmidt; Jonathon D Truwit; Suzanne M Burns; Scott K Epstein; Andres Esteban; Eddy Fan; Miguel Ferrer; Gilles L Fraser; Michelle Ng Gong; Catherine L Hough; Sangeeta Mehta; Rahul Nanchal; Sheena Patel; Amy J Pawlik; William D Schweickert; Curtis N Sessler; Thomas Strøm; Kevin C Wilson; Peter E Morris Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Karen E A Burns; Stavroula Raptis; Rosane Nisenbaum; Leena Rizvi; Andrew Jones; Jyoti Bakshi; Wylie Tan; Aleksander Meret; Deborah J Cook; Francois Lellouche; Scott K Epstein; David Gattas; Farhad N Kapadia; Jesús Villar; Laurent Brochard; Martin R Lessard; Maureen O Meade Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2018-04
Authors: Timothy Miu; Aaron M Joffe; N David Yanez; Nita Khandelwal; Armagan Hc Dagal; Steven Deem; Miriam M Treggiari Journal: Respir Care Date: 2013-07-23 Impact factor: 2.258
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David C Aron; Rosalind E Keith; Susan R Kirsh; Jeffery A Alexander; Julie C Lowery Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Bronagh Blackwood; Fiona Alderdice; Karen E A Burns; Chris R Cardwell; Gavin G Lavery; Peter O'Halloran Journal: J Adv Nurs Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 3.187
Authors: Michael Klompas; Deverick Anderson; William Trick; Hilary Babcock; Meeta Prasad Kerlin; Lingling Li; Ronda Sinkowitz-Cochran; E Wesley Ely; John Jernigan; Shelley Magill; Rosie Lyles; Caroline O'Neil; Barrett T Kitch; Ellen Arrington; Michele C Balas; Ken Kleinman; Christina Bruce; Julie Lankiewicz; Michael V Murphy; Christopher E Cox; Ebbing Lautenbach; Daniel Sexton; Victoria Fraser; Robert A Weinstein; Richard Platt Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2015-02-01 Impact factor: 30.528
Authors: Karen E A Burns; Ibrahim Soliman; Neill K J Adhikari; Amer Zwein; Jessica T Y Wong; Carolina Gomez-Builes; Jose Augusto Pellegrini; Lu Chen; Nuttapol Rittayamai; Michael Sklar; Laurent J Brochard; Jan O Friedrich Journal: Crit Care Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Michele C Balas; Alai Tan; Lorraine C Mion; Brenda Pun; Jin Jun; Audrey Brockman; Jinjian Mu; E Wesley Ely; Eduard E Vasilevskis Journal: Chest Date: 2022-01-19 Impact factor: 10.262