Você pesquisou por y - Critical Care Science (CCS)
You searched for:"Raquel da Silva Townsend"
We found (3) results for your search.
, , , , , Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(4):367-376
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230069-en
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , To assess the impact of different vertical positions on lung aeration in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation.
An open-label randomized crossover clinical trial was conducted between January and July 2020. Adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for > 24 hours and < 7 days with hemodynamic, respiratory and neurological stability were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to the sitting position followed by passive orthostasis condition or the passive orthostasis followed by the sitting position condition. The primary outcome was lung aeration assessed using the lung ultrasound score (score ranges from 0 [better] to 36 [worse]).
A total of 186 subjects were screened; of these subjects, 19 were enrolled (57.8% male; mean age, 73.2 years). All participants were assigned to receive at least one verticalization protocol. Passive orthostasis resulted in mean lung ultrasound scores that did not differ significantly from the sitting position (11.0 versus 13.7; mean difference, -2.7; [95%CI -6.1 to 0.71; p = 0.11). Adverse events occurred in three subjects in the passive orthostasis group and in one in the sitting position group (p = 0.99).
This analysis did not find significant differences in lung aeration between the sitting and passive orthostasis groups. A randomized crossover clinical trial assessing the impact of vertical positioning on lung aeration in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation is feasible. Unfortunately, the study was interrupted due to the need to treat COVID-19 patients.
Abstract
Critical Care Science. 2023;35(4):367-376
DOI 10.5935/2965-2774.20230069-en
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , To assess the impact of different vertical positions on lung aeration in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation.
An open-label randomized crossover clinical trial was conducted between January and July 2020. Adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for > 24 hours and < 7 days with hemodynamic, respiratory and neurological stability were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to the sitting position followed by passive orthostasis condition or the passive orthostasis followed by the sitting position condition. The primary outcome was lung aeration assessed using the lung ultrasound score (score ranges from 0 [better] to 36 [worse]).
A total of 186 subjects were screened; of these subjects, 19 were enrolled (57.8% male; mean age, 73.2 years). All participants were assigned to receive at least one verticalization protocol. Passive orthostasis resulted in mean lung ultrasound scores that did not differ significantly from the sitting position (11.0 versus 13.7; mean difference, -2.7; [95%CI -6.1 to 0.71; p = 0.11). Adverse events occurred in three subjects in the passive orthostasis group and in one in the sitting position group (p = 0.99).
This analysis did not find significant differences in lung aeration between the sitting and passive orthostasis groups. A randomized crossover clinical trial assessing the impact of vertical positioning on lung aeration in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation is feasible. Unfortunately, the study was interrupted due to the need to treat COVID-19 patients.
Abstract
Revista brasileira de terapia intensiva. 2014;26(3):263-268
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20140037
In clinical intensive care practice, weaning from mechanical ventilation is accompanied by concurrent early patient mobilization. The aim of this study was to compare the success of extubation performed with patients seated in an armchair compared to extubation with patients in a supine position.
A retrospective study, observational and non-randomized was conducted in a mixed-gender, 23-bed intensive care unit. The primary study outcome was success of extubation, which was defined as the patient tolerating the removal of the endotracheal tube for at least 48 hours. The differences between the study groups were assessed using Student's t-test and chi-squared analysis.
Ninety-one patients were included from December 2010 and June 2011. The study population had a mean age of 71 years ± 12 months, a mean APACHE II score of 21±7.6, and a mean length of mechanical ventilation of 2.6±2 days. Extubation was performed in 33 patients who were seated in an armchair (36%) and in 58 patients in a supine position (64%). There were no significant differences in age, mean APACHE II score or length of mechanical ventilation between the two groups, and a similar extubation success rate was observed (82%, seated group versus 85%, supine group, p>0.05). Furthermore, no significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of post-extubation distress, need for tracheostomy, duration of mechanical ventilation weaning, or intensive care unit stay.
Our results suggest that the clinical outcomes of patients extubated in a seated position are similar to those of patients extubated in a supine position. This new practice of seated extubation was not associated with adverse events and allowed extubation to occur simultaneously with early mobilization.
Abstract
Revista brasileira de terapia intensiva. 2014;26(3):263-268
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20140037
In clinical intensive care practice, weaning from mechanical ventilation is accompanied by concurrent early patient mobilization. The aim of this study was to compare the success of extubation performed with patients seated in an armchair compared to extubation with patients in a supine position.
A retrospective study, observational and non-randomized was conducted in a mixed-gender, 23-bed intensive care unit. The primary study outcome was success of extubation, which was defined as the patient tolerating the removal of the endotracheal tube for at least 48 hours. The differences between the study groups were assessed using Student's t-test and chi-squared analysis.
Ninety-one patients were included from December 2010 and June 2011. The study population had a mean age of 71 years ± 12 months, a mean APACHE II score of 21±7.6, and a mean length of mechanical ventilation of 2.6±2 days. Extubation was performed in 33 patients who were seated in an armchair (36%) and in 58 patients in a supine position (64%). There were no significant differences in age, mean APACHE II score or length of mechanical ventilation between the two groups, and a similar extubation success rate was observed (82%, seated group versus 85%, supine group, p>0.05). Furthermore, no significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of post-extubation distress, need for tracheostomy, duration of mechanical ventilation weaning, or intensive care unit stay.
Our results suggest that the clinical outcomes of patients extubated in a seated position are similar to those of patients extubated in a supine position. This new practice of seated extubation was not associated with adverse events and allowed extubation to occur simultaneously with early mobilization.
Abstract
Revista brasileira de terapia intensiva. 2014;26(3):313-316
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20140044
We describe herein a case of a patient who, when in orthostatic positions, had severe hypoxemia and ventilatory dysfunction. Although the severity of symptoms required hospitalization in an intensive care setting, the initial tests only identified the presence of enlarged aortic root, which did not explain the condition. The association of these events with an unusual etiology, namely intracardiac shunt, characterized the diagnosis of platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome. The literature review shows that, with advancing research methods, there was a progressive increase in the identification of this condition, and this association should be part of the differential diagnosis of dyspnea in patients with enlarged aortic root.
Abstract
Revista brasileira de terapia intensiva. 2014;26(3):313-316
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20140044
We describe herein a case of a patient who, when in orthostatic positions, had severe hypoxemia and ventilatory dysfunction. Although the severity of symptoms required hospitalization in an intensive care setting, the initial tests only identified the presence of enlarged aortic root, which did not explain the condition. The association of these events with an unusual etiology, namely intracardiac shunt, characterized the diagnosis of platypnea-orthodeoxia syndrome. The literature review shows that, with advancing research methods, there was a progressive increase in the identification of this condition, and this association should be part of the differential diagnosis of dyspnea in patients with enlarged aortic root.
