Reduction of ventilatory time using the multidisciplinary disconnection protocol. Pilot study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.2923.3215Keywords:
Respiration Artificial; Nursing Assessment; General Surgery; Critical Care; Evidence-Based Practice; Postoperative PeriodAbstract
Objective:
compare ventilatory time between patients with the application of a disconnection protocol, managed in a coordinated way between doctor and nurse, with patients managed exclusively by the doctor.
Method:
experimental pilot study before and after. Twenty-five patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for 24 hours or more were included, and the protocol-guided group was compared with the protocol-free group managed according to usual practice.
Results:
by means of the multidisciplinary protocol, the time of invasive mechanical ventilation was reduced (141.94 ± 114.50 vs 113.18 ± 55.14; overall decrease of almost 29 hours), the time spent on weaning (24 hours vs 7.40 hours) and the numbers of reintubation (13% vs 0%) in comparison with the group in which the nurse did not participate. The time to weaning was shorter in the retrospective cohort (2 days vs. 5 days), as was the hospital stay (7 days vs. 9 days).
Conclusion:
the use of a multidisciplinary protocol reduces the duration of weaning, the total time of invasive mechanical ventilation and reintubations. The more active role of the nurse is a fundamental tool to obtain better results.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
