Liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation: A nationwide survey among intensive care units in the Netherlands

Background:

Liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation is a milestone in critical care, but approaches vary. This survey aimed to describe current ventilator liberation practices, relate them to available evidence, and identify areas for improvement.

Methods:

A survey was performed among Dutch intensive care unit (ICU) sites. The survey evaluated practice in seven domains of ventilator liberation: protocol availability, transition from controlled to assisted ventilation, spontaneous breathing trials (SBT), cuff-leak test, postextubation support, weaning failure and tracheostomised weaning. 

Results: 

The survey response rate was 93% (132/142), representing 97% (69/71) of Dutch ICUs. Protocols for postextubation support and weaning failure were available in less than half of the ICUs (44% and 49%, respectively). The transition from controlled to assisted ventilation is regularly evaluated daily in 78% of ICUs. Assisted ventilation tolerance is mainly assessed by clinical signs, respiratory parameters and non-invasive manoeuvres that assess respiratory drive (P 0.1). SBTs are regularly performed in 58% of ICUs, using one or more of the following methods: T-piece (52%), pressure support+positive end expiratory pressure (32%) and continuous positive airway pressure (28%). Cuff-leak tests are seldom performed (1.4%), predominantly in cases of intubation for upper-airway obstruction (92%). Postextubation respiratory support with high-flow nasal oxygen or non-invasive ventilation is used at least as often with therapeutic (43%/13%) rather than preventive (35%/4%) of facilitative intent (29%/3%). Delirium screening (87%) and reconsidering sedation (84%) are frequently assessed in case of weaning failure. Regular use of closed-loop ventilation is reported in a minority of ICUs throughout the process of ventilator liberation (3-9%). 

Conclusions:

Various aspects of ventilator liberation practices show only limited alignment with existing guidelines. The results of this survey pinpoint areas to prioritise in guideline and practice improvement.