A Prospective, Longitudinal Study Evaluating the Efficacy of an Automated Secretion Removal Technology
Issued Date
2024-07-24
Resource Type
eISSN
19433654
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85199816157
Pubmed ID
38296330
Journal Title
Respiratory care
Volume
69
Issue
8
Start Page
931
End Page
936
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Respiratory care Vol.69 No.8 (2024) , 931-936
Suggested Citation
Sinnige J.S., Karbing D.S., Valk C.M.A., Schultz M.J., Rees S.E., Paulus F. A Prospective, Longitudinal Study Evaluating the Efficacy of an Automated Secretion Removal Technology. Respiratory care Vol.69 No.8 (2024) , 931-936. 936. doi:10.4187/respcare.11584 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/100236
Title
A Prospective, Longitudinal Study Evaluating the Efficacy of an Automated Secretion Removal Technology
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endotracheal suctioning causes discomfort, is associated with adverse effects, and is resource-demanding. An artificial secretion removal method, known as an automated cough, has been developed, which applies rapid, automated deflation, and inflation of the endotracheal tube cuff during the inspiratory phase of mechanical ventilation. This method has been evaluated in the hands of researchers but not when used by attending nurses. The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy of the method over the course of patient management as part of routine care. METHODS: This prospective, longitudinal, interventional study recruited 28 subjects who were intubated and mechanically ventilated. For a maximum of 7 d and on clinical need for endotracheal suctioning, the automatic cough procedure was applied. The subjects were placed in a pressure-regulated ventilation mode with elevated inspiratory pressure, and automated cuff deflation and inflation were performed 3 times, with this repeated if deemed necessary. Success was determined by resolution of the clinical need for suctioning as determined by the attending nurse. Adverse effects were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 84 procedures were performed. In 54% of the subjects, the artificial cough procedure was successful on > 70% of occasions, with 56% of all procedures considered successful. Ninety percent of all the procedures were performed in subjects who were spontaneously breathing and on pressure-support ventilation with peak inspiratory pressures of 20 cm H2O. Rates of adverse events were similar to those seen in the application of endotracheal suctioning. CONCLUSIONS: This study solely evaluated the efficacy of an automated artificial cough procedure, which illustrated the potential for reducing the need for endotracheal suctioning when applied by attending nurses in routine care.