Back

A study of clinical outcomes and prognostic factors associated with invasive mechanical ventilation of patients in non-ICU settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Agarwal, S.; Ray, A.; Anand, A.; Chopra, N.; Narayan, A.; Keri, V.; Roy, D. B.; Jadon, R. S.; Vikram, N. K.

2021-04-07 respiratory medicine
10.1101/2021.04.04.21254885 medRxiv
Show abstract

There is paucity of evidence related to mechanical ventilation in the general ward setting. We aimed to study the clinico-etiological profile, outcomes and prognostic factors of patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in non-ICU (ward) setting, and compare these parameters with that of patients in the ICU, wherever it was reported. A systematic review and meta-analysis was done on articles published till June 2020. Two authors independently extracted the data. The study population included patients who received mechanical ventilation in ward setting. Fourteen studies reporting on 20833 patients were included (20252 exclusively ventilated in ward), with most of the studies being from Israel, USA, Japan and Taiwan. Risk of bias was estimated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies, and was found to be low. Most common reason for intubation was respiratory illness. Most common variables predicting mortality were prognostic scores like APACHE-II and Acute Physiology Score (APS). Pooled mortality rate in ward across 6 studies was 0.72 (95% CI 0.69-0.74) with no heterogeneity among these 6 studies (I2=0.0). Mortality rate varied significantly with study population characteristics, and was lower among patients being weaned in ward. A major limitation of our study was the paucity of studies and significant heterogeneity among existing studies, with respect to outcomes like duration of ventilation, hospital stay, rates of complications, and prognostic factors. This systematic review and meta-analysis found that mortality among patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in ward settings remains high. Data regarding other outcomes and prognostic factors predicting mortality was very heterogeneous highlighting the need for future studies concentrating specifically on these aspects. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 2020 (CRD42020166775)

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.2%
2
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 1%
13.1%
3
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.4%
4
Systematic Reviews
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
Annals of Translational Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
5.0%
6
Life
27 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 34%
3.7%
8
BMJ Open Respiratory Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.2%
9
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.2%
10
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.1%
11
Critical Care
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
12
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
13
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
14
Medical Research Archives
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
15
ERJ Open Research
44 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
16
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
17
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
18
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
19
Frontiers in Pediatrics
29 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
20
Pediatric Pulmonology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
21
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
Journal of Clinical Virology
62 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
23
Journal of Medical Microbiology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
100 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
25
Infection
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
26
Respiratory Research
19 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
27
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
28
Genomics
60 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
29
Virology Journal
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%