The predictive applicability of liberal versus restrictive intubation criteria in adult patients with suspected inhalation injury - a retrospective cohort study.

Chotalia, Minesh, Pirrone, Christine, Mangham, Thomas, Torlinska, Barbara, Mullhi, Randeep, England, Kaye and Torlinski, Tomasz (2020) The predictive applicability of liberal versus restrictive intubation criteria in adult patients with suspected inhalation injury - a retrospective cohort study. Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association. ISSN 1559-0488. This article is available to all UHB staff and students via ASK Discovery tool http://tinyurl.com/z795c8c by using their UHB Athens login IDs

Full text not available from this repository.
Official URL: https://academic.oup.com/jbcr

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study compares the ability of liberal vs. restrictive intubation criteria to detect prolonged intubation and inhalation injury in burns patients with suspected inhalation injury. Emerging evidence suggests that using liberal criteria may lead to unnecessary intubation in some patients.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult patients with suspected inhalation injury admitted to intensive care at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham between April 2016 and July 2019. Liberal intubation criteria, as reflected in local guidelines, were compared to restrictive intubation criteria, as outlined in the American Burn Association guidelines. The number of patients displaying positive characteristics from either guideline was compared to the number of patients that had a prolonged intubation (more than 48 hours) and inhalation injury.

RESULTS

In detecting a need for prolonged intubation (n=85), the liberal criteria had greater sensitivity (liberal=0.98 [0.94-1.00] vs restrictive=0.84 [0.75-0.93]; p=0.013). However, the restrictive criteria had greater specificity (restrictive=0.96 [0.89-1.00] vs liberal=0.48 [0.29-0.67]; p<0.001). In detecting inhalation injury (n=72), the restrictive criteria were equally sensitive (restrictive=0.94 [0.87-1.00] vs liberal=0.98 [0.84-1.00]; p=0.48) and had greater specificity [restrictive=0.86 [0.72-1.00] vs. liberal=0.04 [0.00-0.13]; p<0.001). In patients who met liberal but not restrictive criteria, 65% were extubated within 48 hours and 90% did not have inhalation injury.

CONCLUSION

Liberal intubation criteria were more sensitive at detecting a need for prolonged intubation, whilst restrictive criteria were more specific. Most patients intubated based on liberal criteria alone were extubated within 48 hours. Restrictive criteria were highly sensitive and specific at detecting inhalation injury.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This article is available to all UHB staff and students via ASK Discovery tool http://tinyurl.com/z795c8c by using their UHB Athens login IDs
Subjects: WA Patients. Primary care. Medical profession. Forensic medicine
WF Respiratory system. Respiratory medicine
WR Skin. Dermatology
Divisions: Clinical Support > Anaesthetics
Related URLs:
Depositing User: Jamie Edgar
Date Deposited: 18 Jun 2020 10:31
Last Modified: 18 Jun 2020 10:31
URI: http://www.repository.uhblibrary.co.uk/id/eprint/3178

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item