• Onuma Chaiwat, Niyomporn Sarima, Kussama Niyompanitpattana, Chulaluk Komoltri, Yuthana Udomphorn, and Suneerat Kongsayreepong.
• Department of Anesthesiology, Faculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. sioca@staff1.mahidol.ac.th
• J Med Assoc Thai. 2010 Aug 1;93(8):930-6.

BackgroundPrevious studies have demonstrated that protocol-directed weaning is better than physician-directed weaning in terms of shorter duration of mechanical ventilation in general critically ill patients. In this prospective, randomized controlled trial, the authors compared duration of mechanical ventilation between protocol based nurse-directed weaning and physician-directed weaning in patients following intra-abdominal surgery.Material And MethodOne hundred intra-abdominal surgical patients requiring mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours were randomly assigned to receive either protocol-directed (n=51) or physician-directed (n=49) weaning from mechanical ventilation. Patients assigned to the protocol-directed weaning group underwent daily screening and a spontaneous breathing trial by nursing staffOutcomesThe primary outcome was the duration of mechanical ventilation.ResultsThe median duration of mechanical ventilation was 40 and 72 hrs in protocol-directed and physician-directed groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Two patients in the protocol-directed group and three patients in the physician directed group were re-intubated within the first 72 hours after extubation (p = 0.61).ConclusionDaily screening of respiratory function in intra-abdominal surgical patients followed by trials ofspontaneous breathing performed by nurses resulted in a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation when compared to traditional physician-directed weaning.

24 keywords...

hide…