Clinical study of Dysfunctional Ventilatory Weaning Response in critically ill patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.3522.3334Keywords:
Ventilator Weaning, Treatment Failure, Intensive Care Units, Nursing, Nursing Diagnosis, Validation StudiesAbstract
Objective: to clinically validate the nursing diagnosis of Dysfunctional Ventilatory Weaning Response in adult patients admitted to Intensive Care Units. Method: a concurrent cohort performed with 93 patients admitted to Intensive Care Units. The incidence and incidence density of the diagnosis were estimated, its related factors were identified based on bivariate analysis and clinical indicators for determining its occurrence, according to the global and temporal presentation. Results: the overall incidence of the diagnosis was 44.09% and the incidence density was 14.49 occurrences for every 100 extubations/day. The factors related to the diagnosis were the following: age, clinical severity, fluid balance, oliguria, hemodialysis, edema in upper/lower limbs, anasarca, number of antibiotics, hypothermia, hyperthermia, amount of secretion, muscle retraction, anxiety score, heart rate, use of vasopressors and non-invasive ventilation after extubation. The clinical indicators most frequently identified for determining the diagnosis were the following: tachypnea, drop of saturation and tachycardia. Temporal progression in the severity of these manifestations was found. Conclusion: the Dysfunctional Ventilatory Weaning Response is a common finding in critically ill patients. Some components of the diagnosis of the NANDA-International (2018) version could be clinically validated. It is noteworthy that there are variables not yet described in the taxonomy, demonstrating the need to review this nursing diagnosis.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
