evidence/gaps
Cochrane · systematic review · CD009235

Automated versus non‐automated weaning for reducing the duration of mechanical ventilation for critically ill adults and children

Rose, L, Schultz, MJ, Cardwell, CR, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2014 · Cochrane Library

Emergency and Critical Care2 versionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
6
current version
GRADE rated
6
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 16.7%Moderate 1 · 16.7%High 4 · 66.7%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Questions and results

Show all 2 versions

Comparison

Population: critically ill adults and children requiring weaning from mechanical ventilation
6 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Total duration of weaning defined as study randomization to successful extubation (hours)
no estimate extracted16 studies · 1246 participantsLow
Total duration of ventilation defined as intubation or commencement of ventilation in ICU to successful extubation (hours)
no estimate extracted14 studies · 1248 participantsHigh
ICU length of stay (days)
no estimate extracted13 studies · 1339 participantsModerate
Hospital length of stay (days)
no estimate extracted7 studies · 749 participantsHigh
Mortality (ICU, hospital) (days)
no estimate extracted12 studies · 1128 participantsHigh
Reintubation rate
Risk ratio 0.8 [0.61, 1.05]13 studies · 1081 participantsHigh