Clinical practice, decision-making, and use of clinical decision support systems in invasive mechanical ventilation: a narrative review

Résumé fourni par la source

Invasive mechanical ventilation is a key supportive therapy for patients on intensive care. There is increasing emphasis on personalised ventilation strategies. Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) have been developed to support this. We conducted a narrative review to assess evidence that could inform device implementation. A search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE. Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Role allocation is well described, with interprofessional collaboration dependent on culture, nurse:patient ratio, the use of protocols, and perception of responsibility. There were no descriptions of process measures, quality metrics, or clinical workflow. Nurse-led weaning is well-described, with factors grouped by patient, nurse, and system. Physician-led weaning is heterogenous, guided by subjective and objective information, and 'gestalt'. No studies explored decision-making with CDSS. Several explored facilitators and barriers to implementation, grouped by clinician (facilitators: confidence using CDSS, retaining decision-making ownership; barriers: undermining clinician's role, ambiguity moving off protocol), intervention (facilitators: user-friendly interface, ease of workflow integration, minimal training requirement; barriers: increased documentation time), and organisation (facilitators: system-level mandate; barriers: poor communication, inconsistent training, lack of technical support). One study described factors that support CDSS implementation. There are gaps in our understanding of ventilation practice. A coordinated approach grounded in implementation science is required to support CDSS implementation. Future research should describe factors that guide clinical decision-making throughout mechanical ventilation, with and without CDSS, map clinical workflow, and devise implementation toolkits. Novel research design analogous to a learning organisation, that considers the commercial aspects of device design, is required.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.