Automated mechanical ventilation using Adaptive Support Ventilation versus conventional ventilation including ventilator length of stay, mortality, and professional social aspects of adoption of new technology.

Abstract

Background Automation of mechanical ventilation allows for reduction of variation in patient management and has the potential to provide increased patient safety by strict adherence to computer driven ventilator protocols. Methods: A retrospective, observational study compared a group of 196 of general ICU patients managed exclusively on automated mechanical ventilation, adaptive support ventilation (ASV), to another group of 684 managed by usual, non-automated mechanical ventilation (No ASV). The data was collected in a unique access database designed to collect data for assessment of mechanical ventilation outcomes in a small medical center ICU. Results: The length of ventilator stay was non-significant between both groups, (81.7 ± 35.2 hours) in the ASV group; vs. (94.1 ± 35.1 hours) in the No ASV. Percent mortality was significantly less in the ASV group, 8.6% compared to 27.3% in the No ASV. Conclusion: Automated ventilation appears to be a safe ventilator strategy; however, cause effect relationships cannot be determined without further, more sophisticated studies. Keywords: Closed loop ventilation, ASV, Ventilator length of stay, Percent minute ventilation