Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 13, 2026
Inspiratory Muscle Training as an Adjunct to the Treatment of Weaning Failure in Critically Ill Patients: A Practical Guide
Published on: January 30, 2026
The impact of nurse-directed protocolised-weaning from mechanical ventilation on nursing practice: a
Bronagh Blackwood1, Jenifer Wilson-Barnett
1Nursing and Midwifery Research Unit, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen's University Belfast, 21 Stranmillis Road, Belfast, BT9 5AF N. Ireland. b.blackwood@qub.ac.uk
Background:
Internationally, nurse-directed protocolised-weaning has been evaluated by measuring its impact on patient outcomes. The impact on nurses' views and perceptions has been largely ignored.
Aim:
To determine the change in intensive care nurses' perceptions, satisfaction, knowledge and attitudes following the introduction of nurse-directed weaning. Additionally, views were obtained on how useful protocolised-weaning was to practice.
Methods:
The sample comprised nurses working in general intensive care units in three university-affiliated hospitals. Nurse-directed protocolised-weaning was implemented in one unit (intervention group); two ICUs continued with usual doctor-led practice (control group). Nurses' perceptions, satisfaction, knowledge and attitudes were measured by self-completed questionnaires before (Phase I) and after the implementation of nurse-directed weaning (Phase II) in all units.
Results:
Response rates were 79% (n=140) for Phase 1 and 62% (n=132) for Phase II. Regression-based analyses showed that changes from Phase I to Phase II were not significantly different between the intervention and control groups. Sixty-nine nurses responded to both Phase I and II questionnaires. In the intervention group, these nurses scored their mean perceived level of knowledge higher in Phase II (6.39 vs 7.17, p=0.01). In the control group, role perception (4.41 vs 4.22, p=0.01) was lower and, perceived knowledge (6.03 vs 6.63, p=0.04), awareness of weaning plans (6.09 vs 7.06, p=0.01) and satisfaction with communication (5.28 vs 6.19, p=0.01) were higher in Phase II. The intervention group found protocolised weaning useful in their practice (75%): this was scored significantly higher by junior and senior nurses than middle grade nurses (p=0.02).
Conclusion:
We conclude that nurse-directed protocolised-weaning had no effect on nurses' views and perceptions due to the high level of satisfaction which encouraged nurses' participation in weaning throughout. Control group changes are attributed to a 'reactive effect' from being study participants. Weaning protocols provide a uniform method of weaning practice and are particularly beneficial in providing safe guidance for junior staff.