Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 29, 2025

Mechanical Ventilation Boot Camp Curriculum
Published on: March 12, 2018
Interaction of Critical Care Practitioners With a Decision Support Tool for Weaning Mechanical Ventilation in
Silvia M Hartmann1, Reid Wd Farris2, Ofer Yanay2
1Department of Pediatrics, Division of Critical Care Medicine, Seattle Children's Hospital, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington. silvia.hartmann@seattlechildrens.org.
Insights
Care providers found computerized ventilator weaning recommendations for pediatric patients to be too aggressive, with low implementation rates due to concerns about patient stability. The decision support tool was not highly accepted in this pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) setting.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric critical care medicine
- Mechanical ventilation
- Clinical decision support systems
Background:
- Ventilator weaning protocols can benefit children on mechanical ventilation.
- Existing protocols often lack explicit guidance for reducing support from maximal settings.
- Care provider acceptance of a computerized decision support tool for ventilator weaning was evaluated.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess care provider opinions on ventilator weaning recommendations generated by a computerized decision support tool in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU).
- To determine the perceived reasonableness and implementability of these recommendations.
- To identify barriers to the adoption of such tools in clinical practice.
Main Methods:
- A computerized decision support tool, based on the ARDSNet protocol, generated ventilator adjustment recommendations for children with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure.
- Attending physicians, fellows, nurse practitioners, and respiratory therapists (RTs) surveyed on the reasonableness and implementability of recommendations.
- Surveys analyzed based on data from 10 pediatric patients.
Main Results:
- Respiratory therapists (RTs) and ICU providers found 63.9% and 65.3% of recommendations reasonable, respectively.
- Implementation rates were low: 29.9% for RTs and 26.3% for ICU providers.
- Concerns about disrupting patient stability and maintaining low tidal volumes were frequently cited.
Conclusions:
- The decision support tool showed low initial acceptability among RTs and ICU providers, with recommendations rarely implemented.
- Acceptability did not improve over time, even as patients generally improved.
- Respondents perceived recommendations as too aggressive, with potential patient instability being a primary barrier to use.
Background:
There is evidence that ventilator weaning protocols provide benefit to children receiving mechanical ventilation, but many protocols do not include explicit instructions for decreasing ventilator support from maximal settings. We evaluated care provider opinions on ventilator weaning recommendations made by a computerized decision support tool.
Methods:
Recommendations for ventilator adjustment were generated using a computerized decision support tool based on the ARDSNet protocol using data from children with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure admitted to the pediatric ICU (PICU). Attending physicians, fellows, nurse practitioners, and respiratory therapists (RTs) caring for these patients answered a brief survey to assess whether recommendations were reasonable and whether the practitioner believed they could be implemented.
Results:
RTs completed 99 surveys and ICU providers completed 96 surveys based on data from 10 patients. RTs and ICU providers found 63.9% and 65.3% of recommendations reasonable, respectively. There were 5 instances of disagreement between RTs and ICU providers. The percent of recommendations that RTs thought could be implemented was 29.9%, whereas this figure for ICU providers was 26.3%, with 4 instances of disagreement. Free-text responses indicated that many RTs and ICU providers were concerned about disrupting current patient stability and low tidal volumes.
Conclusions:
On initial evaluation, the decision support tool did not appear to be highly acceptable to RTs and ICU providers in our setting because recommendations were rarely implemented. In addition, acceptability did not increase over time as patients generally improved. Most respondents preferred to make no ventilator changes and felt the recommendations were too aggressive. The notable barrier to use was a perception of potential patient instability with weaning.
Related Concept Videos
Mechanical Ventilation III: Noninvasive Ventilation
Noninvasive Positive-Pressure Ventilation...
Mechanical Ventilation II: Invasive Ventilation
Negative-Pressure Ventilators
Negative-pressure ventilators create a vacuum around the chest or body to draw air into the lungs, simulating breathing. This method does not require an...
Mechanical Ventilation I: Indication and Settings
Tracheostomy Decannulation
Description of the Procedure
Decannulation refers to the permanent removal of the tracheostomy tube, signaling the resolution of the condition that initially necessitated the tracheostomy. The process requires a well-coordinated interplay between...
Acute Respiratory Failure-V
Ensure that patients are monitored continuously for their response to therapy, including changes in...
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation II: ACLS Airway Management

