Patient Characteristics and Outcomes of a Provincial Prolonged‐Ventilation Weaning Centre: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Growing numbers of critically ill patients require prolonged mechanical ventilation and experience difficulty with weaning. Specialized centres may facilitate weaning through focused interprofessional expertise with an emphasis on rehabilitation. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the population of a specialized prolonged-ventilation weaning centre (PWC) in Ontario, and to report weaning, mobility, discharge and survival outcomes. METHODS: Data from consecutively admitted patients were retrospectively extracted from electronic and paper medical records by research staff and verified by the primary investigator. RESULTS: From January 2004 to March 2011, 144 patients were admitted: 115 (80%) required ventilator weaning, and 29 (20%) required tracheostomy weaning or noninvasive ventilation. Intensive care unit length of stay before admission was a median 51 days (interquartile range [IQR] 35 to 86 days). Of the patients admitted for ventilator weaning, 76 of 115 (66% [95% CI 55% to 75%]) achieved a 24 h tracheostomy mask trial in a median of 15 days (IQR eight to 25 days). Weaning success, defined as no further ventilation for seven consecutive days, was achieved by 61 patients (53% [95% CI 44% to 62%]) in a median duration of 62 days (IQR 46 to 95 days) of ventilation, and 14 days (IQR nine to 29 days) after PWC admission. Seventeen patients died during admission. Of the 91 patients discharged from the PWC for one year, 43 (47.3% [95% CI 37.3% to 57.4%]) survived; of the 78 discharged for two years, 27 (34.6% [95% CI 25.0% to 45.7%]) were alive; of the 53 discharged for three years, 19 (35.9% [95% CI 24.3% to 49.3%]) were alive; and seven of 22 (31.8% [95% CI 16.4% to 52.7%]) survived to five years. CONCLUSIONS: Weaning success was moderate despite a prolonged intensive care unit stay before admission, but was comparable with studies reporting weaning outcomes from centres in other countries. Few patients survived to five years.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".