Timing of Intubation in Acute Respiratory Failure Associated With Sepsis. A Mixed Methods Study

Philippe R. Bauer, Ashok Kumbamu, Michael Wilson, Jasleen K. Pannu, Jason S. Egginton, Rahul Kashyap, Ognjen Gajic

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To analyze bedside clinicians' perspectives regarding the decision process to optimize timing of intubation in sepsis-associated acute respiratory failure. Participants and Methods: This mixed methods study was conducted from March 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016. Using qualitative research methods, factors that influenced variability in the decision to intubate were organized into categories and used to build a theoretical explanatory model grounded in current practice variance. All coding schemes were independently reviewed for accuracy and consistency. Themes and findings were then refined with member checking by feedback from individuals and from an anonymous questionnaire until saturation was achieved. Results: The practice of intubation varied according to 3 domains: (1) patient factors included the nature of the acute illness, comorbidities, clinical presentation, severity, trajectory, and values and preferences; (2) clinician factors included background, training, experience, and practice style; and (3) system factors included workload, policies and protocols, hierarchy, communications, culture, and team dynamics. In different contexts, intubation was considered early (elective), just in time (urgent), or late (rescue). The initial assessment, initial decision, and reassessment mattered. Conclusion: Recognizing that the variability in both the decision to intubate and its timing depends on many factors, and not on clinical criteria alone, should render the clinician more attentive to the eventual progression of the acute respiratory failure.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalMayo Clinic Proceedings
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2017

Fingerprint

Intubation
Respiratory Insufficiency
Sepsis
Qualitative Research
Workload
Comorbidity
Theoretical Models
Communication

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Timing of Intubation in Acute Respiratory Failure Associated With Sepsis. A Mixed Methods Study. / Bauer, Philippe R.; Kumbamu, Ashok; Wilson, Michael; Pannu, Jasleen K.; Egginton, Jason S.; Kashyap, Rahul; Gajic, Ognjen.

In: Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bauer, Philippe R. ; Kumbamu, Ashok ; Wilson, Michael ; Pannu, Jasleen K. ; Egginton, Jason S. ; Kashyap, Rahul ; Gajic, Ognjen. / Timing of Intubation in Acute Respiratory Failure Associated With Sepsis. A Mixed Methods Study. In: Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2017.
@article{90023522ea4c4cbf8602d65affab6687,
title = "Timing of Intubation in Acute Respiratory Failure Associated With Sepsis. A Mixed Methods Study",
abstract = "Objective: To analyze bedside clinicians' perspectives regarding the decision process to optimize timing of intubation in sepsis-associated acute respiratory failure. Participants and Methods: This mixed methods study was conducted from March 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016. Using qualitative research methods, factors that influenced variability in the decision to intubate were organized into categories and used to build a theoretical explanatory model grounded in current practice variance. All coding schemes were independently reviewed for accuracy and consistency. Themes and findings were then refined with member checking by feedback from individuals and from an anonymous questionnaire until saturation was achieved. Results: The practice of intubation varied according to 3 domains: (1) patient factors included the nature of the acute illness, comorbidities, clinical presentation, severity, trajectory, and values and preferences; (2) clinician factors included background, training, experience, and practice style; and (3) system factors included workload, policies and protocols, hierarchy, communications, culture, and team dynamics. In different contexts, intubation was considered early (elective), just in time (urgent), or late (rescue). The initial assessment, initial decision, and reassessment mattered. Conclusion: Recognizing that the variability in both the decision to intubate and its timing depends on many factors, and not on clinical criteria alone, should render the clinician more attentive to the eventual progression of the acute respiratory failure.",
author = "Bauer, {Philippe R.} and Ashok Kumbamu and Michael Wilson and Pannu, {Jasleen K.} and Egginton, {Jason S.} and Rahul Kashyap and Ognjen Gajic",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1016/j.mayocp.2017.07.001",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Mayo Clinic Proceedings",
issn = "0025-6196",
publisher = "Elsevier Science",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Timing of Intubation in Acute Respiratory Failure Associated With Sepsis. A Mixed Methods Study

AU - Bauer, Philippe R.

AU - Kumbamu, Ashok

AU - Wilson, Michael

AU - Pannu, Jasleen K.

AU - Egginton, Jason S.

AU - Kashyap, Rahul

AU - Gajic, Ognjen

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Objective: To analyze bedside clinicians' perspectives regarding the decision process to optimize timing of intubation in sepsis-associated acute respiratory failure. Participants and Methods: This mixed methods study was conducted from March 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016. Using qualitative research methods, factors that influenced variability in the decision to intubate were organized into categories and used to build a theoretical explanatory model grounded in current practice variance. All coding schemes were independently reviewed for accuracy and consistency. Themes and findings were then refined with member checking by feedback from individuals and from an anonymous questionnaire until saturation was achieved. Results: The practice of intubation varied according to 3 domains: (1) patient factors included the nature of the acute illness, comorbidities, clinical presentation, severity, trajectory, and values and preferences; (2) clinician factors included background, training, experience, and practice style; and (3) system factors included workload, policies and protocols, hierarchy, communications, culture, and team dynamics. In different contexts, intubation was considered early (elective), just in time (urgent), or late (rescue). The initial assessment, initial decision, and reassessment mattered. Conclusion: Recognizing that the variability in both the decision to intubate and its timing depends on many factors, and not on clinical criteria alone, should render the clinician more attentive to the eventual progression of the acute respiratory failure.

AB - Objective: To analyze bedside clinicians' perspectives regarding the decision process to optimize timing of intubation in sepsis-associated acute respiratory failure. Participants and Methods: This mixed methods study was conducted from March 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016. Using qualitative research methods, factors that influenced variability in the decision to intubate were organized into categories and used to build a theoretical explanatory model grounded in current practice variance. All coding schemes were independently reviewed for accuracy and consistency. Themes and findings were then refined with member checking by feedback from individuals and from an anonymous questionnaire until saturation was achieved. Results: The practice of intubation varied according to 3 domains: (1) patient factors included the nature of the acute illness, comorbidities, clinical presentation, severity, trajectory, and values and preferences; (2) clinician factors included background, training, experience, and practice style; and (3) system factors included workload, policies and protocols, hierarchy, communications, culture, and team dynamics. In different contexts, intubation was considered early (elective), just in time (urgent), or late (rescue). The initial assessment, initial decision, and reassessment mattered. Conclusion: Recognizing that the variability in both the decision to intubate and its timing depends on many factors, and not on clinical criteria alone, should render the clinician more attentive to the eventual progression of the acute respiratory failure.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85028603959&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85028603959&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.mayocp.2017.07.001

DO - 10.1016/j.mayocp.2017.07.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 28867256

AN - SCOPUS:85028603959

JO - Mayo Clinic Proceedings

JF - Mayo Clinic Proceedings

SN - 0025-6196

ER -