The effect of flow trigger on rapid shallow breathing index measured through the ventilator

Comparison of different methods of obtaining the rapid shallow breathing index

OBJECTIVE

To compare the Rapid Shallow Breathing Index (RSBI) obtained by the ventilometer and from mechanical ventilation parameters.

METHODS

Randomized crossover trial, including 33 intubated patients, on mechanical ventilation for at least 24 hours, undergoing spontaneous breathing test. Patients were submitted to the measurement of RSBI by four methods: disconnected from the ventilator through the ventilometer; in Pressure Support Ventilation (PSV) mode at a pressure of 7.ßcm H2O; in Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) mode at a pressure of 5.ßcmH2O with flow trigger; in CPAP mode at a pressure of 5.ßcmH2O with pressure trigger.

RESULTS

No significant difference was detected between the RSBI obtained by the ventilometer and in the CPAP mode with flow and pressure triggers, however, in the PSV mode, the values were lower than in the other measurements (p.ß<.ß0.001). By selecting patients from the sample with higher RSBI (... 80 cycles.min-1.L-1), the value of the index obtained by the ventilometer was higher than that obtained in the three options of ventilation methods.

CONCLUSION

The RSBI obtained in the CPAP mode at a pressure of 5.ßcmH2O, in both triggers types, did not differ from that measured by the ventilometer; it is, therefore, an alternative when obtaining it from mechanical ventilation parameters is necessary. However, in the presence of borderline values, the RSBI measured by ventilometer is recommended, as in this method the values are significantly higher than in the three ventilation modalities investigated.

Validation of rapid shallow breathing index displayed by the ventilator compared to the standard technique in patients with readiness for weaning

BACKGROUND

Rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) is the most commonly used parameter for predicting weaning outcome. Measurement of RSBI by Wright spirometer (RSBI_standard) is the standard method in routine clinical practice. Data specific to the accuracy and reliability of the RSBI value displayed by the ventilator (RSBI_vent) are scarce. Accordingly, this study aimed to evaluate the association between the average value of RSBI_vent at different time points and RSBI_standard, and to assess the accuracy and reliability of these two RSBI measurement techniques.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included mechanically ventilated patients who were ready to wean. At the beginning of spontaneous breathing trial using the flow-by method, RSBI was measured by two different techniques at the same time, including: (1) Wright spirometer (breathing frequency/average tidal volume in 1 min) (RSBI_standard), and (2) the values displayed on the ventilator at 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 s (RSBI_vent).

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients were enrolled. The RSBI_vent value was significantly higher than the RSBI_standard value for every comparison. According to Spearman's correlation coefficient (r) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the average value of RSBI from 5 time points (0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 s) showed the best correlation with the standard technique (r = 0.76 [P < 0.001], and ICC = 0.79 [95% CI 0.61-0.88], respectively). Bland-Altman plot also showed the best agreement between RSBI_standard and the RSBI_vent value averaged among 5 time points (mean difference - 17.1 breaths/min/L).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the ventilator significantly overestimates the RSBI value compared to the standard technique by Wright spirometer. The average RSBI_vent value among 5 time points (0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 s) was found to best correlate with RSBI_standard.

The rapid shallow breathing index as a predictor of successful mechanical ventilation weaning: clinical utility when calculated from ventilator data

OBJECTIVE:

The use of the rapid shallow breathing index (RSBI) is recommended in ICUs, where it is used as a predictor of mechanical ventilation (MV) weaning success. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the RSBI calculated by the traditional method (described in 1991) with that of the RSBI calculated directly from MV parameters.

METHODS:

This was a prospective observational study involving patients who had been on MV for more than 24 h and were candidates for weaning. The RSBI was obtained by the same examiner using the two different methods (employing a spirometer and the parameters from the ventilator display) at random. In comparing the values obtained with the two methods, we used the Mann-Whitney test, Pearson's linear correlation test, and Bland-Altman plots. The performance of the methods was compared by evaluation of the areas under the ROC curves.

RESULTS:

Of the 109 selected patients (60 males; mean age, 62 ± 20 years), 65 were successfully weaned, and 36 died. There were statistically significant differences between the two methods for respiratory rate, tidal volume, and RSBI (p < 0.001 for all). However, when the two methods were compared, the concordance and the intra-observer variation coefficient were 0.94 (0.92-0.96) and 11.16%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was similar for both methods (0.81 ± 0.04 vs. 0.82 ± 0.04; p = 0.935), which is relevant in the context of this study.

CONCLUSIONS:

The satisfactory performance of the RSBI as a predictor of weaning success, regardless of the method employed, demonstrates the utility of the method using the mechanical ventilator.