Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2023 May;11(5):465-476.
doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(22)00449-0. Epub 2023 Jan 21.

Weaning from mechanical ventilation in intensive care units across 50 countries (WEAN SAFE): a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study

Collaborators, Affiliations
Observational Study

Weaning from mechanical ventilation in intensive care units across 50 countries (WEAN SAFE): a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study

Tài Pham et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2023 May.

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: Current management practices and outcomes in weaning from invasive mechanical ventilation are poorly understood. We aimed to describe the epidemiology, management, timings, risk for failure, and outcomes of weaning in patients requiring at least 2 days of invasive mechanical ventilation.

Methods: WEAN SAFE was an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study done in 481 intensive care units in 50 countries. Eligible participants were older than 16 years, admitted to a participating intensive care unit, and receiving mechanical ventilation for 2 calendar days or longer. We defined weaning initiation as the first attempt to separate a patient from the ventilator, successful weaning as no reintubation or death within 7 days of extubation, and weaning eligibility criteria based on positive end-expiratory pressure, fractional concentration of oxygen in inspired air, and vasopressors. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients successfully weaned at 90 days. Key secondary outcomes included weaning duration, timing of weaning events, factors associated with weaning delay and weaning failure, and hospital outcomes. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03255109.

Findings: Between Oct 4, 2017, and June 25, 2018, 10 232 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 5869 were enrolled. 4523 (77·1%) patients underwent at least one separation attempt and 3817 (65·0%) patients were successfully weaned from ventilation at day 90. 237 (4·0%) patients were transferred before any separation attempt, 153 (2·6%) were transferred after at least one separation attempt and not successfully weaned, and 1662 (28·3%) died while invasively ventilated. The median time from fulfilling weaning eligibility criteria to first separation attempt was 1 day (IQR 0-4), and 1013 (22·4%) patients had a delay in initiating first separation of 5 or more days. Of the 4523 (77·1%) patients with separation attempts, 2927 (64·7%) had a short wean (≤1 day), 457 (10·1%) had intermediate weaning (2-6 days), 433 (9·6%) required prolonged weaning (≥7 days), and 706 (15·6%) had weaning failure. Higher sedation scores were independently associated with delayed initiation of weaning. Delayed initiation of weaning and higher sedation scores were independently associated with weaning failure. 1742 (31·8%) of 5479 patients died in the intensive care unit and 2095 (38·3%) of 5465 patients died in hospital.

Interpretation: In critically ill patients receiving at least 2 days of invasive mechanical ventilation, only 65% were weaned at 90 days. A better understanding of factors that delay the weaning process, such as delays in weaning initiation or excessive sedation levels, might improve weaning success rates.

Funding: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, European Respiratory Society.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests GBel reports a grant from Drager to his institution, consulting fees from Flowmeter, payments or honoraria from Drager and Getinge, and stock options in Dico technologies. LH reports funding from the European Respiratory Society to his institution in support of the study, grants from Liberate Medical and InflaRx to his institution, honoraria from Getinge and the American Thoracic Society, and reimbursement from the European Respiratory Society. ECG reports a grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to his institution, payment or honoraria from Getinge, and travel support from Lungpacer. GG reports a grant from Fisher & Paykel, and payments or honoraria from Getinge, Drager Medical, Fisher & Paykel, and Cook Medical. LP reports fees received for participation as speaker to scientific conferences organised by Getinge, Fisher and Paykel, and Air Liquid System. AP reports receiving consulting fees from Baxter, Getinge, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Xenios, and payments or honoraria from Xenios and Getinge. LB reports grants from Medtronic, Drager, and Stimit to his institution, and honoraria and equipment received from Fisher Paykel. JGL reports funding from the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Respiratory Society to support the study; grants from Science Foundation Ireland and Health Research Board Ireland to his institution, consulting from Baxter Healthcare and Cellenkos, and unpaid participation on three data safety monitoring boards. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources