• Crit Care · Oct 2021

    Meta Analysis

    Predictive power of extubation failure diagnosed by cough strength: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    • Jun Duan, Xiaofang Zhang, and Jianping Song.
    • Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Youyi Road 1, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, 400016, China. duanjun412589@163.com.
    • Crit Care. 2021 Oct 12; 25 (1): 357.

    BackgroundThe predictive power of extubation failure diagnosed by cough strength varies by study. Here we summarise the diagnostic power of extubation failure tested by cough strength.MethodsA comprehensive online search was performed to select potentially eligible studies that evaluated the predictive power of extubation failure tested by cough strength. A manual search was also performed to identify additional studies. Data were extracted to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative LR, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to evaluate the predictive power of extubation failure.ResultsA total of 34 studies involving 45 study arms were enrolled, and 7329 patients involving 8684 tests were analysed. In all, 23 study arms involving 3018 tests measured cough peak flow before extubation. The pooled extubation failure was 36.2% and 6.3% in patients with weak and strong cough assessed by cough peak flow, respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, DOR, and AUC were 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.80), 0.75 (0.69-0.81), 2.89 (2.36-3.54), 0.37 (0.30-0.45), 8.91 (5.96-13.32), and 0.79 (0.75-0.82), respectively. Moreover, 22 study arms involving 5666 tests measured the semiquantitative cough strength score (SCSS) before extubation. The pooled extubation failure was 37.1% and 11.3%, respectively, in patients with weak and strong cough assessed by the SCSS. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, DOR, and AUC were 0.53 (95% CI: 0.41-0.64), 0.83 (0.74-0.89), 2.50 (1.93-3.25), 0.65 (0.56-0.76), 4.61 (3.03-7.01), and 0.74 (0.70-0.78), respectively.ConclusionsWeak cough is associated with increased extubation failure. Cough peak flow is superior to the SCSS for predicting extubation failure. However, both show moderate power for predicting extubation failure.© 2021. The Author(s).

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.