N/A
N=92
Differences in Morbidity Between a Necessity Endotracheal Suctioning Protocol Versus a Routine Endotracheal Suctioning
Hypoxemia · Arrhythmias · Cardiac Arrest · Ventilator Associated Pneumonia
Bottom Line
View on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01069185 ↗Enrolled (actual)
92
Serious AEs
1.1%
Results posted
Sep 2017
Primary outcome: Primary: Primary Composite End Point — 35; 48 event
Study Design & Population
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- N/A
- Interventions
- Necessity endotracheal suctioning (Procedure); Routine endotracheal suctioning (Procedure)
- Age
- Pediatric · 0+ yrs
- Sex
- All
- Sponsor
- Hospital Pablo Tobón Uribe
- Primary completion
- Aug 2010
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY Primary Composite End Point |
35; 48 | — |
| SECONDARY Mechanical Ventilation Length as Days. |
2.5; 2.4 | — |
Summary
Morbidity frequency associated to a endotracheal suctioning is different between a necessity endotracheal suctioning protocol versus a routine endotracheal protocol.
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- Children older than 1 month until 14 years old requiring orotracheal intubation
Exclusion Criteria
- High frequency ventilation mode
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01069185). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.