The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparison of Four Methods of Weaning Patients from Mechanical Ventilation
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Weaning patients from mechanical ventilation is an important problem in intensive care units. Weaning is usually conducted in an empirical manner, and a standardized approach has not been developed. METHODS: We carried out a prospective, randomized, multicenter study involving 546 patients who had received mechanical ventilation for a mean (+/- SD) of 7.5 +/- 6.1 days and who were considered by their physicians to be ready for weaning. One hundred thirty patients had respiratory distress during a two-hour trial of spontaneous breathing. These patients were randomly assigned to undergo one of four weaning techniques: intermittent mandatory ventilation, in which the ventilator rate was initially set at a mean (+/- SD) of 10.0 +/- 2.2 breaths per minute and then decreased, if possible, at least twice a day, usually by 2 to 4 breaths per minute (29 patients); pressure-support ventilation, in which pressure support was initially set at 18.0 +/- 6.1 cm of water and then reduced, if possible, by 2 to 4 cm of water at least twice a day (37 patients); intermittent trials of spontaneous breathing, conducted two or more times a day if possible (33 patients); or a once-daily trail of spontaneous breathing (31 patients). Standardized protocols were followed for each technique. RESULTS: The median duration of weaning was 5 days for intermittent mandatory ventilation (first quartile, 3 days; third quartile, 11 days), 4 days for pressure-support ventilation (2 and 12 days, respectively), 3 days for intermittent (multiple) trials of spontaneous breathing (2 and 6 days, respectively), and 3 days for a once-daily trial of spontaneous breathing (1 and 6 days, respectively). After adjustment for other covariates, the rate of successful weaning was higher with a once-daily trial of spontaneous breathing than with intermittent mandatory ventilation (rate ratio, 2.83; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.36 to 5.89; P < 0.006) or pressure-support ventilation (rate ratio, 2.05; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.04 to 4.04; P < 0.04). There was no significant difference in the rate of success between once-daily trials and multiple trials of spontaneous breathing. CONCLUSIONS: A once-daily trial of spontaneous breathing led to extubation about three times more quickly than intermittent mandatory ventilation and about twice as quickly as pressure-support ventilation. Multiple daily trials of spontaneous breathing were equally successful.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Regression Models and Life-Tables
Cox, D. R. (1972) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x · Cited by 39,793
Cited by
Vestbo, J., Hurd, S. S., Agustí, A. G., Jones, P. W., Vogelmeier, C., Anzueto, A., Barnes, P. J., Fabbri, L. M., Martinez, F. J., Nishimura, M., et al. (2013) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.201204-0596pp · Cited by 15,983
Rabe, K. F., Hurd, S., Anzueto, A., Barnes, P. J., Buist, S. A., Calverley, P., Fukuchi, Y., Jenkins, C., Rodriguez-Roisin, R., van Weel, C., et al. (2007) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.200703-456so · Cited by 4,925
The Use of Continuous IV Sedation Is Associated With Prolongation of Mechanical Ventilation
Kollef, M. H., Levy, N. T., Ahrens, T. S., Schaiff, R., Prentice, D., & Sherman, G. (1998) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.114.2.541 · Cited by 916
Noninvasive Positive-Pressure Ventilation for Respiratory Failure after Extubation
Esteban, A., Frutos-Vivar, F., Ferguson, N. D., Arabi, Y., Apezteguía, C., González, M., Epstein, S. K., Hill, N. S., Nava, S., Soares, M.-A., et al. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa032736 · Cited by 894
Self-citationHigh-Frequency Oscillation in Early Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Ferguson, N. D., Cook, D. J., Guyatt, G. H., Mehta, S., Hand, L., Austin, P., Zhou, Q., Matte, A., Walter, S. D., Lamontagne, F., et al. (2013) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1215554 · Cited by 874
Metadata
- Authors
- Esteban, A., Frutos, F., Tobin, M. J., Alía, I., Solsona, J. F., Valverdu, V., Fernández, R., de la Cal, M. A., Benito, S., Tomás, R., Carriedo, D., Macías, S., & Blanco, J.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1995-02-09
- Volume
- 332
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 345-350
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2334704549
- Cited by
- 1,549
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 36.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Comparison of Four Methods of Weaning Patients from Mechanical Ventilation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199502093320601
- The paper
- Esteban, A., Frutos, F., Tobin, M. J., Alía, I., Solsona, J. F., Valverdu, V., Fernández, R., de la Cal, M. A., Benito, S., Tomás, R., Carriedo, D., Macías, S., & Blanco, J. (1995). A Comparison of Four Methods of Weaning Patients from Mechanical Ventilation. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199502093320601
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.