Adaptive Pressure Control-Continuous Mandatory Ventilation Versus Volume Control-Continuous Mandatory Ventilation: Factors Associated With Initiation, Maintenance, and Adjustment.

Tran LN, Rosen JE, Pearce AK, Malhotra A, Buhr RG, Saggar R, Davis JA, Martin JL, Kamdar BB. Adaptive Pressure Control-Continuous Mandatory Ventilation Versus Volume Control-Continuous Mandatory Ventilation: Factors Associated With Initiation, Maintenance, and Adjustment. Respiratory Care. 2024 Nov 18; 69(12):1491-1498.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• RCS 20-191 – Research Career Scientist Award

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Adaptive pressure control-continuous mandatory ventilation (APC-CMV) is a frequently utilized ventilator mode in ICU settings. This analysis compared APC-CMV and traditional volume control-continuous mandatory ventilation (VC-CMV) mode, describing factors associated with initiation, maintenance, and changes in settings of each mode. METHODS: We analyzed ventilator data from a retrospective electronic health record data set collected as part of a quality improvement project in a single academic ICU. The majority ventilator mode was defined as the mode comprising the highest proportion of mechanical ventilation time. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with initial and majority APC-CMV or VC-CMV modes. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare ventilator setting changes/d and sedation as a function of APC-CMV and VC-CMV majority modes. RESULTS: Among 1,213 subjects initiated on mechanical ventilation from January 2013-March 2017, 68% and 24% were initiated on APC-CMV and VC-CMV, respectively, which composed 62% and 21% of the majority ventilator modes. Age, sex, race, and ethnicity were not associated with the initial or majority APC-CMV or VC-CMV modes. Subjects initiated on APC-CMV spent 88% of the mechanical ventilation time on APC-CMV mode. Compared to VC-CMV, subjects with APC-CMV majority mode experienced more ventilator setting changes/d (1.1 vs 0.8, < .001). There were no significant differences in sedative medications when comparing subjects receiving APC-CMV versus VC-CMV majority modes. CONCLUSIONS: APC-CMV was highly utilized in the medical ICU. Subjects on APC-CMV had more ventilator setting changes/d than those on VC-CMV. APC-CMV offered no advantage of reduced setting adjustments or less sedation compared to VC-CMV.