In our systematic review of protocolised weaning from mechanical ventilation (Blackwood 2014) we found significant heterogeneity that could not be explained by subgroup analysis (type of protocol, ICU). We suspected that factors unreported in the trials relating to context and mechanisms of using the weaning protocols contributed to the heterogeneity. Therefore we set out to conduct a Cochrane qualitative evidence-synthesis of ‘sibling studies’ (qualitative studies undertaken alongside the included trials that may have examined these factors) and ‘stand-alone’ qualitative studies reporting barriers and facilitators to successful implementation of weaning protocols. The qualitative review was novel, there were few templates or guidelines which challenged us to consider how best to synthesise and report this evidence. However, the benefits of conducting this review are that not only do we have a template for future qualitative syntheses for the ACE group, but specifically for trials of weaning protocols, we found context-specific evidence concerning if, how and why specific protocols have been effective in the settings in which they were delivered and received.
|Publication status||Published - 02 Sep 2016|
|Event||World Congress of Anaesthesiologists - Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre, Hong Kong, China|
Duration: 28 Aug 2016 → 02 Sep 2016
Conference number: 16th
|Conference||World Congress of Anaesthesiologists|
|Period||28/08/2016 → 02/09/2016|