Evidence Hub

The Efficacy Of Respiratory Therapist-Led Protocols In Reducing Mechanical Ventilation Duration: A Systematic Review

Mousa Nasser Ibrahim Otayf, Wael Khalid Ali Nushayli, Abdullah Hisham Abdulmalek Alwabel, Khaled Khormi, Mutaz Ali Bashiri, A. Majrashi, Ali Mohammed Thubab, Musab Sulaiman Salman Wadani et al.

The Review of Diabetic Studies, 2025

Abstract

Background: Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a cornerstone intervention in critical care medicine, providing life-sustaining support for patients with acute respiratory failure. However, prolonged MV is associated with significant morbidity, including ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), ventilator-induced diaphragm dysfunction (VIDD), and increased mortality. The weaning process—the transition from mechanical support to spontaneous breathing—consumes approximately 40% to 50% of the total duration of ventilation. Traditional physician-directed weaning is often characterized by variability, delays in recognition of weaning readiness, and prolonged "dead time" where patients remain ventilated despite physiological recovery. Respiratory Therapist (RT)-led protocols have been proposed as a mechanism to standardize care, reduce variability, and accelerate liberation from MV.

Objectives: This systematic review evaluates the efficacy of RT-led weaning protocols compared to physician-directed usual care in reducing the total duration of mechanical ventilation, weaning duration, and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS). Secondary objectives include assessing safety outcomes (reintubation rates, mortality) and adverse events (VAP).

Methods: A systematic review was conducted adhering to PRISMA guidelines. The PICO framework defined the eligibility criteria: Population (critically ill adults), Intervention (RT-led/driven protocols), Comparison (physician-directed/usual care),…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free