volume threshold for chest tube removal: a randomized ‎controlled trial

Clicks: 222
ID: 160030
2009
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #50 of 63 articles by views in Journal of family medicine and primary care

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Background: Despite importance of chest tube insertion in chest trauma, there is no ‎general agreement on the level of daily volume drainage from chest tube. This study ‎was conducted to compare the effectiveness and safety of chest tube removal at the ‎levels of 150 ml/day and 2oo ml/day. Methods: Eligible patients (138) who needed replacement of chest tube (because of ‎trauma or malignancy) were randomized into two groups; control (removal of chest tube ‎when drainage reached to 150 ml/day) and trial (removal of chest tube at the level of ‎‎200 ml/day). All patients received standard care during hospital admission and a follow-‎up visit after 7days of discharge from hospital. Patients were then compared in terms of ‎major clinical outcomes using chi-squared and t-test. Results: From the total of 138 patients, 70 and 68 patients were randomized to control ‎‎(G150) and trial (G200) group, respectively. Baseline characteristics were comparable ‎between the two groups. Although the trial group had a shorter mean for length of ‎hospital stay (LOS) (4.1 compared to 4.8, p=0.04), their differences in drainage time ‎did not reach to the level of statistical significance (p=0.1). Analysis of data showed no ‎statistically significant differences between the rate of radiological reaccumulation, ‎thoracentesis and decrease in pulmonary sounds (auscultatory), one week after ‎discharge from hospital.‎‏ ‏Conclusions: Compared to a daily volume drainage of 150 ml, removal of chest tube ‎when there is 200 ml/day is safe and will even result in a shorter hospital stay. This in ‎turn leads to a lower cost.‎
Reference Key
hatami2009journalvolume Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Sajad Hatami, Farid Najafi, Mohammad Ali Hessami
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal Journal of family medicine and primary care
Year 2009
DOI
10.5249/jivr.v1i1.5
URL
http://jivresearch.org/jivr/index.php/jivr/article/view/5/8
Keywords
randomized

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.