ライフサイエンスコーパス: mechanical ventilation

1 patient met criteria for receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation).

2 efined by Canadian Standards, and the use of mechanical ventilation).

3 tients (81.6%), of whom 89 required invasive mechanical ventilation.

4 ted to liberating critically ill adults from mechanical ventilation.

5 Three received mechanical ventilation.

6 d hypercapnic acidosis in patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

7 or age, severity of illness, and presence of mechanical ventilation.

8 ning process concerns all patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

9 evant to key questions about liberation from mechanical ventilation.

10 early as possible, to minimize the risks of mechanical ventilation.

11 form optimal patient selection for prolonged mechanical ventilation.

12 (occupying a bed at midnight), and length of mechanical ventilation.

13 y caused by bacterial pathogens or excessive mechanical ventilation.

14 r ZIKV infection (26%), and 5 (14%) required mechanical ventilation.

15 combining saline lung lavages with injurious mechanical ventilation.

16 duced by repeated lung lavages and injurious mechanical ventilation.

17 d hypercapnic acidosis in patients requiring mechanical ventilation.

18 intensive care unit admission; 25% reported mechanical ventilation.

19 with an extended ICU stay who were receiving mechanical ventilation.

20 feelings of regret about choosing prolonged mechanical ventilation.

21 crotizing enterocolitis, and a dependence on mechanical ventilation.

22 es recommendations regarding liberation from mechanical ventilation.

23 asoactive medication and the requirement for mechanical ventilation.

24 ng the participants 22(38%) patients were on mechanical ventilation.

25 ld) with acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation.

26 with an extended ICU stay who were receiving mechanical ventilation.

27 rect lung injury requires longer duration of mechanical ventilation.

28 ed by the ICU mobility scale while receiving mechanical ventilation.

29 perience difficult or prolonged weaning from mechanical ventilation.

30 CI, 1.03-1.05) irrespective of the need for mechanical ventilation.

31 ease, airway patency problems, and prolonged mechanical ventilation.

32 ressure support ventilation); and controlled mechanical ventilation.

33 ficant reduction in the duration of invasive mechanical ventilation.

34 ly psychological outcomes among survivors of mechanical ventilation.

35 U admissions and 23.4% of patients requiring mechanical ventilation.

36 or patients with agitated delirium receiving mechanical ventilation.

37 hocardiograms on patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation.

38 volving respiratory failure, intubation, and mechanical ventilation.

39 further lung injury in patients on invasive mechanical ventilation.

40 or age, severity of illness, and presence of mechanical ventilation.

41 rtality, ICU length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation.

42 agement of critically ill patients requiring mechanical ventilation.

43 Scale score </= 8) and treated with invasive mechanical ventilation.

44 Noninvasive ventilation versus invasive mechanical ventilation.

45 asive ventilation, as the first-line mode of mechanical ventilation.

46 tients with severe hypoxemia on conventional mechanical ventilation.

47 asthma, had higher odds of ICU admission or mechanical ventilation.

48 ical outcomes in patients following invasive mechanical ventilation.

49 rophied diaphragm, and mitigate the harms of mechanical ventilation.

50 s for chronically critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation.

51 time the patients met criteria for prolonged mechanical ventilation.

52 eded 50 mmHg, depending on the conditions of mechanical ventilation.

53 distress syndrome patients undergoing direct mechanical ventilation.

54 4.0 hours; P = .17), duration of weaning off mechanical ventilation (-0.9 hours; 95% CI, -4.3 to 1.3

55 s, 33 (8%) of 424 with available data needed mechanical ventilation, 109 (26%) of 422 developed pseud

56 0, RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.30; p=0.008) and any mechanical ventilation (114 [12%] of 923 vs 83 [9%] of 9

57 (7 [30.4%] vs 19 [61.3%]; P = .03), need for mechanical ventilation (12 [52.2%] vs 19 [93.5%]; P = .0

58 re beneficiaries with pneumonia who required mechanical ventilation, 12,480 (19%) received noninvasiv

59 ifferences were found for median duration of mechanical ventilation (-16.0 hours; 95% CI, -36.5 to 4.

60 Fifty percent of patients required invasive mechanical ventilation, 30% required vasopressors, 17% r

61 9.5-78] vs. 19 [10.5-27.5] days; p = 0.003), mechanical ventilation (36.5 [20-80.5] vs. 16.5 [9-25.5]

62 anciclovir and placebo groups in duration of mechanical ventilation (5 days for the ganciclovir group

63 eltaTdi/d was -7.5% (12.3) during controlled mechanical ventilation, -5.3% (12.9) at high pressure su

64 tory distress syndrome (7 vs 0) and required mechanical ventilation (53% vs 21%).

65 30-day mortality when compared with invasive mechanical ventilation (54% vs 55%; p = 0.92; 95% CI of

66 ly members regretted having chosen prolonged mechanical ventilation (56.7%).

67 27.6%), plasma infusions (65.2% vs. 47.1%), mechanical ventilation (65.7% vs. 56.1%), and vasopresso

68 002), thus required more frequently invasive mechanical ventilation (85.2% vs 73.0%; p < 0.001), oxyg

69 te respiratory failure treated with invasive mechanical ventilation a median of 6 days after T cell t

70 Patients on mechanical ventilation achieved out-of-bed mobility on 1

71 e are substantial differences in duration of mechanical ventilation across ICU and their association

72 The mean observed minus expected duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs was 3.8 hours (95% CI

73 an accurately assess and compare duration of mechanical ventilation across ICUs, but cannot accuratel

74 n SBT rates, exclusion rates, or duration of mechanical ventilation across time periods.

75 Older patients who require prolonged mechanical ventilation after high-risk surgery and survi

76 pigs, the same protocol was repeated during mechanical ventilation after muscle paralysis.

77 and patient-centered outcomes (mortality and mechanical ventilation after second dose).

78 Lung-protective mechanical ventilation aims to prevent alveolar collapse

79 After 60 hours of mechanical ventilation all six ventilated-paced subjects

80 Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, all-cause cardiac surgical ICU r

81 early intervention for communication during mechanical ventilation allows the restoration of phonati

82 Mechanical ventilation alters the metabolic state of the

83 y muscle weakness frequently develops during mechanical ventilation, although in children there are l

84 Mechanical ventilation, although lifesaving, is associat

85 lower likelihood of successful weaning from mechanical ventilation and a higher risk of supraventric

86 Duration of mechanical ventilation and admission fibrinogen, but not

87 ion, pre-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation mechanical ventilation and biochemical variables, inotro

88 mitted to the ICU and anticipated to require mechanical ventilation and continuous sedation for great

89 Other outcomes included need for mechanical ventilation and development of acute respirat

90 We included patients who received mechanical ventilation and excluded patients who receive

91 dity and mortality associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation and extubation failure.

92 ation, as well as higher rates of pneumonia, mechanical ventilation and higher fatality rate (28.6%)

93 ors, secondary analyses included duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay.

94 Days on feeding tube, length of mechanical ventilation and ICU/hospital stay, and hospit

95 ression to compare risk-adjusted duration of mechanical ventilation and in-hospital mortality.

96 injury and two-hit ALI caused by suboptimal mechanical ventilation and injection of thrombin recepto

97 ded incidence of fluid overload, duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit stay, ele

98 e score was also associated with duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit stay.

99 starting with any attempt at separation from mechanical ventilation and its prognosis, according to a

100 Adjusted duration of invasive mechanical ventilation and length of stay in the intensi

101 poxia in the model, compared the duration of mechanical ventilation and mortality of patients treated

102 diaphragmatic expiratory contraction during mechanical ventilation and muscle paralysis may be a con

103 ge 67 y, range 48-79 y) receiving continuous mechanical ventilation and renal replacement therapy in

104 injury was associated with increased use of mechanical ventilation and renal-replacement therapy.

105 ternal smoking was associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation and respiratory support during th

106 High tidal volume mechanical ventilation and the resultant excessive mecha

107 After 34 days, the patient was weaned from mechanical ventilation and was discharged to the pulmona

108 ffed tracheostomy tube facilitates prolonged mechanical ventilation and weaning but usually leads to

109 ignificantly correlated with the duration of mechanical ventilation and with ICU and hospital lengths

110 We enrolled 136 critically ill patients on mechanical ventilation and/or vasopressors, randomized t

111 ure (measured by requirement and duration of mechanical ventilation), and ability to walk (measured b

112 epidemics, and estimated the risk of death, mechanical ventilation, and admission to the intensive c

113 oldest ICU survivors (> 82 yr), survivors of mechanical ventilation, and discharged to skilled-care f

114 ICU and hospital length of stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, and frequency of renal complicat

115 Need for intensive care, mechanical ventilation, and invasive procedure remained

116 btype, and effect of delirium on duration of mechanical ventilation, and length of hospital stay.

117 sociated with increased mortality, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and longer ICU stay.

118 ntal delay, severity of illness, prior coma, mechanical ventilation, and receipt of benzodiazepines a

119 stsurgical patients requiring ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and sedation.

120 severity of illness, delirium, coma, sepsis, mechanical ventilation, and sedatives/opiates.

121 , ECD, lens status, medical history, time on mechanical ventilation, and suitability for transplantat

122 six patients with aspiration syndrome after mechanical ventilation, and therefore without telescopic

123 l death); respiratory distress syndrome; any mechanical ventilation; and duration of stay in a neonat

124 tensive care unit (ICU) patients who receive mechanical ventilation are at high risk for early rehosp

125 ing cyclic airway reopening as occurs during mechanical ventilation (atelectrauma).

126 of delirium included age less than 2 years, mechanical ventilation, benzodiazepines, narcotics, use

127 otor milestones and in death or the need for mechanical ventilation by 2 years of age.

128 This could promote individualized mechanical ventilation by minimizing the probability of

129 and case-mix-adjusted predicted duration of mechanical ventilation can accurately assess and compare

130 entions that lead to earlier liberation from mechanical ventilation can improve patient outcomes.

131 stoperative major complications, duration of mechanical ventilation, cardiac surgical ICU readmission

132 ing more severe kidney injury]) who required mechanical ventilation, catecholamine infusion, or both

133 Mechanical ventilation caused significant lung inflammat

134 For patients with mechanical ventilation codes, Medicare Provider Analysis

135 Mechanical ventilation contributes to diaphragmatic atro

136 hat electrically pacing the diaphragm during mechanical ventilation could reduce diaphragm dysfunctio

137 Harms of mechanical ventilation could then depend on not only amp

138 ere incidence of CMV reactivation in plasma, mechanical ventilation days, incidence of secondary bact

139 Duration of mechanical ventilation decreased in hospital C but not i

140 patients (45.1%) randomized to conventional mechanical ventilation died/ had BPD compared with 43 pa

141 had aspiration syndrome, including 92 before mechanical ventilation discontinuation.

142 ritically ill obese patients when undergoing mechanical ventilation due to increased pleural pressure

143 Mechanical ventilation duration, ICU length of stay, and

144 t accurately predict an individual patient's mechanical ventilation duration.

145 ventilator-free days (ie, days alive without mechanical ventilation), duration of ICU and hospital le

146 bility to identify all patients who received mechanical ventilation during a critical illness.

147 c Health Evaluation Outcomes, 37.0% received mechanical ventilation during the ICU stay versus 24.1%

148 djustment for disease severity and length of mechanical ventilation, dysphagia remained an independen

149 significant risk of death after noninvasive mechanical ventilation failure (risk ratio, 1.07; 95% CI

150 ith a higher risk of death after noninvasive mechanical ventilation failure in those studies reportin

151 ress syndrome (four trials), use of invasive mechanical ventilation (five trials) or related to ICU t

152 g invasive ventilation as first-line mode of mechanical ventilation following unplanned intensive car

153 ated for <48 h, and were expected to require mechanical ventilation for >/=24 h) were randomly assign

154 y rats weighing approximately 400 g received mechanical ventilation for 60 minutes according to the p

155 r than or equal to 5 days of sedation during mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure.

156 Patients who required mechanical ventilation for at least 4 days were eligible

157 t of patients experiencing OHCA who received mechanical ventilation for at least the first 48 hours o

158 ldren 2 weeks to 17 years receiving invasive mechanical ventilation for lower respiratory tract disea

159 and August 2013 was eligible if subjected to mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours.

160 We included studies of adults 1) receiving mechanical ventilation for more than or equal to 14 days

161 e United States with pneumonia, who received mechanical ventilation from 2010 to 2011.

162 g 2 hours or more of general anesthesia with mechanical ventilation from May to November 2014 were in

163 ncreasing numbers of patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation generates a tremendous strain on

164 xplained 6.5% of the variation in first-line mechanical ventilation group (95% CI, 2.0-19.0%).

165 predicted risk of death for the noninvasive mechanical ventilation group acted as a significant mode

166 rbidity and mortality indicator (ie, sepsis, mechanical ventilation >/=24 h, stillbirth, or neonatal

167 Thirty-day survivors who received prolonged mechanical ventilation had a 1-year mortality rate of 47

168 ider Analysis and Review procedure codes for mechanical ventilation had high specificity (96.0%; 95%

169 few days of care and the first day receiving mechanical ventilation had the largest effect on total c

170 critically ill patients on positive-pressure mechanical ventilation have difficulty weaning from the

171 use was associated with a longer duration of mechanical ventilation (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% confiden

172 Older age, nonoperative admission, mechanical ventilation, higher Acute Physiology and Chro

173 s/sedatives (fentanyl, morphine, midazolam), mechanical ventilation, hypotension, and surgeries.

174 lloid resuscitation with hospital mortality, mechanical ventilation, ICU utilization, and length of s

175 We observed similar patterns for mechanical ventilation, ICU utilization, and length of s

176 ICU, initiation of vasopressors, or invasive mechanical ventilation [IMV] initiated after the second

177 tudy over 3 months of all patients receiving mechanical ventilation in 36 intensive care units, with

178 d clinical practice guidelines on the use of mechanical ventilation in adult patients with acute resp

179 patients who had received 7 or more days of mechanical ventilation in an ICU.

180 Adults receiving mechanical ventilation in an ICU.

181 Future trials of mechanical ventilation in children should focus on oxyge

182 ses six questions related to liberation from mechanical ventilation in critically ill adults.

183 recommendations to optimize liberation from mechanical ventilation in critically ill adults.

184 oninvasive ventilation as first-line mode of mechanical ventilation in critically ill children admitt

185 s of 145 consecutive patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation in five hospitals of Taipei City

186 entation of palliative care or withdrawal of mechanical ventilation in order to avoid prolonging the

187 tilation (NIV) reduces the need for invasive mechanical ventilation in patients who develop hypoxemic

188 gen respiratory oscillations observed during mechanical ventilation in the acute respiratory distress

189 e patient who received more than 48 hours of mechanical ventilation in the ICU.

190 Estimates of use of mechanical ventilation in the United States should likel

191 ubation rate for ICU patients liberated from mechanical ventilation in U.S. ICUs is approximately 10%

192 sive care unit [ICU] admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation) in hospitalized CAP patients fro

193 3, and 0 cm H2O before and after lavage and mechanical ventilation induced injury.

194 ome was life-threatening disease, defined as mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, o

195 Duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit length of st

196 e of 10% fluid overload; shorter duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay, and in

197 Short-term (duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay, hospit

198 ransfer, involvement of mobile medical team, mechanical ventilation, intracranial pressure monitoring

199 The evolution of home mechanical ventilation is an intertwined chronicle of ne

200 survival for patients treated with prolonged mechanical ventilation is generally poor; however, patie

201 anaian non-tertiary hospitals where invasive mechanical ventilation is not routinely available.

202 income and middle-income countries, invasive mechanical ventilation is often not available for childr

203 RATIONALE: Controlled mechanical ventilation is used to deliver lung-protectiv

204 Mechanical ventilation is used to sustain life in patien

205 Reintubation after liberation from mechanical ventilation is viewed as an adverse event in

206 es but does not clearly decrease duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay, ventilator-assoc

207 ures of the most invasive (MI) EOL care (eg, mechanical ventilation < 14 days from death).

208 Dysphagia after mechanical ventilation may be an overlooked problem.

209 evidence), and no change in the duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference, 0.01 d [95% CI,

210 4-16] vs 11 days [5-25], p=0.13) and days on mechanical ventilation (median 0 days [IQR 0-6] vs 3 day

211 up and the placebo group in the durations of mechanical ventilation (median, 19 hours and 21 hours, r

212 CI = 2.1-2.5; p < 0.001), as was duration of mechanical ventilation (median, 4 vs 1 d; p < 0.001).

213 ical outcomes, including need for inotropes, mechanical ventilation, meningitis, and death, was uncha

214 of stay (median, 5 vs 4 d; p = 0.0495), used mechanical ventilation more often and for longer (83.7%

215 tion; preextracorporeal membrane oxygenation mechanical ventilation more than 14 days; preextracorpor

216 ent level are day 1 room occupancy and day 1 mechanical ventilation, mortality before unit discharge

217 RIPC significantly shortened mechanical ventilation (MV) duration [weighted mean diff

218 Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a therapeutic interventio

219 Mechanical ventilation (MV) is critical in the managemen

220 Prolonged use of mechanical ventilation (MV) leads to atrophy and dysfunc

221 Mechanical ventilation (MV) remains the cornerstone of a

222 RATIONALE: Intensive care unit (ICU)- and mechanical ventilation (MV)-acquired limb muscle and dia

223 P<0.001), with significantly higher need for mechanical ventilation (myocarditis 11% versus NICM 2% v

224 ysis sessions were performed in 35 patients (mechanical ventilation n = 78; norepinephrine n = 13).

225 Nonintubated patients without mechanical ventilation (n = 90) presenting with sepsis-i

226 Risk of assisted mechanical ventilation, need for insulin, pseudocysts, o

227 vered through nasal cannulae and noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) may reduce the need for rei

228 ies hospitalized with pneumonia who received mechanical ventilation, noninvasive ventilation use was

229 In mechanical ventilation, normoventilation in terms of PCO

230 tality (odds ratio, 1.61; CI, 1.01-2.57) and mechanical ventilation (odds ratio, 2.44; CI, 1.27-4.69)

231 ce the MI-EOL care (eg, intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, odds ratios from 2.0 to 5.1).

232 Patients received mechanical ventilation on 73% of the patient-days mostly

233 c ventilation, and those who did not receive mechanical ventilation on the day of PICU admission were

234 tween compliance during EVLP and duration of mechanical ventilation or ICU and hospital lengths of st

235 injury had no difference in the duration of mechanical ventilation or ICU length of stay; however, t

236 with birth weight less than 1250 g receiving mechanical ventilation or positive pressure respiratory

237 rs, use of antihypertensive agents, need for mechanical ventilation, or changes in the body temperatu

238 tients, defined by tracheotomy for prolonged mechanical ventilation, or surrogates.

239 placebo group to be successfully weaned from mechanical ventilation over the period of 28 days (hazar

240 hospital stay (P = .04) and requirement for mechanical ventilation (P = .03).

241 There was no difference in time on mechanical ventilation (P = 0.59), intensive care unit s

242 Days of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.80), ICU mortality (p = 0.

243 g (39 high-flow nasal cannula patients vs 39 mechanical ventilation patients), no significant differe

244 hat predict long-term mortality in prolonged mechanical ventilation patients.

245 The mean percentage of cases requiring mechanical ventilation per outbreak was 34%.

246 native to high-dose sedatives and controlled mechanical ventilation, pharmacologically induced neurom

247 During prolonged mechanical ventilation, physicians should thoroughly dis

248 associated with increased pulmonary failure, mechanical ventilation, pneumonia, myocardial infarction

249 blic health challenge posed by the prolonged mechanical ventilation population, only 14 articles in t

250 edictors of mortality, including duration of mechanical ventilation prior to extracorporeal membrane

251 ronically critically ill elderly patients on mechanical ventilation, prognosis for significant recove

252 aluate the impact of an emergency department mechanical ventilation protocol on clinical outcomes and

253 nts with acute respiratory failure, invasive mechanical ventilation remains associated with high mort

254 ore, we found significantly greater need for mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, and I

255 and increased mortality, length of stay, and mechanical ventilation requirement.

256 EVLWPBW correlated with duration of mechanical ventilation (rho = 0.59; p < 0.0001) and ICU

257 nit, delirium, pain, airway status, hours of mechanical ventilation, severity of illness, days of sta

258 iratory pressure (PEEP) has been used during mechanical ventilation since the first description of ac

259 levels regardless of single room occupancy, mechanical ventilation status, or illness severity.

260 Protective mechanical ventilation strategies using low tidal volume

261 Patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation suffer from long-term poor qualit

262 , the overweight required longer duration of mechanical ventilation than other groups (p < 0.001).

263 Among patients with COPD receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, the use of acetazolamide, compar

264 Among comatose patients receiving mechanical ventilation, those without clinical, laborato

265 daily with ultrasound, from the first day of mechanical ventilation till discharge to the main ward.

266 io, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.36-0.85; p < 0.01), mean mechanical ventilation time (25.2 vs 19.4 hr; p < 0.01),

267 nic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and mechanical ventilation time affect corneal donor endothe

268 n mean arterial pressure at preshock values, mechanical ventilation titrated to maintain arterial oxy

269 Large trials using noninvasive mechanical ventilation to treat central apnea (CA) occur

270 coli inoculation, rats underwent 4 hours of mechanical ventilation under normocapnia or hypercapnic

271 regression model for predicting duration of mechanical ventilation using ICU day 1 patient character

272 with ARDS, the recommendation is strong for mechanical ventilation using lower tidal volumes (4-8 ml

273 stress syndrome-others and were managed with mechanical ventilation using the low tidal volume strate

274 y from 1988 to 2015 for studies on prolonged mechanical ventilation utilizing a comprehensive strateg

275 me (ARDS) and acute renal failure, requiring mechanical ventilation, vasopressor circulatory support

276 rom October 2013 until May 2014 and required mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, or both.

277 Mechanical ventilation via an endotracheal tube and deli

278 5] (P = 0.31) for death/BPD for conventional mechanical ventilation vs high-frequency oscillation was

279 ital and 90-day mortality, and the length of mechanical ventilation was evaluated.

280 Either high-flow nasal cannula or mechanical ventilation was initiated, at the discretion

281 Mechanical ventilation was required in 23 patients, main

282 Mechanical ventilation was required in 35% of donors.

283 ts on mechanical ventilator, the duration of mechanical ventilation was significantly lower on those

284 Invasive mechanical ventilation was ultimately needed in 142 pati

285 sive care unit admission (P = .04); however, mechanical ventilation was uncommon (2/51 inpatients; P

286 We used mechanical ventilation waveform data (VWD) as a use case

287 to -0.36]; I = 74%; n = 394, six trials) and mechanical ventilation (weighted mean difference, -2.98

288 mean days of physical therapy treatment and mechanical ventilation were associated with increased ho

289 ese (aOR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.4-3.2), and odds of mechanical ventilation were higher in children with obes

290 ght (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4), and odds of mechanical ventilation were lowest in adults who were ov

291 gth of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, and days on mechanical ventilation were observed in the NI patients

292 tients, greater than or equal to 48 hours on mechanical ventilation with a nonneurologic ICU admissio

293 tion containing 10% of fresh whole blood and mechanical ventilation with constant low driving pressur

294 se and increased lung aeration compared with mechanical ventilation with muscle paralysis and absence

295 xtracorporeal membrane oxygenation receiving mechanical ventilation with very low tidal volume.

296 PaO2-to-FIO2 ratio, 83 mm Hg), 97% received mechanical ventilation, with mean positive end-expirator

297 evious ICU admission (odds ratio, 1.43), and mechanical ventilation within 24 hours of admission (odd

298 ritically ill patients (>/=18 years) needing mechanical ventilation within 72 h of admission.

299 Main Outcomes and Measures: Need for mechanical ventilation within 72 hours from the beginnin

300 Among 98,367 patients who received mechanical ventilation without death or tracheostomy pri