Update search
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
NARROW
Format
Journal
Article Type
Date
Availability
1-1 of 1
Sarah Boisen
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
CE Article
Vinciya Pandian, PhD, MBA, MSN, RN, ACNP-BC, Sarah Boisen, BA, MSN, Shifali Mathews, Michael J. Brenner, MD
American Journal of Critical Care (2019) 28 (6): 441–450.
Published: 01 November 2019
Abstract
Objective To synthesize evidence of the safety and effectiveness of phonation in patients with fenestrated tracheostomy tubes. Methods PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched. The research question was, “Are fenestrated tracheostomy tubes a safe and effective option to facilitate early phonation in patients undergoing tracheostomy?” Studies of fenestrated tracheostomy tubes were assessed for risk of bias and quality of evidence. Data were abstracted, cross-checked for accuracy, and synthesized. Results Of the 160 studies identified, 13 met inclusion criteria, including 6 clinical studies (104 patients), 6 case reports (13 patients), and 1 nationwide clinician survey. The primary indications for a tracheostomy were chronic ventilator dependence (83%) and airway protection (17%). Indications for fenestrated tracheostomy included inaudible phonation and poor voice intelligibility. Patients with fenestrated tubes achieved robust voice outcomes. Complications included granulation tissue (6 patients [5%]), malpositioning (1 patient [0.9%]), decreased oxygen saturation (3 patients [2.6%]), increased blood pressure (1 patient [0.9%]), increased peak pressures (2 patients [1.7%]), and air leakage (1 patient [0.9%]); subcutaneous emphysema also occurred frequently. Patient-reported symptoms included shortness of breath (4 patients [3.4%]), anxiety (3 patients [2.6%]), and chest discomfort (1 patient [0.9%]). Conclusions Fenestrated devices afford benefits for speech and decannulation but carry risks of granulation, aberrant airflow, and acclimation challenges. Findings highlight the need for continued innovation, education, and quality improvement around the use of fenestrated devices.