ArticleSAGE open medicine2025
Factors associated with ABCDEF bundle implementation for critically ill patients: An international cross-sectional survey in 54 countries.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study investigated the implementation of the ABCDEF bundle and the factors associated with its implementation according to national income levels. Methods: This study is cross-sectional research. We conducted a secondary analysis of an international 1-day point-prevalence study that investigated the implementation of the ABCDEF bundle in critically ill patients. All patients admitted to the ICU were eligible. This study was conducted across 135 ICUs in 54 countries, including data from 664 patients. Outcomes were categorized according to the income level of the country (high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries) in which each ICU was located. A multilevel generalized linear model was developed to identify the factors associated with ABCDEF bundle implementation for each income level. Results: We identified 664 patients in 79 high-income countries, 278 in 26 middle-income countries, and 287 in 30 low-income countries ICUs. Implementation rates of the ABCDEF bundle were low for all income levels but varied. Few individuals completed the entire bundle on the survey date. Common factors associated with the implementation among all income levels were a multidisciplinary team approach for Element A (pain) and mechanical ventilation use for Element C (sedation), which were also associated with lower Element E (mobility). The existence of a protocol was frequently identified as a promoting factor associated with ABCDEF bundle implementation. The associated factors varied by income level; for example, dedicated intensivists were only identified in high-income countries, but not in middle-income countries or low-income countries. Conclusions: The overall low ABCDEF bundle implementation rates necessitate action. As factors associated with its implementation vary according to national income level, tailored strategies are essential for improving ICU care quality. Trial registration: NA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.