©Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2026. No commercial re-use. See Permissions. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Crit Care Med. Mar 9, 2026; 15(1): 113310
Published online Mar 9, 2026. doi: 10.5492/wjccm.v15.i1.113310
Published online Mar 9, 2026. doi: 10.5492/wjccm.v15.i1.113310
Ventilatory strategies in intensive care: Balancing clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness
Orivaldo Alves Barbosa, Critical Care, Hospital São Carlos, Fortaleza 60810035, Ceara, Brazil
Author contributions: Barbosa OA was responsible for the conception, writing, and elaboration of this manuscript.
Conflict-of-interest statement: The author reports no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.
Corresponding author: Orivaldo Alves Barbosa, MD, Chief Physician, Critical Care, Hospital São Carlos, Pontes Vieira 2531, Fortaleza 60810035, Ceara, Brazil.
Received: August 21, 2025
Revised: October 4, 2025
Accepted: December 5, 2025
Published online: March 9, 2026
Processing time: 191 Days and 5.2 Hours
Revised: October 4, 2025
Accepted: December 5, 2025
Published online: March 9, 2026
Processing time: 191 Days and 5.2 Hours
Core Tip
Core Tip: Cost-effectiveness analysis of ventilatory strategies in intensive care helps balance optimal patient outcomes with rational resource use. Evidence supports the value of lung-protective ventilation, non-invasive ventilation, and prone positioning in improving survival at relatively low cost. In contrast, prolonged mechanical ventilation is resource-intensive, offering limited incremental benefit and highlighting the need for targeted, efficient critical care interventions.