Overview of Intraoperative Lung Protective Ventilation in Czech Republic

This study is designed as an observational cross-sectional survey focusing on attitudes, knowledge, and practical application of intraoperative lung-protective ventilation among anesthesiology professionals in the Czech Republic. The primary aim is to describe the prevalence of LPV-related practices during general anesthesia in adult surgical patients. Key elements of LPV include the use of lower tidal volumes adjusted to predicted body weight, titrated PEEP, avoidance of unnecessary high oxygen fractions, and a judicious approach to lung recruitment maneuvers. The study evaluates whether these components are routinely utilized and if so, under what clinical circumstances.

Secondary aims of the study include identifying barriers that may prevent anesthesiologists from applying LPV techniques, such as concerns about hemodynamic instability, limited training, lack of standardized protocols, insufficient monitoring capabilities, or doubts regarding clinical benefit. The survey also investigates how clinicians perceive the safety of recruitment maneuvers and whether they encounter adverse effects such as hypotension, desaturation, or barotrauma. The survey explores whether respondents view LPV as universally beneficial or applicable only to specific patient groups such as obese or critically ill individuals. The study further investigates whether national or departmental protocols and guidelines for ventilation exist at respondents' workplaces, whether ventilator settings are standardized, and whether institutional education or quality improvement initiatives support evidence-based ventilation.

The target population consists of anesthesiologists and anesthesiology trainees actively involved in perioperative care in hospitals across the Czech Republic. Participation is voluntary and anonymous, with no patient-level data collected. Demographic information such as level of training, years of experience, type of institution, and exposure to specialized perioperative or intensive care practice is included to allow subgroup comparisons. Data collection is conducted online via a secure electronic questionnaire with an estimated completion time of approximately five to eight minutes. The distribution strategy includes professional organizations, departmental mailing lists, and professional association communication channels to maximize nationwide representation.

The study utilizes a structured questionnaire composed of multiple-choice and ordinal-scale items that address five thematic categories: general anesthetic ventilation practices including tidal volume and FiO₂ selection; PEEP use and adherence to recommendations; indications and frequency of recruitment maneuvers; perceived safety and complications associated with LPV; and institutional culture, including guideline availability and ventilator technology. Respondents are asked to report how they usually manage typical elective surgical cases rather than unusual or high-risk scenarios, allowing insight into real-world standard practices. The results will quantify how closely routine clinical practice aligns with currently available scientific evidence and international perioperative ventilation recommendations.

The primary outcome is the proportion of respondents reporting ventilation settings that meet predefined LPV criteria in their routine practice. Secondary outcomes include differences in adherence between trainee and consultant anesthesiologists, between academic and non-academic hospitals, between centers with and without formal local protocols, and between clinicians with differing exposure to intensive care medicine. The data will be analyzed descriptively and comparatively to identify significant trends or variability within the national practice environment. Findings from this survey may provide a basis for future interventional or educational studies and facilitate development of nationwide recommendations.