Introduction: Hypoxemic respiratory failure (HRF) affects nearly 15 percent of critically ill adults admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). An evidence based, stakeholder informed multidisciplinary care pathway (Venting Wisely) was created to standardize the diagnosis and management of patients with HRF and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Successful adherence to the pathway requires a coordinated team-based approach by the clinician team. The overall aim of this study is to describe the acceptability of the Venting Wisely pathway among critical care clinicians. Specifically this will allow us to: 1) better understand the user's experience with the intervention and 2) determine if the intervention was delivered as intended. Methods and analysis: This qualitative study will conduct focus groups with nurse practitioners, physicians, registered nurses, and registered respiratory therapists from 17 Alberta ICUs. We will use template analysis to describe the acceptability of a multi component care pathway according to seven constructs of acceptability: 1) Affective Attitude; 2) Burden; 3) Ethicality; 4) Intervention coherence; 5) Opportunity costs; 6) Perceived effectiveness; and 7) Self-efficacy. This study will contribute to a better understanding of the acceptability of the Venting Wisely pathway. Identification of areas of poor acceptability will be used to refine the pathway and implementation strategies as ways to improve adherence to the pathway and promote its sustainability. Ethics and dissemination: The study was approved by the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (CHREB). The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a scientific conference.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

We have received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Health Innovation Implementation and Spread (HIIS 2) grant from Alberta Health and Alberta Health Services. The funders had no role in study design, data collection, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study was approved by the University of Calgary Conjoint Health Research Ethics Board (CHREB).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

This is a protocol so there is no data associated with this manuscript. We have ethics approval to conduct this study.