ABSTRACT
Background: Respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) occurs in about 50% of preterm infants born at less than 30 weeks of gestational age. Surfactant therapy and mechanical ventilation have been the standard of care in the management of RDS. Objective of this study to compare the time required to achieve successful extubation criteria in Volume guarantee mode of ventilation to that with Time cycled pressure-limited mode of ventilation and the duration of mechanical ventilation between them in preterm neonates ventilated for respiratory distress syndrome.Method: The study was done at Neonatal intensive care unit, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Kochi, Kerala over a period of 2 years. Total of 37 inborn preterm neonates between 26 weeks to 32weeks with RDS requiring mechanical ventilation were included in 2-year study period with 18 babies in 1st year study period ventilated with SIPPV mode and 19 babies in 2nd year study period on SIPPV'VG mode of ventilation. Analysis was done using SPSS v. 16 software.Results: In the present study the neonates receiving SIPPV-VG ventilation had stable and equivalent gas exchange at significantly lower MAP and PIP compared to neonates receiving SIPPV -TCPL. Also, neonates receiving SIPPV-VG had achieved significantly faster extubation criteria than SIPPV-TCPL and hence lesser duration of ventilation.Conclusion: Our study concludes that Volume Guarantee ventilation achieves near stable tidal volume delivery by auto-weaning peak inspiratory pressures thereby promoting early extubation and hence reducing volutrauma and barotrauma in contrast to TCPL mode.
ABSTRACT
OBJETIVOS: Avaliar se a observação clínica da expansibilidade torácica prediz o volume corrente em neonatos sob ventilação mecânica e se a experiência do examinador interfere no resultado. MÉTODOS: Estudo observacional que incluiu médicos de baixa experiência (1° ano de residência em pediatria), moderada experiência (2° ano de residência em pediatria, 1° ano de especialização em neonatologia ou em terapia intensiva pediátrica) e experientes (2° ano de especialização em neonatologia, pós-graduandos ou assistentes com experiência mínima de 4 anos em neonatologia). Estes observaram a expansibilidade torácica de recém-nascidos em ventilação mecânica e responderam qual o volume corrente fornecido aos bebês. O volume corrente ofertado foi calculado, indexado ao peso atual do paciente e considerado adequado se entre 4-6 mL/kg, insuficiente se abaixo de 4 mL/kg e excessivo se acima de 6 mL/kg. Para análise dos resultados, foi utilizado o qui-quadrado. RESULTADOS: Foram realizadas 111 avaliações em 21 recém-nascidos, e as respostas fornecidas concordaram com o volume mensurado em 23,1, 41,3 e 65,7 por cento para os médicos de baixa, moderada experiência e experientes, respectivamente. Esses resultados evidenciam que os três grupos não são estatisticamente iguais (p = 0,013) e que o grupo de médicos experientes apresenta maior concordância que os de baixa e moderada experiência (p = 0,007). CONCLUSÃO: A análise clínica da expansibilidade torácica realizada por médicos de baixa e moderada experiência apresenta pouca concordância com o volume corrente ofertado aos recém-nascidos em ventilação mecânica. Embora a experiência dos médicos tenha resultado em maior concordância, a expansibilidade torácica deve ser interpretada com cautela.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether clinical observation of chest expansion predicts tidal volume in neonates on mechanical ventilation and whether observer experience interferes with results. METHODS: An observational study that enrolled less experienced physicians in the first year of pediatric residency, moderately experienced (second year pediatric residency, first year of neonatology or pediatric intensive care specialization) or who were already experienced (second year neonatology specialization, graduate students or primary physician supervisors with minimum experience of 4 years in neonatology). These professionals observed the chest expansion of newborn infants on mechanical ventilation and estimated the tidal volume being supplied to the babies. True tidal volume given was calculated, indexed by the patient's current weight, and considered adequate between 4 and 6 mL/kg, insufficient below 4 mL/kg and excessive over 6 mL/kg. Results were analyzed using chi-square test. RESULTS: One hundred and eleven assessments were carried out with 21 newborn infants and the estimates given were in agreement with measured volume in 23.1, 41.3 and 65.7 percent for less, moderately and experienced physicians, respectively. These results are evidence that the three groups are not statistically equal (p = 0.013) and that the group of fully-experienced physicians have a better level of agreement than those with little or moderate experience (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical analysis of chest expansion by physicians with less or moderate experience exhibit a low level of agreement with the tidal volume given to newborn infants on mechanical ventilation. Although increased experience did result in higher levels of agreement, chest expansion must still be interpreted with caution.