Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Variation in Use of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Noninvasive Ventilation Among Patients With COVID-19.
Garcia, Michael A; Johnson, Shelsey W; Sisson, Emily K; Sheldrick, Christopher R; Kumar, Vishakha K; Boman, Karen; Bolesta, Scott; Bansal, Vikas; Bogojevic, Marija; Domecq, J P; Lal, Amos; Heavner, Smith; Cheruku, Sreekanth R; Lee, Donna; Anderson, Harry L; Denson, Joshua L; Gajic, Ognjen; Kashyap, Rahul; Walkey, Allan J.
  • Garcia MA; The Pulmonary Center, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Sleep and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. Michael.Garcia@bmc.org.
  • Johnson SW; The Pulmonary Center, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Sleep and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • Sisson EK; Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • Sheldrick CR; Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • Kumar VK; Society of Critical Care Medicine, Mount Prospect, Illinois.
  • Boman K; Society of Critical Care Medicine, Mount Prospect, Illinois.
  • Bolesta S; Department of Pharmacy Practice, Nesbitt School of Pharmacy, Wilkes University, Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
  • Bansal V; Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Bogojevic M; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Domecq JP; Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Lal A; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Heavner S; Department of Emergency Medicine, Prisma Health, Greenville, South Carolina.
  • Cheruku SR; Divisions of Cardiothoracic Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesia and Pain Management, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
  • Lee D; Center for Advanced Analytics, Best Practices, Baptist Health South Florida, Miami, Florida.
  • Anderson HL; Department of Surgery, St. Joseph Mercy Ann Arbor Hospital, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Denson JL; Section of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Environmental Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana.
  • Gajic O; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Kashyap R; Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Walkey AJ; The Pulmonary Center, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, Sleep and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Respir Care ; 67(8): 929-938, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1879560
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) for hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 are recommended by critical-care guidelines; however, apprehension about viral particle aerosolization and patient self-inflicted lung injury may have limited use. We aimed to describe hospital variation in the use and clinical outcomes of HFNC and NIV for the management of COVID-19.

METHODS:

This was a retrospective observational study of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who received supplemental oxygen between February 15, 2020, and April 12, 2021, across 102 international and United States hospitals by using the COVID-19 Registry. Associations of HFNC and NIV use with clinical outcomes were evaluated by using multivariable adjusted hierarchical random-effects logistic regression models. Hospital variation was characterized by using intraclass correlation and the median odds ratio.

RESULTS:

Among 13,454 adults with COVID-19 who received supplemental oxygen, 8,143 (60%) received nasal cannula/face mask only, 2,859 (21%) received HFNC, 878 (7%) received NIV, 1,574 (12%) received both HFNC and NIV, with 3,640 subjects (27%) progressing to invasive ventilation. The hospital of admission contributed to 24% of the risk-adjusted variation in HFNC and 30% of the risk-adjusted variation in NIV. The median odds ratio for hospital variation of HFNC was 2.6 (95% CI 1.4-4.9) and of NIV was 3.1 (95% CI 1.2-8.1). Among 5,311 subjects who received HFNC and/or NIV, 2,772 (52%) did not receive invasive ventilation and survived to hospital discharge. Hospital-level use of HFNC or NIV were not associated with the rates of invasive ventilation or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS:

Hospital variation in the use of HFNC and NIV for acute respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 was great but was not associated with intubation or mortality. The wide variation and relatively low use of HFNC/NIV observed within our study signaled that implementation of increased HFNC/NIV use in patients with COVID-19 will require changes to current care delivery practices. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT04323787.).
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Respiratory Insufficiency / Noninvasive Ventilation / COVID-19 Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Adult / Humans Language: English Journal: Respir Care Year: 2022 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Respiratory Insufficiency / Noninvasive Ventilation / COVID-19 Type of study: Experimental Studies / Observational study / Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Adult / Humans Language: English Journal: Respir Care Year: 2022 Document Type: Article