Starting HMV at home: a reasonable option for many patients?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In the current study, we undertook a more detailed exploration of the reasons why patients undergoing HMV were screened out of a recently published study in order to better understand how applicable home initiation of HMV is under real life conditions. METHODS: All referred patients who had an indication for starting HMV were screened to participate in the Homerun study. In this trial 512 patients were screened out of the study. Those patients not enrolled in the trial were divided into the following 3 groups: (1) those not fulfilling the inclusion criteria; 2) those meeting the exclusion criteria and 3) those excluded on the basis of medical or organisation reasons. Each group was then further divided into those who would likely have been suitable for initiation of HMV at home in real world practice and those who were unsuitable. RESULTS: Based on inclusion criteria (group 1) 116 patients could not start HMV in real life, while this was 245 patients in the study. Based on the exclusion criteria (group 2) 11 patients could not start in real life while this was 79 in the study. One hundred and eighty-eight could not be enrolled in the study due to medical and organisational reasons ( group 3), while in real life this was only 95. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that more than 55% of patients who did not participate in the Homerun study could have started HMV at home in real life.

Home mechanical ventilation: the Dutch approach.

In the Netherlands we have an unique organisation of only 4 centres being responsible for all patients who need Home Mechanical ventilation(HMV). Nationwide criteria for referral and initiation of HMV are stated in our national guideline and recently a unique national learning management system (LMS) for all caregivers and professionals was developed. A nationwide multi-centric research program is running and every centre is participating. In this paper we provide information about the evolution of HMV in the Netherlands during the last 30 years, including details about the number of patients, different diagnose groups, residence and the type of ventilators.

Nocturnal non-invasive ventilation in COPD patients with prolonged hypercapnia after ventilatory support for acute respiratory failure: a randomised, controlled, parallel-group study.

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV) in COPD patients with prolonged hypercapnia after ventilatory support for acute respiratory failure (ARF) remains unclear. We investigated if nocturnal NIV in these patients prolongs the time to readmission for respiratory causes or death (primary endpoint) in the following 12 months. METHODS: 201 COPD patients admitted to hospital with ARF and prolonged hypercapnia >48 h after termination of ventilatory support were randomised to NIV or standard treatment. Secondary outcomes were daytime arterial blood gasses, transcutaneous PCO2 during the night, lung function, health-related quality-of-life (HRQL), mood state, daily activities and dyspnoea. RESULTS: 1 year after discharge, 65% versus 64% of patients (NIV vs standard treatment) were readmitted to hospital for respiratory causes or had died; time to event was not different (p=0.85). Daytime PaCO2 was significantly improved in NIV versus standard treatment (PaCO2 0.5 kPa (95% CI 0.04 to 0.90, p=0.03)) as was transcutaneous PCO2 during the night. HRQL showed a trend (p=0.054, Severe Respiratory Insufficiency questionnaire) in favour of NIV. Number of exacerbations, lung function, mood state, daily activity levels or dyspnoea was not significantly different. DISCUSSIONS: We could not demonstrate an improvement in time to readmission or death by adding NIV for 1 year in patients with prolonged hypercapnia after an episode of NIV for ARF. There is no reason to believe the NIV was not effective since daytime PaCO2 and night-time PCO2 improved. The trend for improvement in HRQL favouring NIV we believe nevertheless should be explored further. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR1100.

Forty-Five Years of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is a progressive muscle disease. No curative therapy is currently available, but in recent decades standards of care have improved. These improvements include the use of corticosteroids and mechanical ventilation. OBJECTIVE: To present a detailed population based report of the DMD disease course in The Netherlands (1980-2006) and evaluate the effect of changes in care by comparing it with an historical Dutch DMD cohort (1961-1974). METHODS: Information about DMD patients was gathered through the Dutch Dystrophinopathy Database using a standardized questionnaire and information from treating physicians. RESULTS: The study population involved 336 DMD patients (70% of the estimated prevalence), of whom 285 were still alive. Mean age at disease milestones was: diagnosis 4.3 years, wheelchair dependence 9.7 years, scoliosis surgery 14 years, cardiomyopathy (fractional shortening <27%) 15 years, mechanical ventilation 17 years and death 19 years. Within our cohort, corticosteroid use was associated with an increased age of wheelchair dependence from 9.8 to 11.6 years (p < 0.001). When comparing the recent cohort to the historical cohort, mean survival improved from 17 to 27 years (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The current study gives detailed information about the disease course of DMD patients, provides evidence for the positive effect of steroid treatment and mechanical ventilation and supports the use of patient registries as a valuable resource for evaluating improvements in care.