Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis ; 18: 2925-2931, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38089539

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) impacted outcomes of persons with chronic respiratory diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study investigated the differences in respiratory interventions, hospital utilization, smoking status, and 30-day readmission in those with COPD and COVID-19 based on hospital survival status. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted from February 2020 to October 2020 and included persons with COPD and COVID-19 infection. We examined respiratory interventions, hospital utilization and outcomes, and 30-day hospital readmission. Chi-square test analysis was used to assess categorical variables, and t-test or Mann-Whitney was used to analyze continuous data based on normality. Results: Ninety persons were included in the study, 78 (87%) were survivors. The most common comorbidity was hypertension 71 (78.9%) (p = 0.003). Twenty-two (24%) persons were intubated, from whom 12 (15%) survived (p < 0.001). There were 25 (32.1%) and 12 (100%), (p < 0.001) persons who required an ICU admission from the survivor and non-survivor groups, respectively. Among the survivor group, fifteen (19%) persons required 30-day hospital readmission. Conclusion: Persons with COPD and COVID-19 had a lower mortality rate (13%) compared to other studies in the early pandemic phase. Non-survivors had increased ICU utilization, endotracheal intubation, and more frequent application of volume control mode. Discharging survivors to long-term acute care facilities may reduce 30-day hospital readmissions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Humans , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/therapy , Patient Readmission , Hospitals
3.
Respir Care ; 67(10): 1282-1290, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35347080

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Postextubation monitoring helps identify patients at risk of developing respiratory failure. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of our standard respiratory therapist (RT) assessment tool versus an automated continuous monitoring alert to initiate postextubation RT-driven care on the re-intubation rate. METHODS: This was a single-center randomized clinical trial from March 2020 to September 2021 of adult subjects who received mechanical ventilation for > 24 h and underwent planned extubation in the ICU. The subjects were assigned to the standard RT assessment tool or an automated monitoring alert to identify the need for postextubation RT-driven care. The primary outcome was the need for re-intubation due to respiratory failure within 72 h. Secondary outcomes included re-intubation within 7 d, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, hospital mortality, ICU cost, and RT time associated with patient assessment and therapy provision. RESULTS: Of 234 randomized subjects, 32 were excluded from the primary analysis due to disruption in RT-driven care during the surge of patients with COVID-19, and 1 subject was excluded due to delay in the automated monitoring initiation. Analysis of the primary outcome included 85 subjects assigned to the standard RT assessment group and 116 assigned to the automated monitoring alert group to initiate RT-driven care. There was no significant difference between the study groups in re-intubation rate, median length of stay, mortality, or ICU costs. The RT time associated with patient assessment (P < .001) and therapy provided (P = .031) were significantly lower in the automated continuous monitoring alert group. CONCLUSIONS: In subjects who received mechanical ventilation for > 24 h, there were no significant outcome or cost differences between our standard RT assessment tool or an automated monitoring alert to initiate postextubation RT-driven care. Using an automated continuous monitoring alert to initiate RT-driven care saved RT time. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT04231890).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Insufficiency , Adult , Airway Extubation/adverse effects , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Respiration, Artificial/adverse effects , Respiratory Insufficiency/diagnosis , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Ventilator Weaning
4.
Respir Care ; 67(4): 415-420, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34475262

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the use of continuous high-frequency oscillation combined with nebulization during mechanical ventilation becomes more prevalent clinically, it is important to evaluate its aerosol delivery efficacy. METHODS: A bench study was conducted that simulated 2 adult and 2 pediatric conditions. A continuous high-frequency oscillation device integrated into the inspiratory limb of a conventional critical care ventilator was attached to an endotracheal tube (ETT) with a collection filter and test lung. High-frequency oscillation with high-flow setting was used with jet nebulizers attached to the manifold, and a vibrating mesh nebulizer placed between the ETT and the ventilator circuit versus at the inlet of the humidifier. Albuterol (2.5 mg in 3 mL) was nebulized for each condition (no. = 3). The drug was eluted from the collection filter and assayed with ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm). RESULTS: During continuous high-frequency oscillation, the mean inhaled dose with jet nebulizers was low (<2% with the adult settings and <1% with the pediatric settings). Across both adult and pediatric conditions, when the vibrating mesh nebulizer was placed between the ETT and the Y-piece during continuous high-frequency oscillation, the inhaled dose was higher than with the placement of the vibrating mesh nebulizer at the inlet of the humidifier, median 11.1% (IQR 7.0%-13.7%) median 6.0% (IQR 3.9%-7.2%) (P = .002) respectively, but still lower than the inhaled dose with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed at the inlet of the humidifier with continuous high-frequency oscillation off, median 22.7% (IQR 19.5%-25.4%) versus median 11.1% (IQR 7.0%-13.7%) (P < .001). The inhaled dose with the 10-year-old scenario was higher than with the 5-year-old scenario in all settings except aerosol delivery via continuous high-frequency oscillation. CONCLUSIONS: During invasive mechanical ventilation with continuous high-frequency oscillation, aerosol delivery with jet nebulizers in the manifold resulted in a marginal inhaled dose. The vibrating mesh nebulizer at the ETT during continuous high-frequency oscillation delivered 6-fold more aerosol than did the jet nebulizer, while delivering only half of the inhaled dose with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed at the inlet of the humidifier without continuous high-frequency oscillation.


Subject(s)
Bronchodilator Agents , Respiration, Artificial , Administration, Inhalation , Adult , Aerosols , Albuterol , Child , Child, Preschool , Drug Delivery Systems , Equipment Design , Humans , Nebulizers and Vaporizers , Respiration, Artificial/methods
5.
Crit Care ; 25(1): 340, 2021 09 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34535158

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (APP) is widely used in the management of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The primary objective of this study was to compare the outcome of COVID-19 patients who received early versus late APP. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of data collected for a randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04325906). Adult patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 who received APP for at least one hour were included. Early prone positioning was defined as APP initiated within 24 h of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) start. Primary outcomes were 28-day mortality and intubation rate. RESULTS: We included 125 patients (79 male) with a mean age of 62 years. Of them, 92 (73.6%) received early APP and 33 (26.4%) received late APP. Median time from HFNC initiation to APP was 2.25 (0.8-12.82) vs 36.35 (30.2-75.23) hours in the early and late APP group (p < 0.0001), respectively. Average APP duration was 5.07 (2.0-9.05) and 3.0 (1.09-5.64) hours per day in early and late APP group (p < 0.0001), respectively. The early APP group had lower mortality compared to the late APP group (26% vs 45%, p = 0.039), but no difference was found in intubation rate. Advanced age (OR 1.12 [95% CI 1.0-1.95], p = 0.001), intubation (OR 10.65 [95% CI 2.77-40.91], p = 0.001), longer time to initiate APP (OR 1.02 [95% CI 1.0-1.04], p = 0.047) and hydrocortisone use (OR 6.2 [95% CI 1.23-31.1], p = 0.027) were associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Early initiation (< 24 h of HFNC use) of APP in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure secondary to COVID-19 improves 28-day survival. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04325906.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Prone Position , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Wakefulness , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/mortality , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/etiology , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/mortality , Time-to-Treatment
6.
ERJ Open Res ; 7(1)2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33527076

ABSTRACT

Wearing a surgical/procedure mask over high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) reduces aerosol particle concentrations in the patients' vicinity. Wearing a mask over HFNC should be encouraged to reduce risks of aerosol transmission. #COVID19 https://bit.ly/2HLg5cE.

7.
Respir Care ; 65(2): 227-232, 2020 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31575710

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Continuous high-frequency oscillation (CHFO) is a therapeutic mode for the mobilization of secretions. The Metaneb CHFO device also incorporates aerosol administration using an integrated jet nebulizer. However, the effectiveness of aerosol delivery and influential factors remain largely unreported. METHODS: A collecting filter was placed between an adult manikin with a representative upper airway and a breath simulator, set to simulate quiet and distressed patterns of spontaneous adult breathing. The Metaneb CHFO device was attached to the manikin via a mask. Two jet nebulizers were tested in 2 different positions: placement in the manifold and placement between manifold and mask. A vibrating mesh nebulizer was placed between the manifold and mask with and without extension tubing. Aerosol administration was compared during CHFO and during nebulization mode alone. Albuterol (2.5 mg in 3 mL) was nebulized for each condition. The drug was eluted from the filter and assayed with ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm). RESULTS: During CHFO, inhaled doses with jet nebulizers were low (∼ 2%), regardless of nebulizer placement. Inhaled dose was improved with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed between the manifold and mask (12.48 ± 2.24% vs 2.58 ± 0.48%, P = .004). Inhaled doses with the jet nebulizer in the manifold with nebulization mode alone was lower than with the jet nebulizer with an aerosol mask (4.03 ± 1.82% vs 10.39 ± 2.79%, P = .004). Inhaled dose was greater with distressed breathing than quiet breathing. The use of a vibrating mesh nebulizer (P < .001) and distressed breathing (P = .001) were identified as predictors of increased inhaled dose. CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled dose with a jet nebulizer via the Metaneb CHFO device was lower than with a jet nebulizer alone. Placement of a vibrating mesh nebulizer at the airway and distressed breathing increased inhaled dose.


Subject(s)
High-Frequency Ventilation/instrumentation , Respiration , Administration, Inhalation , Aerosols/administration & dosage , Albuterol/administration & dosage , Bronchodilator Agents/administration & dosage , Drug Delivery Systems/instrumentation , Equipment Design , Humans , Manikins , Nebulizers and Vaporizers
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...