Nasal high flow therapy use in wards in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease may spare ICU resources.

Nasal high flow therapy has been previously studied for the management of acute hypoxic respiratory failure in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease but the data regarding its use outside of the intensive care unit are sparse. We aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of nasal high flow therapy outside of the intensive care unit in patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure and known chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We conducted a retrospective matched historic cohort study of adult patients with diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease presenting with acute hypoxic respiratory failure between December 2017 to June 2019, after the initiation of a new protocol, which allowed patients to be managed with nasal high flow therapy on the medical/surgical wards instead of transferring them to the ICU per prior standard of care. Nasal high flow therapy was initiated either in the emergency department or on the medical/surgical wards. Patients were matched with historical cohorts who were managed with prior standard of care based on age, body mass index, comorbidities, and home oxygen use. Primary outcome of interest was difference in rates of mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, total number of days spent in the intensive care unit, and in-hospital mortality. A total of 90 patients met study inclusion criteria and were matched to 90 historical control patients. Among the study group, 8% required mechanical ventilation versus 9% in the control group (p = 0.79). Hospital length of stay was 7 days in study group versus 6 days in control group (p = 0.02), and in-hospital mortality was the same in both study and control groups at 12% (p = 0.99). Nineteen percent of study group patients required ICU level of care at any time during the admission compared with 49% of control group (p < 0.001). Nasal high flow therapy use in patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure and underlying chronic obstructive pulmonary disease outside of the intensive care unit may spare ICU resources and cost without delay in definitive care such as mechanical ventilation.

Early versus late awake prone positioning in non-intubated patients with COVID-19.

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.

Implementation of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy Outside the Intensive Care Setting.

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is an option for respiratory support in patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure. To improve patient outcomes, reduce ICU-associated costs, and ease ICU bed availability, a multi-phased, comprehensive strategy was implemented to make HFNC available outside the ICU under the supervision of pulmonology or trauma providers in cooperation with a dedicated respiratory therapy team. The purpose of this study was to describe the education and implementation process for initiating HFNC therapy outside the ICU and to convey key patient demographics and outcomes from the implementation period. METHODS: HFNC therapy was implemented at a tertiary hospital in the Midwest, with systematic roll-out to all in-patient floors over a 9-month period. Utilization of the therapy and patient outcomes were tracked to ensure safety and efficacy of the effort. RESULTS: During the implementation period, 346 unique subjects met study inclusion criteria. Median (interquartile range) hospital length of stay was 8 d (4-12), and median duration of HFNC therapy was 44 h (18-90). Two thirds of subjects (n = 238) received the entire course of HFNC therapy outside the ICU, and more than half of subjects (n = 184) avoided the ICU for their entire hospitalization. Moreover, 6% of subjects in the study group escalated from HFNC to noninvasive ventilation, and 5% of subjects escalated from HFNC to mechanical ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive implementation process and a robust therapy protocol were integral to initiating and managing HFNC in all hospital locations. Study findings indicate that patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure can safely receive HFNC therapy outside the ICU with appropriate patient selection and staff education.

Proactive Use of High-Flow Nasal Cannula With Critically Ill Subjects.

INTRODUCTION: It has been suggested that use of a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) could be a first-line therapy for patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure. The purpose of this study was to determine if protocolized use of HFNC decreases unplanned intubation and adverse outcomes in an ICU population. METHODS: The study was a prospective evaluation of 2 cohorts who received HFNC per protocol. Control groups were retrospective selections of subjects who received HFNC in the pre-protocol period. Cohort 1 (n = 88) received mechanical ventilation for ≥ 24 h and was extubated directly to HFNC following strict protocol criteria. Cohort 2 (n = 83) were placed on HFNC when oxygen requirements escalated (>4 L/min). RESULTS: Cohort 1 did not differ from its control group in mortality, hospital stay, or ICU days, but there were significant decreases in incidence of Gram-negative pulmonary infection (30% vs 9%, P = .001) and use of bronchodilator therapy (81% vs 61%, P = .008). Failed extubation rates were nearly identical across groups, but time to re-intubation was shorter in the protocol group (24 vs 13 h, P = .19). Cohort 2 did not differ significantly from its control group in intubation rates or mortality, but subjects managed by protocol experienced significant decreases in ICU days (4 vs 3 d, P = .03) and hospital days (12 vs 8 d, P = .007). There was a trend toward fewer hours on HFNC (33 vs 24 h, P = .10) and faster time to intubation when HFNC failed (19 vs 9 h, P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Extubation to HFNC led to a significant decrease in pulmonary infections and bronchodilator therapy in Cohort 1 but did not reduce length of stay or rates of failed extubation. When HFNC was used early and per protocol (Cohort 2), ICU and hospital lengths of stay were reduced and HFNC was initiated more quickly when the need for respiratory support escalated.

A Preventative Respiratory Protocol to Identify Trauma Subjects at Risk for Respiratory Compromise on a General In-Patient Ward.

BACKGROUND: Patients are at risk for respiratory complications after sustaining blunt chest trauma, yet contradictory evidence exists about the utility of prophylactic respiratory therapy to reduce respiratory complications in this population. This study assessed the effectiveness of a proactive respiratory protocol on an in-patient ward to identify trauma patients at risk for pulmonary complications, administer appropriate therapies, and prevent deterioration requiring transfer to the ICU. METHODS: Trauma patients received a respiratory therapy evaluation at the time of admission to a general in-patient ward at a Level 1 trauma center. If subjects met protocol inclusion criteria, they received prophylactic respiratory treatments, primarily MetaNeb therapy, Vest therapy, or EzPAP. Multiple phases were included to evaluate the effectiveness of the protocol, with 50 subjects in each phase: a pre-protocol phase before adoption of the protocol; phase 1, which was found to have low physician adherence and overly broad inclusion criteria; and phase 2, with improved adherence and narrower inclusion criteria. Study inclusion criteria mirror the protocol criteria from phase 2: ≥3 rib fractures; pulmonary contusion; exacerbation of COPD, asthma, or other lung disease; or age ≥65 y with expected immobility of ≥48 h. RESULTS: The respiratory protocol was associated with an elimination of unplanned admissions to the ICU. After controlling for injury severity and other important clinical factors, receiving the protocol significantly decreased hospital stay by approximately 1.5 d. More subjects were admitted from the emergency department directly to the ward, avoiding the ICU. Bronchodilator use also decreased, although the result did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Study results suggest that a preventive respiratory protocol had a beneficial effect on patient outcomes; receiving the protocol reduced hospital days and eliminated unplanned admission to the ICU.

High-flow nasal cannula therapy for patients with blunt thoracic injury: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been shown to reduce the need for mechanical ventilation (MV) and to decrease hospital and ICU days for patients with severe respiratory compromise. HFNC has not been evaluated in trauma patients, thus the goal of this study is to describe the use of HFNC in a chest-injured population. METHODS: A retrospective study examined trauma patients with moderate to severe thoracic injury admitted to the ICU at a tertiary hospital between March 2012 and August 2015. HFNC was delivered by the Fisher & Paykel Optiflow system. Primary outcomes were the need for intubation after HFNC for respiratory failure, length of hospitalization, and mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 105 patients with blunt chest trauma were admitted to the ICU and received HFNC therapy. Eighteen percent received MV prior to HFNC. Overall, 69% of patients who received HFNC never received MV, and 92% of patients were discharged alive. The intubation rate for respiratory failure after HFNC was 18%. For patients who did not receive MV prior to HFNC, delay to first HFNC was correlated with increased hospital days (r s = 0.41, p = 0.001) and ICU days (r s = 0.41, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Study results suggest that HFNC is comparable with other methods of noninvasive ventilation and may be beneficial for patients with thoracic injury. Additional investigation is warranted to determine if early use of HFNC can deliver effective respiratory support and prevent intubation in this population.