The use of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in the emergency department: results of a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) in the emergency department (ED) will reduce the need for tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, prospective clinical trial. SETTING: ED of Barnes-Jewish Hospital, a university-affiliated teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Twenty-seven patients meeting a predetermined definition of acute respiratory distress requiring hospital admission. INTERVENTIONS: Conventional medical therapy for the various etiologies of acute respiratory distress and the application of NPPV. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was the need for tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. Secondary outcomes also assessed included hospital mortality, hospital length of stay, acquired organ system derangements, and the utilization of respiratory care personnel. Sixteen patients (59.3%) were randomly assigned to receive conventional medical therapy plus NPPV, and 11 patients (40.7%) were randomly assigned to receive conventional medical therapy without NPPV. The two groups were similar at the time of randomization in the ED with regard to demographic characteristics, hospital admission diagnoses, and severity of illness. Tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation was required in seven patients (43.8%) receiving conventional medical therapy plus NPPV and in five patients (45.5%) receiving conventional medical therapy alone (relative risk=0.96; 95% confidence interval=0.41 to 2.26; p=0.930). There was a trend towards a greater hospital mortality rate among patients in the NPPV group (25%) compared to patients in the conventional medical therapy group (0.0%) (p=0.123). Among patients who subsequently required mechanical ventilation, those in the NPPV group had a longer time interval from ED arrival to the start of mechanical ventilation compared to patients in the conventional medical therapy group (26.0+/-27.0 h vs 4.8+/-6.9 h; p=0.055). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the application of NPPV in the ED may delay tracheal intubation and the initiation of mechanical ventilation in some patients with acute respiratory distress. We also demonstrated that the application of NPPV was associated with an increased hospital mortality rate. Based on these preliminary observations, larger clinical investigations are required to determine if adverse patient outcomes can be attributed to the early application of NPPV in the ED. Additionally, improved patient selection criteria for the optimal administration of NPPV in the ED need to be developed.

A randomized clinical trial comparing an extended-use hygroscopic condenser humidifier with heated-water humidification in mechanically ventilated patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and cost-effectiveness of mechanical ventilation with an extended-use hygroscopic condenser humidifier (Duration; Nellcor Puritan-Bennett; Eden Prairie, Minn) compared with mechanical ventilation with heated-water humidification. DESIGN: Prospective randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Medical and surgical ICUs of Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis, a university-affiliated teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Three hundred ten consecutive qualified patients undergoing mechanical ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: Patients requiring mechanical ventilation were randomly assigned to receive humidification with either an extended-use hygroscopic condenser humidifier (for up to the first 7 days of mechanical ventilation) or heated-water humidification. MEASUREMENTS: Occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia, endotracheal tube occlusion, duration of mechanical ventilation, lengths of intensive care and hospitalization, acquired multiorgan dysfunction, and hospital mortality. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-three patients were randomly assigned to receive humidification with an extended-use hygroscopic condenser humidifier, and 147 patients were randomly assigned to receive heated-water humidification. The two groups were similar at the time of randomization with regard to demographic characteristics, ICU admission diagnoses, and severity of illness. Risk factors for the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia were also similar during the study period for both treatment groups. Ventilator-associated pneumonia was seen in 15 (9.2%) patients receiving humidification with an extended-use hygroscopic condenser humidifier and in 15 (10.2%) patients receiving heated-water humidification (relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval=0.46 to 1.78; p=0.766). No statistically significant differences for hospital mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation, lengths of stay in the hospital ICU, or acquired organ system derangements were found between the two treatment groups. No episode of endotracheal tube occlusion occurred during the study period in either treatment group. The total cost of providing humidification was $2,605 for patients receiving a hygroscopic condenser humidifier compared with $5,625 for patients receiving heated-water humidification. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the initial application of an extended-use hygroscopic condenser humidifier is a safe and more cost-effective method of providing humidification to patients requiring mechanical ventilation compared with heated-water humidification.

Patient transport from intensive care increases the risk of developing ventilator-associated pneumonia.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient transport out of the ICU is associated with an increased risk of developing ventilator-associated pneumonia. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: ICUs of Barnes-Jewish Hospital, a university-affiliated teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Five hundred twenty-one ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation for > 12 h. INTERVENTION: Prospective patient surveillance and data collection. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia. A total of 273 (52.4%) mechanically ventilated patients required at least one transport out of the ICU while 248 (47.6%) patients did not undergo transport. Sixty-six (24.2%) of the transported patients developed ventilator-associated pneumonia compared with 11 (4.4%) patients in the group not undergoing transport (relative risk=5.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]=2.9 to 10.1; p<0.001). Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that a preceding episode of transport out of the ICU was independently associated with the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia (adjusted odds ratio=3.8; 95% CI=2.6 to 5.5; p<0.001). Other variables independently associated with the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia included reintubation, presence of a tracheostomy, administration of aerosols, and male gender. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that patient transport out of the ICU is associated with an increased risk for the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Mechanical ventilation with or without daily changes of in-line suction catheters.

The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and cost-effectiveness of not routinely changing in-line suction catheters for patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either no routine in-line suction catheter changes (n = 258) or in-line suction catheter changes every 24 h (n = 263). The main outcome measure was the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Other outcomes evaluated included hospital mortality, acquired organ system derangements, duration of mechanical ventilation, lengths of intensive care and hospital stay, and the cost for in-line suction catheters. Ventilator-associated pneumonia was seen in 38 patients (14.7%) receiving no routine in-line suction catheter changes and in 39 patients (14.8%) receiving in-line suction catheter changes every 24 h (relative risk, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.50). No statistically significant differences for hospital mortality, lengths of stay, the number of acquired organ system derangements, death in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia, or mortality directly attributed to ventilator-associated pneumonia were found between the two treatment groups. Patients receiving in-line suction catheter changes every 24 h had 1,224 catheter changes costing a total of $11,016; patients receiving no routine in-line suction catheter changes had a total of 93 catheter changes costing $837. Our findings suggest that the elimination of routine in-line suction catheter changes is safe and can reduce the costs associated with providing mechanical ventilation.