Noninvasive Neurally Adjusted Ventilatory Assist Versus High Flow Cannula Support After Congenital Heart Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Extubation failure rates for critical patients in pediatric intensive care units (ICUs) range from 5% to 29%. Noninvasive (NIV) ventilation has been shown to decrease extubation failure. We compared reintubation rates and outcomes of patients supported with NIV neurally adjusted ventilation assist (NAVA) versus historical controls supported with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). METHODS: Case-control study of infants less than three months of age who underwent cardiac surgery and received NIV support after extubation from January 2011 to May 2017. All patients supported with NIV NAVA after it became available in September 2013 were compared to matched patients extubated to HFNC from prior to September 2013. RESULTS: Forty-two patients identified for the NIV NAVA group were matched with 42 historical controls supported with HFNC. Groups had similar baseline characteristics based on rate of acute kidney injury, number of single ventricle patients, Society of Thoracic Surgeons-European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (STAT) category, age, weight, bypass time, and duration of intubation. There was no significant difference in reintubation rates within 72 hours (14.3% in the HFNC group and 16.7% in the NIV NAVA group, P = 1.0). Median duration from extubation to coming off NIV support was longer in the NIV NAVA group (3.6 days vs 0.6 days, P < .001). Median time from extubation to ICU discharge was longer in the NIV NAVA group (10.5 vs 6.8 days, P = .02), as was total postoperative ICU length of stay (LOS; 17.6 vs 12.2, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of NIV NAVA for postextubation support did not reduce reintubation rates compared to HFNC. Further study is needed as adoption of NIV NAVA may prolong LOS.

Home-Based Telemedicine for Children with Medical Complexity.

Background: Children with medical complexity (CMC) are high utilizers of health care services. Telehealth encounters may provide a means to improve care outcomes for this population. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility, usability, and impact of an in-home telehealth device in the care of CMC. Methods: This single-center feasibility study employed a nonblinded randomized clinical trial design. English-speaking caregivers of children within a pediatric complex care program with home Wi-Fi were eligible for participation. Participants were randomized 1.5:1 with stratification based on tracheostomy status to a control group that received usual care or an intervention group that received a telehealth device for in-home use. Patients were followed up for 4 months. The primary outcome was successful device connectivity and data transmission. Data included clinician encounter device usability; caregiver satisfaction; and encounter type, purpose, and cost. Descriptive statistics, negative binomial regression, and Kaplan-Meier plot were used for analysis. Results: Twenty-four patients were enrolled (9 controls, 15 in the intervention group) in September 2016. The telehealth device was attempted in 73 encounters. Device connectivity was successful 96% of the time. Image and sound quality were acceptable in 98% of visits. Caregivers expressed their overall satisfaction with the device. The hospitalization rate was lower in the intervention group (0.77 vs. 1.14 intensive care unit days/patient-months), resulting in $9,425/USD per patient savings compared with the control group. Conclusion: Despite small sample size and short observation period, this study demonstrated that use of an in-home telehealth device is feasible, well received by caregivers, and can result in decreased hospitalizations when compared with usual care.