4.2 Article

Humidification During Invasive and Noninvasive Mechanical Ventilation: 2012

Journal

RESPIRATORY CARE
Volume 57, Issue 5, Pages 782-788

Publisher

DAEDALUS ENTERPRISES INC
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.01766

Keywords

active humidification; heat and moisture exchanger; heated humidifier; hydrophobic; hygroscopic condenser humidification; passive humidification

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We searched the MEDLINE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library databases for articles published between January 1990 and December 2011. The update of this clinical practice guideline is based on 184 clinical trials and systematic reviews, and 10 articles investigating humidification during invasive and noninvasive mechanical ventilation. The following recommendations are made following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) scoring system: 1. Humidification is recommended on every patient receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. 2. Active humidification is suggested for noninvasive mechanical ventilation, as it may improve adherence and comfort. 3. When providing active humidification to patients who are invasively ventilated, it is suggested that the device provide a humidity level between 33 mg H2O/L and 44 mg H2O/L and gas temperature between 34 degrees C and 41 degrees C at the circuit Y-piece, with a relative humidity of 100%. 4. When providing passive humidification to patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation, it is suggested that the HME provide a minimum of 30 mg H2O/L. 5. Passive humidification is not recommended for noninvasive mechanical ventilation. 6. When providing humidification to patients with low tidal volumes, such as when lung-protective ventilation strategies are used, HMEs are not recommended because they contribute additional dead space, which can increase the ventilation requirement and P-aco2. 7. It is suggested that HMEs are not used as a prevention strategy for ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available