4.3 Article

Home noninvasive ventilation use in patients hospitalized with COPD

Journal

CLINICAL RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/crj.13678

Keywords

COPD; hypercapnia; noninvasive ventilation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study aimed to estimate the prevalence of chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure (CHRF) and home noninvasive ventilation (NIV) use in individuals with a history of COPD-related hospitalizations. The retrospective analysis of medical records showed that 52.7% of patients had CompHRF, while only 4.3% used home NIV. The rates increased in patients with multiple hospitalizations. Further research is needed to determine CHRF rates and the underutilization of home NIV in larger samples.
IntroductionThe study objective was to estimate the prevalence of chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure (CHRF) and home noninvasive ventilation (NIV) use in a high-risk population, individuals with a history of at least one COPD-related hospitalizations. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed electronic medical record data of patients with at least one COPD-related hospitalization between October 1, 2011, and September 30, 2017, to the Iowa City VA Medical Center. We excluded individuals with no obstructive ventilatory defect. ResultsOf 186 patients, the overall prevalence of compensated hypercapnic respiratory failure (CompHRF), defined as PaCO2 > 45 mmHg with a pH = 7.35-7.45, was 52.7%, while the overall prevalence of home NIV was 4.3%. The prevalence of CompHRF was 43.6% and home NIV was 1.8% in those with one COPD-related hospitalization. Among those with & GE;4 COPD-related hospitalizations, the prevalence of CompHRF was 77.8% (14 of 18), and home NIV was 11.1% (2 of 18). ConclusionApproximately half of individuals with at least one COPD-related hospitalization have CompHRF, but only 8.2% of those use home NIV. Future studies should estimate CHRF rates and the degree of underutilization of home NIV in larger multicenter samples.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available