4.5 Article

The use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) as respiratory support in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units in Germany - A nationwide survey

期刊

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
卷 131, 期 -, 页码 210-214

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2017.08.027

关键词

High-flow nasal cannula; Indication; Complication; Flow rate; Pneumothorax; Pediatric intensive care unit

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC)1 is a technique of oxygen supply, initially being used as a potentially less-invasive alternative to nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP)2 for premature infants/neonates, which nowadays crosses the border of neonatal care. HFNC builds up a positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP)3 but lacks the opportunity for continuous monitoring. Therefore, pressure depending complications are a risk. Our goal was to evaluate the current use of HFNC in Germany regarding indications, techniques of application and complications experienced. Studydesign: We used a questionnaire sent to 226 pediatric clinics. Results: We received responses from 67 pediatric clinics (29.6%). HFNC was applied in the age group of 8 to 14 years in 42% and between 14 and 18 years in 33% of the clinics. 54% of the clinics have been using HFNC for more than 3 years. Applied flow rates varied strongly among the clinics. 70% of the clinics use HFNC outside of the established indications (alternative to nCPAP for premature infants and neonates, bronchiolitis) for pneumonia, support after extubation and non-adherence to nCPAP. Severe complications such as pneumothorax have been seen by 17,9% of the clinics. Conclusion: We reported for the first time a nationwide overview about the expanded use of HFNC in pediatric clinics. Our results emphasize the fact that, even though HFNC is widely accepted as a noninvasive procedure there is still a potential of severe side effects. Therefore the use of HFNC should be monitored continuously and closely within an intensive or intermediate care unit. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据