Bubble CPAP therapy for neonatal respiratory distress in level III neonatal unit in Amman, Jordan: a prospective observational study

RAM Cannula Versus Bi-Nasal Prongs as Respiratory Device Interfaces in Neonates of Thirty-Two or More Weeks of Gestation With Respiratory Distress: The First "ProRAM" Randomized Trial Report

Background

Using bilateral short nasal prongs as an interface for noninvasive respiratory support is challenging, and it is associated with nasal injury. We aimed to compare RAM cannula with nasal prongs in delivering noninvasive ventilation to newborn infants.

Methods

This is a single-center randomized trial (trial registry: ISRCTN10561691). The setting involves a tertiary neonatal unit with a capacity of 30 beds and more than 13 years of experience in neonatal noninvasive ventilation. We included 50 infants born at ≥ 32 weeks of gestation, who had respiratory distress at birth. We excluded those with major congenital anomalies and those who required intubation in the delivery room. Primary outcomes were intubation rate and use of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NIPPV); other outcomes included air leak and nasal injury rate. The infants were assigned using randomly generated numbers into bi-nasal prong and RAM canula groups in a 1:1 ratio.

Results

Two and four babies in the RAM and prong groups, respectively, were upgraded to NIPPV (P = 0.600). One versus no baby in the RAM vs. prong groups was intubated (P = 1.000). Newborns in the prong group required oxygen support for a longer period (mean duration: 154.6 ± 255.2 h) than those in the RAM group (40.7 ± 72.6 h, P = 0.030). None of the patients in the RAM group had traumatic nasal injury compared to five babies in the prong group (P = 0.050). Four babies in our study developed air leaks, with two in each group.

Conclusions

The use of RAM cannula in delivering noninvasive ventilation to newborns ≥ 32 weeks of age did not affect the noninvasive ventilation failure rate or incidence of air leak. The use was associated with a shorter duration of respiratory support and a reduced risk of nasal septal injury.

Experiences with implementation of continuous positive airway pressure for neonates and infants in low-resource settings: A scoping review

Background

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the gold standard of care in providing non-invasive positive pressure support to neonates in respiratory distress in high-resource settings. While safety has been demonstrated in low-resource settings, there is a lack of knowledge on the barriers and facilitators to proper implementation.

Objective

To identify and describe the barriers, facilitators, and priorities for future implementation of CPAP for neonates and infants in low-resource settings.

Methods

A systematic search (database inception to March 6, 2020) was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Global Health, and the WHO Global Index Medicus using PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Original research articles pertaining to implementation of CPAP devices in low-resource settings, provider or parent perspectives and experiences with CPAP, cost-benefit analyses, and cost-effectiveness studies were included. Inductive content analysis was conducted.

Findings

1385 article were screened and 54 studies across 19 countries met inclusion criteria. Six major themes emerged: device attributes, patient experiences, parent experiences, provider experiences, barriers, and facilitators. Nasal trauma was the most commonly reported complication. Barriers included unreliable electricity and lack of bioengineering support. Facilitators included training, mentorship and empowerment of healthcare providers. Device design, supply chain infrastructure, and training models were imperative to the adoption and sustainability of CPAP.

Conclusion

Sustainable implementation of CPAP in low resource settings requires easy-to-use devices, ready access to consumables, and holistic, user-driven training. Further research is necessary on standardizing metrics, interventions that support optimal provider performance, and conditions needed for successful long-term health system integration.

Bubble Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (bNCPAP): An Effective Low-Cost Intervention for Resource-Constrained Settings

Preterm birth complications are responsible for almost one-third of the global neonatal mortality burden, and respiratory distress syndrome remains the single most common cause of these preventable deaths. Since its inception, almost half a century ago, nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) has evolved to become the primary modality for neonatal respiratory care in both the developed and developing world. Although evidence has demonstrated the effectiveness of low-cost bubble NCPAP in reducing newborn mortality, its widespread use is yet to be seen in resource-constrained settings. Moreover, many tertiary hospitals in developing countries still utilise an inexpensive locally assembled bNCPAP system of unknown efficacy and safety. This review provides a brief overview of the history, physiological benefits, indications, contraindications, and complications of bNCPAP. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of low-cost bNCPAP in the neonatal intensive care unit is also summarised. The article further details a locally assembled bNCPAP system used in resource-constrained settings and highlights the care package for neonates receiving bNCPAP, failure criteria, and strategies for weaning.

Randomized trial of mask or prongs for nasal intermittent mandatory ventilation in term infants with transient tachypnea of the newborn

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare nasal masks (NM) with binasal prongs (NP) for applying nasal intermittent mandatory ventilation (NIMV) by assessing the duration of respiratory distress, rate of intubation, and nasal trauma in term infants with transient tachypnea of the newborn (TTN).

METHODS

Infants with a gestational age ≥37 weeks and birthweight ≥2,000 g who had NIMV administered for TTN were enrolled. We randomly allocated 80 neonates to the NM (n = 40) or NP (n = 40) group. Duration of respiratory distress was the primary outcome of this study.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for the duration of tachypnea and NIMV (P = 0.94 and P = 0.13, respectively). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of duration of oxygen supplementation and length of hospitalization (P = 0.72 and P = 0.70, respectively). The incidence of any grade of trauma and moderate trauma (grade II) was significantly higher in the NP group than in the NM group (P = 0.004 and P = 0.04, respectively). The rate of NIMV failure and other complications, including pneumothorax, pneumonia and feeding intolerance, was not significantly different in the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In term infants with TTN, delivering NIMV using NP in comparison to using NM appears to be similar with regard to the duration of respiratory distress and preventing intubation. However, the use of NP involves a greater risk of trauma than that of NM.