Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2018
National surveys of UK and Italian neonatal units highlighted significant differences in the use of non-invasive respiratory support.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bresesti Ilia, Zivanovic Sanja, Ives Kevin Nicolas, Lista Gianluca, Roehr Charles Christoph
Аннотация
AIM: This study compared how non-invasive respiratory support (NRS) was provided in neonatal units in Italy and the UK.
METHODS: An NRS questionnaire was sent to tertiary neonatal centres, identified by national societies, from November 2015 to May 2016.
RESULTS: Responses were received from 49/57 (86%) UK units and 103/115 (90%) Italian units. NRS was started in the delivery room by 61% of UK units and 85% of Italian units. In neonatal intensive care units, 33% of UK units used nasal high-flow therapy (HFT) as primary support, compared to 3% in Italy. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was used in 57% of UK units and 90% of Italian units. The commonest starting flow rate on nasal HFT for term and preterm infants was 6 L/min in the UK, while Italian units mainly used this flow for term infants. In the UK, 67% of units decreased nasal HFT by 1 L/min per day. In Italy, infants on nasal CPAP were weaned by 1 cm H2 O per day in 39% of units.
CONCLUSION: The way that NRS was managed for very preterm infants differed between the UK and Italy, reflecting a lack of evidence on optimal NRS and the use of local protocols.
METHODS: An NRS questionnaire was sent to tertiary neonatal centres, identified by national societies, from November 2015 to May 2016.
RESULTS: Responses were received from 49/57 (86%) UK units and 103/115 (90%) Italian units. NRS was started in the delivery room by 61% of UK units and 85% of Italian units. In neonatal intensive care units, 33% of UK units used nasal high-flow therapy (HFT) as primary support, compared to 3% in Italy. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was used in 57% of UK units and 90% of Italian units. The commonest starting flow rate on nasal HFT for term and preterm infants was 6 L/min in the UK, while Italian units mainly used this flow for term infants. In the UK, 67% of units decreased nasal HFT by 1 L/min per day. In Italy, infants on nasal CPAP were weaned by 1 cm H2 O per day in 39% of units.
CONCLUSION: The way that NRS was managed for very preterm infants differed between the UK and Italy, reflecting a lack of evidence on optimal NRS and the use of local protocols.