Airway clearance therapy (ACT) is used in a variety of settings for a variety of ailments. These guidelines were developed from a systematic review with the purpose of determining whether the use of nonpharmacologic ACT improves oxygenation, reduces length of time on the ventilator, reduces stay in the ICU, resolves atelectasis/consolidation, and/or improves respiratory mechanics, versus usual care in 3 populations. For hospitalized, adult and pediatric patients without cystic fibrosis, 1) chest physiotherapy (CPT) is not recommended for the routine treatment of uncomplicated pneumonia; 2) ACT is not recommended for routine use in patients with COPD; 3) ACT may be considered in patients with COPD with symptomatic secretion retention, guided by patient preference, toleration, and effectiveness of therapy; 4) ACT is not recommended if the patient is able to mobilize secretions with cough, but instruction in effective cough technique may be useful. For adult and pediatric patients with neuromuscular disease, respiratory muscle weakness, or impaired cough, 1) cough assist techniques should be used in patients with neuromuscular disease, particularly when peak cough flow is < 270 L/min; CPT, positive expiratory pressure, intrapulmonary percussive ventilation, and high-frequency chest wall compression cannot be recommended, due to insufficient evidence. For postoperative adult and pediatric patients, 1) incentive spirometry is not recommended for routine, prophylactic use in postoperative patients, 2) early mobility and ambulation is recommended to reduce postoperative complications and promote airway clearance, 3) ACT is not recommended for routine postoperative care. The lack of available high-level evidence related to ACT should prompt the design and completion of properly designed studies to determine the appropriate role for these therapies.
Disease processes can impair ciliary function, alter secretion production and mucus rheology, and interfere with the cough reflex. Airway clearance therapy has been a cornerstone of therapy aimed at minimizing the devastating effects of airway obstruction, infection, and inflammation due to mucus stasis on the conducting airways and lung parenchyma. Although challenges to performing clinical studies evaluating the effectiveness of airway clearance therapeutic modalities exist, resources are available in the literature. In addition to device evaluations and original clinical research, the expert opinion, systematic reviews, and evidence-based practice guidelines can be found. These tools can be used to develop protocols and pathways to guide our practice. Monitoring and reporting patient, process, and financial outcomes are essential steps germane to the implementation of evidence-based care.
Aerosolized medications are used as airway clearance therapy to treat a variety of airway diseases. These guidelines were developed from a systematic review with the purpose of determining whether the use of these medications to promote airway clearance improves oxygenation and respiratory mechanics, reduces ventilator time and ICU stay, and/or resolves atelectasis/consolidation compared with usual care. Recombinant human dornase alfa should not be used in hospitalized adult and pediatric patients without cystic fibrosis. The routine use of bronchodilators to aid in secretion clearance is not recommended. The routine use of aerosolized N-acetylcysteine to improve airway clearance is not recommended. Aerosolized agents to change mucus biophysical properties or promote airway clearance are not recommended for adult or pediatric patients with neuromuscular disease, respiratory muscle weakness, or impaired cough. Mucolytics are not recommended to treat atelectasis in postoperative adult or pediatric patients, and the routine administration of bronchodilators to postoperative patients is not recommended. There is no high-level evidence related to the use of bronchodilators, mucolytics, mucokinetics, and novel therapy to promote airway clearance in these populations.
Teresa A Volsko MHHS RRT FAARC, Kathy Fedor RRT-NPS, Jason Amadei RRT, and Robert L Chatburn MHHS RRT-NPS FAARC BACKGROUND: Limited data are available to describe the CPAP effects that can be expected when using high flow with a traditional nasal cannula. OBJECTIVE: To describe the relationship between the pressure generated at the airway opening and flow through a nasal cannula using a simulated infant model. We hypothesized that positive pressure generated by a standard cannula at flows > 2 L/min would be minimal and clinically unimportant. METHODS: Nares were simulated with holes drilled in a plastic fixture. A nares template for CPAP prongs served as a sizing template for the holes. Small, medium, and large nares fixtures were constructed and connected to a lung simulator that simulated spontaneous breathing. Respiratory muscle pressure was simulated by setting a waveform and adjusting the amplitude to deliver a range of tidal volumes (V T ) from 3 mL to 12 mL. Lung compliance and resistance were set at 0.
Statistically significant and clinically relevant variations in Ppeak, PEP, and pressure amplitude occurred between devices and within a device, as the resistance setting changed. The combination of device, time, and resistance settings affects OPEP device output for pressure, amplitude, and oscillatory frequency. Functional variations may impact therapeutic effectiveness, warranting additional study to determine clinical impact.
BACKGROUND: Bubble CPAP, used for spontaneously breathing infants to avoid intubation or postextubation support, can be delivered with different interface types. This study compared the effect that interfaces had on CPAP delivery. We hypothesized that there would be no difference between set and measured levels between interface types. METHODS: A validated preterm infant nasal airway model was attached to the ASL 5000 breathing simulator. The simulator was programmed to deliver active breathing of a surfactant-deficient premature infant with breathing frequency at 70 breaths/min inspiratory time of 0.30 s, resistance of 150 cm H 2 O/L/s, compliance of 0.5 mL/cm H 2 O, tidal volume of 5 mL, and esophageal pressure of ؊10 cm H 2 O. Nasal CPAP prongs, size 4030, newborn and infant RAM cannulas were connected to a nasal airway model and a bubble CPAP system. CPAP levels were set at 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 cm H 2 O with flows of 6, 8, and 10 L/min each. Measurements were recorded after 1 min of stabilization. The analysis was performed using SAS 9.4. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test assessed normality of the data. The Friedman test was used to compare non-normally distributed repeated measures. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to conduct post hoc analysis. All tests were 2-sided, and P values of <.05 were considered as indicating significant differences unless otherwise indicated. RESULTS: At lower set CPAP levels, 4 -6 cm H 2 O, measured CPAP dropped precipitously with the nasal prongs with the highest flow setting. At higher CPAP levels, 7-9 cm H 2 O measured CPAP concomitantly increased as the flow setting increased. Statistically significant differences in set and measured CPAP occurred for all devices across all CPAP levels, with the measured CPAP less than set for all conditions, P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Set flow had a profound effect on measured CPAP. The concomitant drop in measured pressure with high and low flows could be attributed to increased resistance to spontaneous breathing or insufficient flow to meet inspiratory demand. Clinicians should be aware of the effect that the interface and flow have on CPAP delivery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.