Abramo Thomas, Williams Abby, Mushtaq Samaiya, Meredith Mark, Sepaule Rawle, Crossman Kristen, Burney Jones Cheryl, Godbold Suzanne, Hu Zhuopei, Nick Todd
Division of Pediatric Emergency, Department of Pediatrics, Vanderbilt School of Medicine.
Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of Arkansas School of Medicine Arkansas Children's Hospital Little Rock, Little Rock, Arkansas, USA.
BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 16;7(1):e011845. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011845.
In paediatric moderate-to-severe asthmatics, there is significant bronchospasm, airway obstruction, air trapping causing severe hyperinflation with more positive intraplural pressure preventing passive air movement. These effects cause an increased respiratory rate (RR), less airflow and shortened inspiratory breath time. In certain asthmatics, aerosols are ineffective due to their inadequate ventilation. Bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) in acute paediatric asthmatics can be an effective treatment. BiPAP works by unloading fatigued inspiratory muscles, a direct bronchodilation effect, offsetting intrinsic PEEP and recruiting collapsed alveoli that reduces the patient's work of breathing and achieves their total lung capacity quicker. Unfortunately, paediatric emergency department (PED) BiPAP is underused and quality analysis is non-existent. A PED BiPAP Continuous Quality Improvement Program (CQIP) from 2005 to 2013 was evaluated using descriptive analytics for the primary outcomes of usage, safety, BiPAP settings, therapeutics and patient disposition.
PED BiPAP CQIP descriptive analytics.
Academic PED.
1157 patients.
A PED BiPAP CQIP from 2005 to 2013 for the usage, safety, BiPAP settings, therapeutic response parameters and patient disposition was evaluated using descriptive analytics.
Safety, usage, compliance, therapeutic response parameters, BiPAP settings and patient disposition.
1157 patients had excellent compliance without complications. Only 6 (0.5%) BiPAP patients were intubated. BiPAP median settings: IPAP 18 (16,20) cm HO range 12-28; EPAP 8 cmHO (8,8) range 6-10; inspiratory-to-expiratory time (I:E) ratio 1.75 (1.5,1.75). Pediatric Asthma Severity score and RR decreased (p<0.001) while tidal volume increased (p<0.001). Patient disposition: 325 paediatric intensive care units (PICU), 832 wards, with 52 of these PED ward patients were discharged home with only 2 hours of PED BiPAP with no returning to the PED within 72 hours.
BiPAP is a safe and effective therapeutic option for paediatric patients with asthma presenting to a PED or emergency department. This BiPAP CQIP showed significant patient compliance, no complications, improved therapeutics times, very low intubations and decreased PICU admissions. CQIP analysis demonstrated that using a higher IPAP, low EPAP with longer I:E optimises the patient's BiPAP settings and showed a significant improvement in PAS, RR and tidal volume. BiPAP should be considered as an early treatment in the PED severe or non-responsive moderate asthmatics.
在儿科中重度哮喘患者中,存在显著的支气管痉挛、气道阻塞、气体潴留,导致严重的肺过度充气,胸膜腔内压力更呈正值,阻碍了气体的被动运动。这些效应导致呼吸频率(RR)增加、气流减少和吸气时间缩短。在某些哮喘患者中,由于通气不足,气雾剂治疗无效。双水平气道正压通气(BiPAP)对儿科急性哮喘患者可能是一种有效的治疗方法。BiPAP的作用机制是减轻疲劳的吸气肌负荷,具有直接的支气管扩张作用,抵消内源性呼气末正压(PEEP),使萎陷的肺泡复张,从而减轻患者的呼吸功,并更快地达到其肺总量。不幸的是,儿科急诊科(PED)对BiPAP的使用不足,且不存在质量分析。对2005年至2013年期间的一项PED BiPAP持续质量改进项目(CQIP)进行了评估,采用描述性分析方法分析使用情况、安全性、BiPAP设置、治疗效果和患者处置等主要结果。
PED BiPAP CQIP描述性分析。
学术性PED。
1157例患者。
采用描述性分析方法对2005年至2013年期间的一项PED BiPAP CQIP进行评估,内容包括使用情况、安全性、BiPAP设置、治疗反应参数和患者处置。
安全性、使用情况、依从性、治疗反应参数、BiPAP设置和患者处置。
1157例患者依从性良好,无并发症。仅6例(0.5%)使用BiPAP的患者需要插管。BiPAP的中位设置:吸气相气道正压(IPAP)为18(16,20)cmH₂O,范围为12 - 28;呼气相气道正压(EPAP)为8 cmH₂O(8,8),范围为6 - 10;吸呼比(I:E)为1.75(1.5,1.75)。小儿哮喘严重程度评分和RR降低(p<0.001),而潮气量增加(p<0.001)。患者处置情况:325例入住儿科重症监护病房(PICU),832例入住病房,其中52例PED病房患者仅接受2小时的PED BiPAP治疗后出院,72小时内未再返回PED。
BiPAP对于就诊于PED或急诊科的儿科哮喘患者是一种安全有效的治疗选择。该BiPAP CQIP显示患者依从性良好,无并发症,治疗时间改善,插管率极低,入住PICU的人数减少。CQIP分析表明,使用较高的IPAP、较低的EPAP和较长的I:E可优化患者的BiPAP设置,并使小儿哮喘严重程度评分(PAS)、RR和潮气量有显著改善。对于PED中重度哮喘或治疗无反应的患者,BiPAP应被视为早期治疗方法。