Use Of High-flow Nasal Therapy Research Articles

International Survey of High-Flow Nasal Therapy Use for Respiratory Failure in Adult Patients.

(1) Background: High-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) has shown several benefits in addressing respiratory failure. However, the quality of evidence and the guidance for safe practice are lacking. This survey aimed to understand HFNT practice and the needs of the clinical community to support safe practice. (2) Method: A survey questionnaire was developed and distributed to relevant healthcare professionals through national networks in the UK, USA and Canada; responses were collected between October 2020 and April 2021. (3) Results: In the UK and Canada, HFNT was used in 95% of hospitals, with the highest use being in the emergency department. HNFT was widely used outside of a critical care setting. HFNT was mostly used to treat acute type 1 respiratory failure (98%), followed by acute type 2 respiratory failure and chronic respiratory failure. Guideline development was felt to be important (96%) and urgent (81%). Auditing of practice was lacking in 71% of hospitals. In the USA, HFNT was broadly similar to UK and Canadian practice. (4) Conclusions: The survey results reveal several key points: (a) HFNT is used in clinical conditions with limited evidence; (b) there is a lack of auditing; (c) it is used in wards that may not have the appropriate skill mix; and (d) there is a lack of guidance for HFNT use.

Effect of high-flow nasal therapy on patient-centred outcomes in patients at high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after cardiac surgery: a study protocol for a multicentre adaptive randomised controlled trial

BackgroundHigh-flow nasal therapy is a non-invasive form of respiratory support that delivers low-level, flow dependent positive airway pressure. The device can be better tolerated by patients than alternatives such as continuous positive airway pressure. The primary objective is to determine if prophylactic high-flow nasal therapy after tracheal extubation can result in an increase in the number of days alive and at home within the first 90 days after surgery, when compared with standard oxygen therapy. The co-primary objective is to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of high-flow nasal therapy vs standard oxygen therapy at 90 days, from the view-point of the public sector, the health service and patients.MethodsThis is an adaptive, multicentre, international parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with embedded cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the use of high-flow nasal therapy with control in patients at high risk of respiratory complications following cardiac surgery. Participants will be randomised before tracheal extubation and allocated either high-flow nasal therapy or standard oxygen therapy for a minimum of 16 h immediately post extubation. Participants will be followed up until 90 days after surgery. The total sample size needed to detect a 2-day increase in DAH90 with 90% power with an intention to treat analysis is 850 patients. The adaptive design includes an interim sample size re-estimation which will provide protection against deviations from the original sample size assumptions made from the single-centre pilot study and will allow for a maximum sample size increase to 1152 patients.DiscussionEvidence to support routine use of high-flow nasal therapy will inform the development of effective enhanced recovery care bundles. Reducing complications should reduce length of stay and re-admission to hospital and provide an important focus for cost reduction. However; high-quality studies evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of high-flow nasal therapy after cardiothoracic surgery are lacking.Trial registrationThe study has been registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN14092678, 13/05/2020)Clinicaltrials.gov Registration Pending

Feasibility of Using Daily Home High-Flow Nasal Therapy in COPD Patients Following a Recent COPD Hospitalization.

High-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) has beneficial effects in patients hospitalized with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. HFNT has not been extensively studied following hospitalization for an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). We explored the feasibility of conducting a multicentered trial to evaluate the use of HFNT to increase the time to next moderate/ severe exacerbation in patients recently hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation. In this pilot study we measured the hours of home daily HFNT use, maximally tolerated flow rates and temperature, and side effects for a period of 90 days. Patients were enrolled in a 90-day, open-labeled pilot study of HFNT to determine the safety and feasibility of home use for daily outpatient COPD management. Patients ≥ 40 years of age with prior hospitalization within the past 12 weeks for an AECOPD were enrolled. COPD was the primary diagnosis in all patients. Thirty patients presented for HFNT titration. Two dropped out; 1 after receiving a lung transplant and the other was lost to follow-up. The remaining 28 patients completed 90 days of HFNT. None withdrew from HFNT due to intolerance. Use of HFNT averaged 6.8 (2.1) hours daily. Daily home HFNT for up to 3 months is feasible in COPD patients following hospitalization for AECOPD. Improvements observed in disease-specific quality of life, respiratory symptoms, and 6-minute walk distance suggest the need for a prospective multicenter controlled clinical trial.

Utility of the ROX Index in Predicting Intubation for Patients With COVID-19–Related Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure Receiving High-Flow Nasal Therapy: Retrospective Cohort Study

BackgroundThe use of high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) to treat COVID-19 pneumonia has been greatly debated around the world due to concerns about increased health care worker transmission and delays in invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Herein, we analyzed the utility of the noninvasive ROX (ratio of oxygen saturation) index to predict the need for and timing of IMV.ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess whether the ROX index can be a useful score to predict intubation and IMV in patients receiving HFNT as treatment for COVID-19–related hypoxemic respiratory failure.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort analysis of 129 consecutive patients with COVID-19 admitted to Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, PA, from March 10, 2020, to May 17, 2020. This is a single-center study conducted in designated COVID-19 units (intensive care unit and other wards) at Temple University Hospital. Patients with moderate and severe hypoxemic respiratory failure treated with HFNT were included in the study. HFNT patients were divided into two groups: HFNT only and intubation (ie, patients who progressed from HFNT to IMV). The primary outcome was the value of the ROX index in predicting the need for IMV. Secondary outcomes were mortality, rate of intubation, length of stay, and rate of nosocomial infections in a cohort treated initially with HFNT.ResultsOf the 837 patients with COVID-19, 129 met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 60.8 (SD 13.6) years, mean BMI was 32.6 (SD 8) kg/m², 58 (45%) were female, 72 (55.8%) were African American, 40 (31%) were Hispanic, and 48 (37.2%) were nonsmokers. The mean time to intubation was 2.5 (SD 3.3) days. An ROX index value of less than 5 at HFNT initiation was suggestive of progression to IMV (odds ratio [OR] 2.137, P=.052). Any further decrease in ROX index value after HFNT initiation was predictive of intubation (OR 14.67, P<.001). Mortality was 11.2% (n=10) in the HFNT-only group versus 47.5% (n=19) in the intubation group (P<.001). Mortality and need for pulmonary vasodilators were higher in the intubation group.ConclusionsThe ROX index helps decide which patients need IMV and may limit eventual morbidity and mortality associated with the progression to IMV.

High flow nasal oxygen for acute type two respiratory failure: a systematic review

Background: Acute type two respiratory failure (AT2RF) is characterized by high carbon dioxide levels (PaCO 2 >6kPa). Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), the current standard of care, has a high failure rate. High flow nasal therapy (HFNT) has potential additional benefits such as CO 2 clearance, the ability to communicate and comfort. The primary aim of this systematic review is to determine whether HFNT in AT2RF improves 1) PaCO 2, 2) clinical and patient-centred outcomes and 3) to assess potential harms. Methods: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL (January 1999-January 2021). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing HFNT with low flow nasal oxygen (LFO) or NIV were included. Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, data extraction and risk of bias. We used Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs and Ottawa-Newcastle scale for cohort studies. Results: From 727 publications reviewed, four RCTs and one cohort study (n=425) were included. In three trials of HFNT vs NIV, comparing PaCO 2 (kPa) at last follow-up time point, there was a significant reduction at four hours(1 RCT; HFNT median 6.7, IQR 5.6 - 7.7 vs NIV median 7.6, IQR 6.3 - 9.3) and no significant difference at 24-hours or five days. Comparing HFNT with LFO, there was no significant difference at 30-minutes. There was no difference in intubation or mortality. Conclusions: This review identified a small number of studies with low to very low certainty of evidence. A reduction of PaCO 2 at an early time point of four hours post-intervention was demonstrated in one small RCT. Significant limitations of the included studies were lack of adequately powered outcomes and clinically relevant time-points and small sample size. Accordingly, systematic review cannot recommend the use of HFNT as the initial management strategy for AT2RF and trials adequately powered to detect clinical and patient-relevant outcomes are urgently warranted.

Noninvasive Ventilation and High-Flow Nasal Therapy Administration in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations

Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is considered to be the standard of care for the management of acute hypercapnic respiratory failure in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation. It can be delivered safely in any dedicated setting, from emergency rooms to high dependency or intensive care units and wards. NIV helps improving dyspnea and gas exchange, reduces the need for endotracheal intubation, and morbidity and mortality rates. It is therefore recognized as the gold standard in this condition. High-flow nasal therapy helps improving ventilatory efficiency and reducing the work of breathing in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Early studies indicate that some patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure can be managed with high-flow nasal therapy, but more information is needed before specific recommendations for this therapy can be made. Therefore, high-flow nasal therapy use should be individualized in each particular situation and institution, taking into account resources, and local and personal experience with all respiratory support therapies.

High Flow Nasal Therapy Use in Patients with Acute Exacerbation of COPD and Bronchiectasis: A Feasibility Study

The efficacy and feasibility of high flow nasal therapy (HFNT) use in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) and bronchiectasis is unknown. We performed a single-center, single-arm prospective observational study in patients with AECOPD, documented bronchiectasis, pH ≥ 7.35, respiratory rate (RR) ≥ 26 breaths/minute despite receiving maximal medical treatment and oxygen via face mask up to 10 L/m. Patients received HFNT (Airvo 2, Fisher & Paykel) at a gas flow of 50 L/min and FIO2 adjusted to maintain SpO2 ≥92%. Dyspnea, rated by Borg scale, RR, arterial blood gases and mucus production (ranging from 1 to 3) were collected before and 1 h after starting HFNT and then every 24 h for 3 days. Tolerance was measured using a visual analogic scale (VAS). Fifteen patients were enrolled. After 24 h, patients showed a significant improvement in dyspnea score [Borg scale from 6.7 ± 1.4 to 4.1 ± 1.3 (p<.001)]; RR decreased from 29.6 ± 2.7 breaths/min to 23.2 ± 2.9 breaths/min (p<.001); pCO2 significantly decreased after 24 h [58.4 ± 13 vs. 51.7 ± 8.2 (p=.003)] while quantity of mucus production increased [(1.1 ± 0,6 vs. 2.4 ± 0.7, p<.001)]. No patient received invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation. Overall VAS score for HFNT tolerance was 6.5. HFNT was effective in improving dyspnea score, decreasing RR, improving gas exchange, and increasing mucus production in patients with AECOPD and coexisting bronchiectasis. Moreover, no safety concerns on its use were detected. Nevertheless, due to the single-arm design, the effect of HFNT could not be isolated from standard pharmacological treatment due to the study design.

Tolerability and Safety of High-Flow Nasal Therapy in Patients Hospitalized with an Exacerbation of COPD.

The effect of high-flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in individuals with an exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and hypercapnia is not well studied. We assessed patient tolerance and impact of air-gas therapy delivered by humidified HFNT (20-35 L/min) on gas exchange in hypercapnic COPD patients during hospitalization for COPD exacerbation. We hypothesized that HFNT use would be safe and well tolerated in individuals hospitalized for COPD exacerbation regardless of the degree of hypercapnia. Patients hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation were included if they were hypercapnic (arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide [PaCO2] > 45 mmHg), ≥ 10 pack-year history, and agreed to treatment with HFNT, along with daily arterial blood gas (ABG) samples and bedside spirometry. They were placed on a HFNT system following admission for at least 3 days with an air-gas blend to maintain a flow rate between 20-35 L/min and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) titrated to keep oxygen saturation (SaO2) values > 90%. Patient tolerance of HFNT and evidence of clinical deterioration as defined by worsening hypoxia or hypercapnia was the primary endpoint. Ten consecutive patients participated in the study. The patients had frequent prior exacerbations, were hypercapnic, dyspneic, and gas trapped. Participants received an air-gas flow rate (median [interquartile range (IQR)] 25 (IQR 20-30) L/min and FiO2 of 30 (IQR 30-30) %. There was no increase in PaCO2- levels (p = 0.26) or dyspnea (Borg scale, p= 0.52) while using HFNT. No patient discontinued HFNT, had further decompensation, required non-invasive ventilation or intubation during the study period. In a pilot study, patients experiencing a severe COPD exacerbation were able to tolerate continuous HFNT safely regardless of degree of hypercapnia.

High‐flow nasal therapy – modelling the mechanism

High‐flow nasal therapy – modelling the mechanism

OC04 - A weaning plan for high flow nasal therapy (HFNT) in bronchiolitis - a nurse-led initiative.

Theme: Nursing education, management and leadership. The use of HFNT in bronchiolitis is a new phenomenon in paediatrics, with insufficient evidence on its effectiveness (Beggs et al 2014). This paper reports the findings of a clinical audit which resulted in the development of a nurse-led weaning plan to support infant recovery with the potential to reduce hospital stay. To highlight the effectiveness of a nurse-led weaning plan in a general paediatric unit. The data of 32 infants were analysed between October 2014 and March 2015. Further data will be collected between October 2015 and March 2016. Data will then be compared. Initial data demonstrates the average time infants spent on HFNT was 2.6 days compared to five days in previous studies (Bressan et al 2013). A nurse-led weaning plan has been developed from data collected. The audit demonstrates a clinical need for efficient weaning of infants on HFNT.