Cargando…

Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula

BACKGROUND: The high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) delivers up to 60 l/min of humidified air/oxygen blend at a temperature close to that of the human body. In this study, we tested whether higher temperature and flow decrease patient comfort. In more severe patients, instead, we hypothesized that higher...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mauri, Tommaso, Galazzi, Alessandro, Binda, Filippo, Masciopinto, Laura, Corcione, Nadia, Carlesso, Eleonora, Lazzeri, Marta, Spinelli, Elena, Tubiolo, Daniela, Volta, Carlo Alberto, Adamini, Ileana, Pesenti, Antonio, Grasselli, Giacomo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5941611/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29743098
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-018-2039-4
_version_ 1783321320732229632
author Mauri, Tommaso
Galazzi, Alessandro
Binda, Filippo
Masciopinto, Laura
Corcione, Nadia
Carlesso, Eleonora
Lazzeri, Marta
Spinelli, Elena
Tubiolo, Daniela
Volta, Carlo Alberto
Adamini, Ileana
Pesenti, Antonio
Grasselli, Giacomo
author_facet Mauri, Tommaso
Galazzi, Alessandro
Binda, Filippo
Masciopinto, Laura
Corcione, Nadia
Carlesso, Eleonora
Lazzeri, Marta
Spinelli, Elena
Tubiolo, Daniela
Volta, Carlo Alberto
Adamini, Ileana
Pesenti, Antonio
Grasselli, Giacomo
author_sort Mauri, Tommaso
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) delivers up to 60 l/min of humidified air/oxygen blend at a temperature close to that of the human body. In this study, we tested whether higher temperature and flow decrease patient comfort. In more severe patients, instead, we hypothesized that higher flow might be associated with improved comfort. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, cross-over study was performed on 40 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) patients (PaO(2)/FiO(2) ≤ 300 + pulmonary infiltrates + exclusion of cardiogenic edema) supported by HFNC. The primary outcome was the assessment of patient comfort during HFNC delivery at increasing flow and temperature. Two flows (30 and 60 l/min), each combined with two temperatures (31 and 37 °C), were randomly applied for 20 min (four steps per patient), leaving clinical FiO(2) unchanged. Toward the end of each step, the following were recorded: comfort by Visual Numerical Scale ranging between 1 (extreme discomfort) and 5 (very comfortable), together with respiratory parameters. A subgroup of more severe patients was defined by clinical FiO(2) ≥ 45%. RESULTS: Patient comfort was reported as significantly higher during steps at the lower temperature (31 °C) in comparison to 37 °C, with the HFNC set at both 30 and 60 l/min (p < 0.0001). Higher flow, however, was not associated with poorer comfort. In the subgroup of patients with clinical FiO(2) ≥ 45%, both lower temperature (31 °C) and higher HFNC flow (60 l/min) led to higher comfort (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: HFNC temperature seems to significantly impact the comfort of AHRF patients: for equal flow, lower temperature could be more comfortable. Higher flow does not decrease patient comfort; at variance, it improves comfort in the more severely hypoxemic patient.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5941611
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59416112018-05-14 Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula Mauri, Tommaso Galazzi, Alessandro Binda, Filippo Masciopinto, Laura Corcione, Nadia Carlesso, Eleonora Lazzeri, Marta Spinelli, Elena Tubiolo, Daniela Volta, Carlo Alberto Adamini, Ileana Pesenti, Antonio Grasselli, Giacomo Crit Care Research BACKGROUND: The high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) delivers up to 60 l/min of humidified air/oxygen blend at a temperature close to that of the human body. In this study, we tested whether higher temperature and flow decrease patient comfort. In more severe patients, instead, we hypothesized that higher flow might be associated with improved comfort. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, cross-over study was performed on 40 acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) patients (PaO(2)/FiO(2) ≤ 300 + pulmonary infiltrates + exclusion of cardiogenic edema) supported by HFNC. The primary outcome was the assessment of patient comfort during HFNC delivery at increasing flow and temperature. Two flows (30 and 60 l/min), each combined with two temperatures (31 and 37 °C), were randomly applied for 20 min (four steps per patient), leaving clinical FiO(2) unchanged. Toward the end of each step, the following were recorded: comfort by Visual Numerical Scale ranging between 1 (extreme discomfort) and 5 (very comfortable), together with respiratory parameters. A subgroup of more severe patients was defined by clinical FiO(2) ≥ 45%. RESULTS: Patient comfort was reported as significantly higher during steps at the lower temperature (31 °C) in comparison to 37 °C, with the HFNC set at both 30 and 60 l/min (p < 0.0001). Higher flow, however, was not associated with poorer comfort. In the subgroup of patients with clinical FiO(2) ≥ 45%, both lower temperature (31 °C) and higher HFNC flow (60 l/min) led to higher comfort (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: HFNC temperature seems to significantly impact the comfort of AHRF patients: for equal flow, lower temperature could be more comfortable. Higher flow does not decrease patient comfort; at variance, it improves comfort in the more severely hypoxemic patient. BioMed Central 2018-05-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5941611/ /pubmed/29743098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-018-2039-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Mauri, Tommaso
Galazzi, Alessandro
Binda, Filippo
Masciopinto, Laura
Corcione, Nadia
Carlesso, Eleonora
Lazzeri, Marta
Spinelli, Elena
Tubiolo, Daniela
Volta, Carlo Alberto
Adamini, Ileana
Pesenti, Antonio
Grasselli, Giacomo
Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula
title Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula
title_full Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula
title_fullStr Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula
title_full_unstemmed Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula
title_short Impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula
title_sort impact of flow and temperature on patient comfort during respiratory support by high-flow nasal cannula
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5941611/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29743098
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-018-2039-4
work_keys_str_mv AT mauritommaso impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT galazzialessandro impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT bindafilippo impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT masciopintolaura impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT corcionenadia impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT carlessoeleonora impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT lazzerimarta impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT spinellielena impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT tubiolodaniela impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT voltacarloalberto impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT adaminiileana impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT pesentiantonio impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula
AT grasselligiacomo impactofflowandtemperatureonpatientcomfortduringrespiratorysupportbyhighflownasalcannula