Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2007 Jan;33(1):74-81.
doi: 10.1007/s00134-006-0391-3. Epub 2006 Oct 13.

Non-invasive ventilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: helmet versus facial mask

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Non-invasive ventilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients: helmet versus facial mask

Paolo Navalesi et al. Intensive Care Med. 2007 Jan.

Abstract

Rationale: The helmet is a new interface with the potential of increasing the success rate of non-invasive ventilation by improving tolerance.

Objectives: To perform a physiological comparison between the helmet and the conventional facial mask in delivering non-invasive ventilation in hypercapnic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Methods: Prospective, controlled, randomized study with cross-over design. In 10 patients we evaluated gas exchange, inspiratory effort, patient-ventilator synchrony and patient tolerance after 30 min of non-invasive ventilation delivered either by helmet or facial mask; both trials were preceded by periods of spontaneous unassisted breathing.

Measurements: Arterial blood gases, inspiratory effort, duration of diaphragm contraction and ventilator assistance, effort-to-support delays (at the beginning and at the end of inspiration), number of ineffective efforts, and patient comfort.

Main results: Non-invasive ventilation improved gas exchange (p<0.05) and inspiratory effort (p<0.01) with both interfaces. The helmet, however, was less efficient than the mask in reducing inspiratory effort (p<0.05) and worsened the patient-ventilator synchrony, as indicated by the longer delays to trigger on (p<0.05) and cycle off (p<0.05) the mechanical assistance and by the number of ineffective efforts (p<0.005). Patient comfort was no different with the two interfaces.

Conclusions: Helmet and facial mask were equally tolerated and both were effective in ameliorating gas exchange and decreasing inspiratory effort. The helmet, however, was less efficient in decreasing inspiratory effort and worsened the patient-ventilator interaction.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995 Jun;151(6):1799-806 - PubMed
    1. Crit Care Med. 2002 Mar;30(3):602-8 - PubMed
    1. Paediatr Anaesth. 2005 Aug;15(8):699-702 - PubMed
    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001 Feb;163(2):540-77 - PubMed
    1. Intensive Care Med. 1999 Jul;25(7):662-7 - PubMed

Publication types