Observational cohort study of changing trends in non-invasive ventilation in very preterm infants and associations with clinical outcomes
- PMID: 34413093
- DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2021-322390
Observational cohort study of changing trends in non-invasive ventilation in very preterm infants and associations with clinical outcomes
Abstract
Objective: To determine the change in non-invasive ventilation (NIV) use over time in infants born at <32 weeks' gestation and the associated clinical outcomes.
Study design: Retrospective cohort study using routinely recorded data from the National Neonatal Research Database of infants born at <32 weeks admitted to neonatal units in England and Wales from 2010 to 2017.
Results: In 56 537 infants, NIV use increased significantly between 2010 and 2017 (continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) from 68.5% to 80.2% in 2017 and high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) from 14% to 68%, respectively) (p<0.001)). Use of NIV as the initial mode of respiratory support also increased (CPAP, 21.5%-28.0%; HFNC, 1%-7% (p<0.001)).HFNC was used earlier, and for longer, in those who received CPAP or mechanical ventilation. HFNC use was associated with decreased odds of death before discharge (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.19, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.22). Infants receiving CPAP but no HFNC died at an earlier median chronological age: CPAP group, 22 (IQR 10-39) days; HFNC group 40 (20-76) days (p<0.001). Among survivors, HFNC use was associated with increased odds of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) (aOR 2.98, 95% CI 2.81 to 3.15) and other adverse outcomes.
Conclusions: NIV use is increasing, particularly as initial respiratory support. HFNC use has increased significantly with a sevenfold increase soon after birth which was associated with higher rates of BPD. As more infants survive with BPD, we need robust clinical evidence, to improve outcomes with the use of NIV as initial and ongoing respiratory support.
Keywords: epidemiology; intensive care units; neonatal; neonatology.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: LSa was funded by the Health Education England, Academic Foundation Training Programme. SO has received funds from the National Institute of Health Research, UK and the Medical Research Council, UK for other research.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials