ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hilbert, G
Right arrow Articles by Cardinaud, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hilbert, G
Right arrow Articles by Cardinaud, J.
Eur Respir J 2000; 16: 710-716
Copyright © ERS Journals Ltd 2000


Original Articles

Noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure. Quite low time consumption for nurses

G Hilbert, D Gruson, F Vargas, R Valentino, L Portel, G Gbikpi-Benissan, and JP Cardinaud

Methods of noninvasive pressure support ventilation (NIPSV) are not always easy to apply in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The assistance time spent by nurses in relation to ventilatory time was prospectively studied, when NIPSV was used, in a sequential mode, in COPD patients with either acute exacerbations (58 patients, group I) or postextubation hypercapnic respiratory insufficiency (42 patients, group II) in a medical intensive care unit. During the first 24 h after enrolment, NIPSV was used for 6.7+/-3.2 h (mean+/-SD) in group I and 5.6+/-3.1 h in group II; the duration of NIPSV sessions and the nurse time consumption per session were respectively 47+/-12 and 11+/-7 min in group 1, and 46+/-12 and 11+/-6 min in group II. After the first 24 h of the study, the duration of NIPSV was 4.7+/-3.2 h x day(-1) in group I and 4.9+/-3.5 h x day(-1) in group II, and the nurse time consumption dropped significantly: the duration of NIPSV sessions and the nurse time consumption per session were respectively 44+/-10 and 7+/-4 min in group I, and 47+/-14 and 7+/-3 min in group II. Between the first 24 h and the subsequent period of 24 h, the nursing time dropped significantly (98 versus 59 min in group I (p<0.05), and 85 versus 52 min in group II (p<0.05)). There was no difference in the duration of NIPSV sessions, or in the overall assistance time per session, between the two groups of patients. In conclusion, the study seems to favour a quite low assistance time spent by nurses in relation to ventilatory time when noninvasive pressure support ventilation is used in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with either acute exacerbations or postextubation hypercapnic respiratory insufficiency.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Eur Respir JHome page
M.W. Elliott, M. Confalonieri, and S. Nava
Where to perform noninvasive ventilation?
Eur. Respir. J., June 1, 2002; 19(6): 1159 - 1166.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ThoraxHome page
Non-invasive ventilation in acute respiratory failure
Thorax, March 1, 2002; 57(3): 192 - 211.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
M. R. Lessard
Noninvasive ventilation in the ICU / La ventilation non invasive aux soins intensifs
Can J Anesth, June 1, 2001; 48(90001): R2 - 2.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the European Respiratory Society.