Anne D Zakrajsek, Lissy Kesterson, Marty O Visscher, Vivek Narendran, Orlando S Hoilett, Eric A Nauman
{"title":"Neonatal Noninvasive Ventilation Nasal Mask Interface Pressure and the Inter-Individual Variation of Mask Placement.","authors":"Anne D Zakrajsek, Lissy Kesterson, Marty O Visscher, Vivek Narendran, Orlando S Hoilett, Eric A Nauman","doi":"10.4187/respcare.12217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation for CPAP as an alternative to mechanical ventilation for treatment of neonatal respiratory distress prompted a rapid shift to noninvasive ventilation (NIV). Since most patients receive nasal bubble CPAP (a form of NIV), a concomitant increase in nasal pressure injuries followed. This prospective observational study aims to develop strategies to reduce nasal mask pressure injury in neonates by 1.) quantifying CPAP mask-interface pressure and 2.) assessing placement variability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 1F MEMS Connect pressure sensor (Millar®) was modified for contact pressure measurements with silicone embedding and calibrated. The CPAP generator and interface components were sized for a 24-week neonatal simulator. Thirteen neonatal ICU staff placed the simulator on CPAP at 6 cmH<sub>2</sub>O and 8 L/min of flow with no humidification. Pressure was measured at three locations (the forehead, nasal bridge, and philtrum) in triplicate (three measurements per site). Descriptive statistics, a location-specific, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a Tukey post hoc test, and a two-sample paired <i>t</i>-test of the means of the first and last triplicate were performed (Minitab, LLC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pressure ranged from 12.3 to 377.3 mmHg. The mean (SD) interface pressure at the philtrum was significantly higher than both the nasal bridge and the forehead (philtrum: 173.9 (101.3), nasal bridge: 67.79 (28.9), and forehead 79.02 (36.87), <i>p</i> ˂ 0.001). CPAP fixation varied, including bonnet placement, trunk angle, mask compression, use of hook and loop extenders, and level of vigorous bubble feedback achieved.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study developed a modified pressure sensor for quantifying the pressure exerted by a nasal mask on facial skin. Maximum pressures were higher than those previously reported. Inter-individual differences were present in both quantitative and qualitative measures of pressure. Reduction of NIV-associated pressure injuries may be achieved through NIV fixation technique training and improved nasal mask stability and size increments.</p>","PeriodicalId":21125,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.12217","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation for CPAP as an alternative to mechanical ventilation for treatment of neonatal respiratory distress prompted a rapid shift to noninvasive ventilation (NIV). Since most patients receive nasal bubble CPAP (a form of NIV), a concomitant increase in nasal pressure injuries followed. This prospective observational study aims to develop strategies to reduce nasal mask pressure injury in neonates by 1.) quantifying CPAP mask-interface pressure and 2.) assessing placement variability.
Methods: A 1F MEMS Connect pressure sensor (Millar®) was modified for contact pressure measurements with silicone embedding and calibrated. The CPAP generator and interface components were sized for a 24-week neonatal simulator. Thirteen neonatal ICU staff placed the simulator on CPAP at 6 cmH2O and 8 L/min of flow with no humidification. Pressure was measured at three locations (the forehead, nasal bridge, and philtrum) in triplicate (three measurements per site). Descriptive statistics, a location-specific, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a Tukey post hoc test, and a two-sample paired t-test of the means of the first and last triplicate were performed (Minitab, LLC).
Results: Pressure ranged from 12.3 to 377.3 mmHg. The mean (SD) interface pressure at the philtrum was significantly higher than both the nasal bridge and the forehead (philtrum: 173.9 (101.3), nasal bridge: 67.79 (28.9), and forehead 79.02 (36.87), p ˂ 0.001). CPAP fixation varied, including bonnet placement, trunk angle, mask compression, use of hook and loop extenders, and level of vigorous bubble feedback achieved.
Conclusions: This study developed a modified pressure sensor for quantifying the pressure exerted by a nasal mask on facial skin. Maximum pressures were higher than those previously reported. Inter-individual differences were present in both quantitative and qualitative measures of pressure. Reduction of NIV-associated pressure injuries may be achieved through NIV fixation technique training and improved nasal mask stability and size increments.
期刊介绍:
RESPIRATORY CARE is the official monthly science journal of the American Association for Respiratory Care. It is indexed in PubMed and included in ISI''s Web of Science.