Keep the PEEP: A quality improvement project assessing safety and feasibility of prolonged non-invasive positive end expiratory pressure.

Q2 Medicine
Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-29 DOI:10.1177/19345798251339650
E Sangillo, S Patel, K Nyman, E Cho, E Schofield, C H Driscoll
{"title":"Keep the PEEP: A quality improvement project assessing safety and feasibility of prolonged non-invasive positive end expiratory pressure.","authors":"E Sangillo, S Patel, K Nyman, E Cho, E Schofield, C H Driscoll","doi":"10.1177/19345798251339650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>IntroductionInfants born less than 32-week gestation are at increased risk of respiratory distress syndrome due to underdeveloped pulmonary alveoli. Despite known respiratory benefits associated with positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP), our staff expressed concern that prolonged exposure to PEEP would contribute to increased risk of pneumothorax and delayed initiation of oral feeding.​ This quality improvement project aimed to standardize PEEP use with a guideline for early initiation, continuation, and subsequent discontinuation in infants born at less than 32-week gestation.MethodsWe developed and implemented a \"Keep the PEEP\" guideline, which included recommendations for initiation of PEEP at delivery, continuation through 32-week post-menstrual age (PMA), and discontinuation. Data collection occurred between July 2019-July 2021 (pre-intervention) and July 2021-August 2023 (post-intervention). Data analysis included run charts for monthly compliance, and bivariate analysis of pre- and post-intervention data. Interventions included team member education and team engagement through auditing.ResultsWe achieved a median compliance of 100% with PEEP use through 32-week PMA. We found no statistically significant differences in a pre- versus post-intervention comparison of pneumothorax incidence [14 versus 13, <i>p</i> = 0.86], bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) incidence [82 versus 68, <i>p</i> = 0.65], median post-menstrual age at first oral feed [34.1 versus 34.1, <i>p</i> = 0.56], or median length of stay [55 versus 43, <i>p</i> = 0.2].ConclusionsWe successfully implemented a new respiratory guideline to standardize PEEP use in our unit during the study period. Despite initial concerns, the incidence of pneumothorax and the median gestational age at initiation of oral feedings remained unchanged.</p>","PeriodicalId":16537,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine","volume":" ","pages":"362-368"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19345798251339650","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

IntroductionInfants born less than 32-week gestation are at increased risk of respiratory distress syndrome due to underdeveloped pulmonary alveoli. Despite known respiratory benefits associated with positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP), our staff expressed concern that prolonged exposure to PEEP would contribute to increased risk of pneumothorax and delayed initiation of oral feeding.​ This quality improvement project aimed to standardize PEEP use with a guideline for early initiation, continuation, and subsequent discontinuation in infants born at less than 32-week gestation.MethodsWe developed and implemented a "Keep the PEEP" guideline, which included recommendations for initiation of PEEP at delivery, continuation through 32-week post-menstrual age (PMA), and discontinuation. Data collection occurred between July 2019-July 2021 (pre-intervention) and July 2021-August 2023 (post-intervention). Data analysis included run charts for monthly compliance, and bivariate analysis of pre- and post-intervention data. Interventions included team member education and team engagement through auditing.ResultsWe achieved a median compliance of 100% with PEEP use through 32-week PMA. We found no statistically significant differences in a pre- versus post-intervention comparison of pneumothorax incidence [14 versus 13, p = 0.86], bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) incidence [82 versus 68, p = 0.65], median post-menstrual age at first oral feed [34.1 versus 34.1, p = 0.56], or median length of stay [55 versus 43, p = 0.2].ConclusionsWe successfully implemented a new respiratory guideline to standardize PEEP use in our unit during the study period. Despite initial concerns, the incidence of pneumothorax and the median gestational age at initiation of oral feedings remained unchanged.

Keep the PEEP:一项质量改进项目,评估延长无创呼气末正压的安全性和可行性。
由于肺泡发育不全,妊娠32周以下出生的婴儿患呼吸窘迫综合征的风险增加。尽管已知呼气末正压(PEEP)对呼吸系统有益,但我们的工作人员表示担心,长时间暴露于PEEP会增加气胸的风险,并推迟口服喂养的开始。本质量改进项目旨在规范妊娠少于32周的婴儿早期开始、继续和随后停止使用PEEP的指南。方法:我们制定并实施了“保持PEEP”指南,其中包括分娩时开始PEEP,持续到月经后32周(PMA)和停止PEEP的建议。数据收集时间为2019年7月至2021年7月(干预前)和2021年7月至2023年8月(干预后)。数据分析包括每月依从性的运行图,以及干预前后数据的双变量分析。干预措施包括通过审计进行团队成员教育和团队参与。结果通过32周的PMA,我们达到了中位100%的PEEP使用依从性。我们发现干预前与干预后比较,气胸发病率[14比13,p = 0.86]、支气管肺发育不良(BPD)发病率[82比68,p = 0.65]、首次口服喂养时经后年龄中位数[34.1比34.1,p = 0.56]、住院时间中位数[55比43,p = 0.2]均无统计学差异。结论在研究期间,我们成功地实施了一套新的呼吸指南,规范了PEEP在我单位的使用。尽管最初的担忧,气胸的发生率和开始口服喂养时的中位胎龄保持不变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine
Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
124
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信