Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Reading: Comparison of continuous positive airway pressure and non-invasive positive pressure ventila...

Download

A- A+
Alt. Display

Original Articles

Comparison of continuous positive airway pressure and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation as modes of non-invasive respiratory support for neonates in a Level III neonatal intensive care unit

Authors:

Anne Kaushalya Gomez ,

Teaching Hospital Mahamodara, Galle, Sri Lanka,, LK
About Anne
Teaching Hospital Mahamodara, Galle, Sri Lanka,
X close

Medha Weerasekara,

Sri Jayawardenepura Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka, LK
About Medha
Sri Jayawardenepura Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka
X close

Prasad Wickramaarachchi,

Sri Jayawardenepura Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka, LK
About Prasad
Sri Jayawardenepura Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka
X close

Kanthi Prathapasinghe,

Sri Jayawardenepura Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka, LK
About Kanthi
Sri Jayawardenepura Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka
X close

Ayani Wickramanayaka Wickramanayaka

Sri Jayawardenepura Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka, LK
About Ayani Wickramanayaka
Sri Jayawardenepura Teaching Hospital, Sri Lanka
X close

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in neonates with mild to moderate respiratory distress. 

Method: A single centre randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Sri Jayawardenepura General Hospital, Sri Lanka from January to December 2015. The trial was registered with The Clinical Trials Registry ‘Clinical Trials.gov’ retrospectively. Eighty neonates admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) were randomly allocated to NIPPV and CPAP. Outcomes of respiratory support were observed and information on risk factors were obtained by going through the bed head tickets of the study cohort. Data analysis was done using SPSS 20 software.

Results: Infants treated with NIPPV and CPAP had comparable demographic data and clinical status at the time of enrolment into the study. Infants treated initially with NIPPV needed less endotracheal ventilation than infants treated with CPAP (35% vs 40%, p = 0.644) but this difference is not statistically significant.

Conclusions: The risks for respiratory failure and the need for ventilation were not statistically significantly different whether using NIPPV or CPAP.

Sri Lanka Journal of Child Health, 2018; 47: 242-248

How to Cite: Gomez, A.K., Weerasekara, M., Wickramaarachchi, P., Prathapasinghe, K. and Wickramanayaka, A.W., 2018. Comparison of continuous positive airway pressure and non-invasive positive pressure ventilation as modes of non-invasive respiratory support for neonates in a Level III neonatal intensive care unit. Sri Lanka Journal of Child Health, 47(3), pp.242–248. DOI: http://doi.org/10.4038/sljch.v47i3.8547
Published on 05 Sep 2018.
Peer Reviewed

Downloads

  • PDF (EN)

    comments powered by Disqus