High flow therapy versus hypertonic saline in bronchiolitis: randomised controlled trial
Objective To demonstrate that heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is superior to inhaled hypertonic saline solution (HSS) in improving respiratory distress in moderate bronchiolitis. In addition, it could improve comfort and reduce length of hospital stay (LOS) and admission to Paedia...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Archives of disease in childhood 2014-06, Vol.99 (6), p.511-515 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 515 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 511 |
container_title | Archives of disease in childhood |
container_volume | 99 |
creator | Bueno Campaña, Mercedes Olivares Ortiz, Jorge Notario Muñoz, Cristina Rupérez Lucas, Marta Fernández Rincón, Adelaida Patiño Hernández, Olga Calvo Rey, Cristina |
description | Objective To demonstrate that heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is superior to inhaled hypertonic saline solution (HSS) in improving respiratory distress in moderate bronchiolitis. In addition, it could improve comfort and reduce length of hospital stay (LOS) and admission to Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Design Randomised Clinical Trial from 1 October 2010 to 31 December 2012. Setting Two urban secondary (no PICU available) paediatric hospitalisation units. Patients Hospitalised children aged up to 6 months with moderate acute bronchiolitis (Respiratory Distress Assessment Instrument, RDAI ≥4). Intervention Patients were randomised to HHHFNC or HSS. All of them received epinephrine as bronchodilator. Main outcomes Primary outcome was difference in mean Respiratory Assessment Change Score (RACS) between both groups measured in six previously defined consecutive moments. Secondary outcomes were difference in mean comfort scores in this period, LOS and rate of PICU admission. Results Seventy-five previously healthy patients were enrolled. Mean age was 2.4 months (95% CI 2.04 to 2.76). 43 were allocated to HSS group and 32 in HHHFNC. Data of 1 patient were lost, and 8 changed group over the study period. Intention-to-treat principle was applied. There were no significant differences in mean RACS and mean comfort scores between groups at the evaluation points. Median LOS or PICU admission rate were similar in both groups. No adverse events were observed. Conclusions HHHFNC was not superior to HSS in treatment of moderate acute bronchiolitis with respect to severity and comfort scores, LOS or PICU admission rate. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01873144. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1136/archdischild-2013-305443 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1526134700</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A371138407</galeid><sourcerecordid>A371138407</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b505t-362a66b15420e3a298494c1e8d8d0d13b2f235214d18f2f175ed557eb8ae63dd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU2LFDEQhoMo7uzoX5CACF5a89md8bYMuiss7EXBW0gn1dMZMsmYdKvz783Q4weePCWEp1Jv1YMQpuQNpbx9a7IdnS929ME1jFDecCKF4I_QiopW1SchHqMVIYQ3G6XUFbouZU8IZUrxp-iKCclop7oV-nLndyMeQvqOpxGyOZ7wN8hlLng8HSFPKXqLiwk-AvYR9znF2jUFP_nyDmcTXTr4Ag7bFKecQqjXKXsTnqEngwkFnl_ONfr84f2n7V1z_3D7cXtz3_SSyKnhLTNt21MpGAFu2EaJjbAUlFOOOMp7NjBewwpH1cAG2klwUnbQKwMtd46v0evl32NOX2cok655LIRgIqS5aCpZS7no6irW6OU_6D7NOdZ0mqq6GcUIZ5VqFmpnAmgfz4PBj8meZ9uBruG3D_qGd1WEEqSrvFp4m1MpGQZ9zP5g8klTos-29N-29NmWXmzV0heXQHN_APe78JeeCry6AKZYE4a6b-vLH05V2RsmK8cXrj_s_7_9T-y1sLM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1828882032</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>High flow therapy versus hypertonic saline in bronchiolitis: randomised controlled trial</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><creator>Bueno Campaña, Mercedes ; Olivares Ortiz, Jorge ; Notario Muñoz, Cristina ; Rupérez Lucas, Marta ; Fernández Rincón, Adelaida ; Patiño Hernández, Olga ; Calvo Rey, Cristina</creator><creatorcontrib>Bueno Campaña, Mercedes ; Olivares Ortiz, Jorge ; Notario Muñoz, Cristina ; Rupérez Lucas, Marta ; Fernández Rincón, Adelaida ; Patiño Hernández, Olga ; Calvo Rey, Cristina</creatorcontrib><description>Objective To demonstrate that heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is superior to inhaled hypertonic saline solution (HSS) in improving respiratory distress in moderate bronchiolitis. In addition, it could improve comfort and reduce length of hospital stay (LOS) and admission to Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Design Randomised Clinical Trial from 1 October 2010 to 31 December 2012. Setting Two urban secondary (no PICU available) paediatric hospitalisation units. Patients Hospitalised children aged up to 6 months with moderate acute bronchiolitis (Respiratory Distress Assessment Instrument, RDAI ≥4). Intervention Patients were randomised to HHHFNC or HSS. All of them received epinephrine as bronchodilator. Main outcomes Primary outcome was difference in mean Respiratory Assessment Change Score (RACS) between both groups measured in six previously defined consecutive moments. Secondary outcomes were difference in mean comfort scores in this period, LOS and rate of PICU admission. Results Seventy-five previously healthy patients were enrolled. Mean age was 2.4 months (95% CI 2.04 to 2.76). 43 were allocated to HSS group and 32 in HHHFNC. Data of 1 patient were lost, and 8 changed group over the study period. Intention-to-treat principle was applied. There were no significant differences in mean RACS and mean comfort scores between groups at the evaluation points. Median LOS or PICU admission rate were similar in both groups. No adverse events were observed. Conclusions HHHFNC was not superior to HSS in treatment of moderate acute bronchiolitis with respect to severity and comfort scores, LOS or PICU admission rate. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01873144.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9888</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2044</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-305443</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24521787</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ADCHAK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: BMJ Publishing Group</publisher><subject>Acute Disease ; Administration, Inhalation ; Admission Criteria ; Airway management ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bronchiolitis ; Bronchiolitis - drug therapy ; Bronchiolitis - therapy ; Care and treatment ; Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma ; Clinical trials ; Evaluation ; Female ; General aspects ; Hospitalization ; Humans ; Infant ; Infant, Newborn ; Intensive Care Units, Pediatric ; Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Miscellaneous ; Nurses ; Oxygen equipment (Medical care) ; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy - methods ; Oxygen therapy ; Patients ; Pediatrics ; Physiologic salines ; Pneumology ; Prevention and actions ; Protocol Analysis ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Saline solution ; Saline Solution, Hypertonic - therapeutic use ; Severity of Illness Index ; Statistical analysis ; Treatment Outcome ; Ventilation ; Ventilators ; Young Children</subject><ispartof>Archives of disease in childhood, 2014-06, Vol.99 (6), p.511-515</ispartof><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.</rights><rights>Copyright: 2014 Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b505t-362a66b15420e3a298494c1e8d8d0d13b2f235214d18f2f175ed557eb8ae63dd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b505t-362a66b15420e3a298494c1e8d8d0d13b2f235214d18f2f175ed557eb8ae63dd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://adc.bmj.com/content/99/6/511.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://adc.bmj.com/content/99/6/511.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,314,780,784,3196,23571,27924,27925,77600,77631</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=28468925$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24521787$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bueno Campaña, Mercedes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olivares Ortiz, Jorge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Notario Muñoz, Cristina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rupérez Lucas, Marta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernández Rincón, Adelaida</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patiño Hernández, Olga</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calvo Rey, Cristina</creatorcontrib><title>High flow therapy versus hypertonic saline in bronchiolitis: randomised controlled trial</title><title>Archives of disease in childhood</title><addtitle>Arch Dis Child</addtitle><description>Objective To demonstrate that heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is superior to inhaled hypertonic saline solution (HSS) in improving respiratory distress in moderate bronchiolitis. In addition, it could improve comfort and reduce length of hospital stay (LOS) and admission to Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Design Randomised Clinical Trial from 1 October 2010 to 31 December 2012. Setting Two urban secondary (no PICU available) paediatric hospitalisation units. Patients Hospitalised children aged up to 6 months with moderate acute bronchiolitis (Respiratory Distress Assessment Instrument, RDAI ≥4). Intervention Patients were randomised to HHHFNC or HSS. All of them received epinephrine as bronchodilator. Main outcomes Primary outcome was difference in mean Respiratory Assessment Change Score (RACS) between both groups measured in six previously defined consecutive moments. Secondary outcomes were difference in mean comfort scores in this period, LOS and rate of PICU admission. Results Seventy-five previously healthy patients were enrolled. Mean age was 2.4 months (95% CI 2.04 to 2.76). 43 were allocated to HSS group and 32 in HHHFNC. Data of 1 patient were lost, and 8 changed group over the study period. Intention-to-treat principle was applied. There were no significant differences in mean RACS and mean comfort scores between groups at the evaluation points. Median LOS or PICU admission rate were similar in both groups. No adverse events were observed. Conclusions HHHFNC was not superior to HSS in treatment of moderate acute bronchiolitis with respect to severity and comfort scores, LOS or PICU admission rate. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01873144.</description><subject>Acute Disease</subject><subject>Administration, Inhalation</subject><subject>Admission Criteria</subject><subject>Airway management</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bronchiolitis</subject><subject>Bronchiolitis - drug therapy</subject><subject>Bronchiolitis - therapy</subject><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Hospitalization</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Intensive Care Units, Pediatric</subject><subject>Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Oxygen equipment (Medical care)</subject><subject>Oxygen Inhalation Therapy - methods</subject><subject>Oxygen therapy</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Physiologic salines</subject><subject>Pneumology</subject><subject>Prevention and actions</subject><subject>Protocol Analysis</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Saline solution</subject><subject>Saline Solution, Hypertonic - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Ventilation</subject><subject>Ventilators</subject><subject>Young Children</subject><issn>0003-9888</issn><issn>1468-2044</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU2LFDEQhoMo7uzoX5CACF5a89md8bYMuiss7EXBW0gn1dMZMsmYdKvz783Q4weePCWEp1Jv1YMQpuQNpbx9a7IdnS929ME1jFDecCKF4I_QiopW1SchHqMVIYQ3G6XUFbouZU8IZUrxp-iKCclop7oV-nLndyMeQvqOpxGyOZ7wN8hlLng8HSFPKXqLiwk-AvYR9znF2jUFP_nyDmcTXTr4Ag7bFKecQqjXKXsTnqEngwkFnl_ONfr84f2n7V1z_3D7cXtz3_SSyKnhLTNt21MpGAFu2EaJjbAUlFOOOMp7NjBewwpH1cAG2klwUnbQKwMtd46v0evl32NOX2cok655LIRgIqS5aCpZS7no6irW6OU_6D7NOdZ0mqq6GcUIZ5VqFmpnAmgfz4PBj8meZ9uBruG3D_qGd1WEEqSrvFp4m1MpGQZ9zP5g8klTos-29N-29NmWXmzV0heXQHN_APe78JeeCry6AKZYE4a6b-vLH05V2RsmK8cXrj_s_7_9T-y1sLM</recordid><startdate>20140601</startdate><enddate>20140601</enddate><creator>Bueno Campaña, Mercedes</creator><creator>Olivares Ortiz, Jorge</creator><creator>Notario Muñoz, Cristina</creator><creator>Rupérez Lucas, Marta</creator><creator>Fernández Rincón, Adelaida</creator><creator>Patiño Hernández, Olga</creator><creator>Calvo Rey, Cristina</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140601</creationdate><title>High flow therapy versus hypertonic saline in bronchiolitis: randomised controlled trial</title><author>Bueno Campaña, Mercedes ; Olivares Ortiz, Jorge ; Notario Muñoz, Cristina ; Rupérez Lucas, Marta ; Fernández Rincón, Adelaida ; Patiño Hernández, Olga ; Calvo Rey, Cristina</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b505t-362a66b15420e3a298494c1e8d8d0d13b2f235214d18f2f175ed557eb8ae63dd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Acute Disease</topic><topic>Administration, Inhalation</topic><topic>Admission Criteria</topic><topic>Airway management</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bronchiolitis</topic><topic>Bronchiolitis - drug therapy</topic><topic>Bronchiolitis - therapy</topic><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Hospitalization</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Intensive Care Units, Pediatric</topic><topic>Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Oxygen equipment (Medical care)</topic><topic>Oxygen Inhalation Therapy - methods</topic><topic>Oxygen therapy</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Physiologic salines</topic><topic>Pneumology</topic><topic>Prevention and actions</topic><topic>Protocol Analysis</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Saline solution</topic><topic>Saline Solution, Hypertonic - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Ventilation</topic><topic>Ventilators</topic><topic>Young Children</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bueno Campaña, Mercedes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Olivares Ortiz, Jorge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Notario Muñoz, Cristina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rupérez Lucas, Marta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernández Rincón, Adelaida</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patiño Hernández, Olga</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Calvo Rey, Cristina</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of disease in childhood</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bueno Campaña, Mercedes</au><au>Olivares Ortiz, Jorge</au><au>Notario Muñoz, Cristina</au><au>Rupérez Lucas, Marta</au><au>Fernández Rincón, Adelaida</au><au>Patiño Hernández, Olga</au><au>Calvo Rey, Cristina</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>High flow therapy versus hypertonic saline in bronchiolitis: randomised controlled trial</atitle><jtitle>Archives of disease in childhood</jtitle><addtitle>Arch Dis Child</addtitle><date>2014-06-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>99</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>511</spage><epage>515</epage><pages>511-515</pages><issn>0003-9888</issn><eissn>1468-2044</eissn><coden>ADCHAK</coden><abstract>Objective To demonstrate that heated humidified high-flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC) is superior to inhaled hypertonic saline solution (HSS) in improving respiratory distress in moderate bronchiolitis. In addition, it could improve comfort and reduce length of hospital stay (LOS) and admission to Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Design Randomised Clinical Trial from 1 October 2010 to 31 December 2012. Setting Two urban secondary (no PICU available) paediatric hospitalisation units. Patients Hospitalised children aged up to 6 months with moderate acute bronchiolitis (Respiratory Distress Assessment Instrument, RDAI ≥4). Intervention Patients were randomised to HHHFNC or HSS. All of them received epinephrine as bronchodilator. Main outcomes Primary outcome was difference in mean Respiratory Assessment Change Score (RACS) between both groups measured in six previously defined consecutive moments. Secondary outcomes were difference in mean comfort scores in this period, LOS and rate of PICU admission. Results Seventy-five previously healthy patients were enrolled. Mean age was 2.4 months (95% CI 2.04 to 2.76). 43 were allocated to HSS group and 32 in HHHFNC. Data of 1 patient were lost, and 8 changed group over the study period. Intention-to-treat principle was applied. There were no significant differences in mean RACS and mean comfort scores between groups at the evaluation points. Median LOS or PICU admission rate were similar in both groups. No adverse events were observed. Conclusions HHHFNC was not superior to HSS in treatment of moderate acute bronchiolitis with respect to severity and comfort scores, LOS or PICU admission rate. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01873144.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group</pub><pmid>24521787</pmid><doi>10.1136/archdischild-2013-305443</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-9888 |
ispartof | Archives of disease in childhood, 2014-06, Vol.99 (6), p.511-515 |
issn | 0003-9888 1468-2044 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1526134700 |
source | MEDLINE; BMJ Journals - NESLi2 |
subjects | Acute Disease Administration, Inhalation Admission Criteria Airway management Biological and medical sciences Bronchiolitis Bronchiolitis - drug therapy Bronchiolitis - therapy Care and treatment Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma Clinical trials Evaluation Female General aspects Hospitalization Humans Infant Infant, Newborn Intensive Care Units, Pediatric Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data Male Medical sciences Miscellaneous Nurses Oxygen equipment (Medical care) Oxygen Inhalation Therapy - methods Oxygen therapy Patients Pediatrics Physiologic salines Pneumology Prevention and actions Protocol Analysis Public health. Hygiene Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine Saline solution Saline Solution, Hypertonic - therapeutic use Severity of Illness Index Statistical analysis Treatment Outcome Ventilation Ventilators Young Children |
title | High flow therapy versus hypertonic saline in bronchiolitis: randomised controlled trial |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T10%3A41%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=High%20flow%20therapy%20versus%20hypertonic%20saline%20in%20bronchiolitis:%20randomised%20controlled%20trial&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20disease%20in%20childhood&rft.au=Bueno%20Campa%C3%B1a,%20Mercedes&rft.date=2014-06-01&rft.volume=99&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=511&rft.epage=515&rft.pages=511-515&rft.issn=0003-9888&rft.eissn=1468-2044&rft.coden=ADCHAK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/archdischild-2013-305443&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA371138407%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1828882032&rft_id=info:pmid/24521787&rft_galeid=A371138407&rfr_iscdi=true |