 |
Transport
of Critically Ill Newborns and Children utilizing High Frequency Ventilation
(HFV) and Nitric Oxide: A report on the experience at Children?s Hospital of
Orange County, CA.
D.Villareal
R.R.T., J. Cappon, M.D., J. Cleary, M.D.
Introduction: The Children?s
Hospital of Orange County (CHOC) Transport Team frequently transports newborns
and children with respiratory and /or cardiac failure for HFOV, inhaled Nitric
Oxide (NO), and/or ECMO. Increasingly in our referral centers, these children
are receiving advanced therapies such as HFOV and NO at the time of referral.
We integrated the Volumetric Diffusive Respirator (VDR) Ventilator (Percussionaire
? Corp., Sandpoint, Idaho) series to our neonatal and pediatric transporters.
Reliable NO delivery using the Aeronox Nitric Oxide Delivery System (Tofield,
Alberta, Canada) with the VDR ?3C, was established on a bench study.
Method: We reviewed our transport
data from January of 1999 through December 2001. Our objective was to: 1) monitor
staff compliance of utilizing the VDR; 2) compare the mode of ventilation between
the referring hospital and during transport; 3) compare the pre- and post- transport
blood gases and Oxygen Index (OI); and 4) report the effective delivery of NO
and HFV under clinical transport conditions.
Results: During the early
stages, the compliance for the utilization of the VDR-3C was suboptimal. To
improve compliance, we developed a ?train the trainer? program and in turn,
implemented a preceptor procedure for those Respiratory Care Practitioners (RCP)
staff assigned to transport. Subsequently, VDR-3C protocol compliance objectively
improved. The ventilator mode at the referring facility ranged from hand-ventilation,
conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV) to HFV. Of the 46 patients, 5 patients
were transported via CMV, 4 were hand-ventilated, 17 received HFV and NO, and
20 HFV alone. Table 1 shows the comparison of HFV settings between the referring
facility and immediately post-transport for the 21 patients who received HFV
in both settings. Table 2 indicates the pre- and post- blood gases and OI in
those patients with completed transport data.
| Table 1 |
Referring
Facility Ventilator Settings |
Transport
Ventilator Settings |
| N=21 |
MAP |
Hz |
AMP |
FiO2 (%) |
N= 20* |
MAP |
Hz |
AMP |
FiO2 (%) |
| Mean |
12.8 |
11.1 |
28.7 |
81.1 |
Mean |
14.9 |
10.1 |
28.3 |
91.2 |
*one patient converted over to CMV,
5 patient were transported on NO.
| Table
2 |
Referring
Facility Blood Gases |
Transport
Blood Gases |
| N=17 |
PH |
PCO2 |
PO2 |
OI* |
N=17* |
PH |
PCO2 |
PO2 |
OI* |
| Mean |
7.22 |
56.6 |
43.4 |
40.9 |
Mean |
7.32 |
47 |
65.4 |
16.4 |
*OI based on 16 patients,
1 patient has no MAP data prior to transport.
Conclusions: We report the
successful transport of critically ill newborns and children utilizing our HFV
transport system. We found that successful initiation of HFV and NO transport
program involves extensive training of staff members to the concept of VDR technology
and NO therapy. Furthermore, we demonstrated significant improvement in patient
oxygenation and ventilation.
Special thanks to the CHOC Emergency
Transport Team for their contribution in making this abstract possible.
OF-02-046
|
 |