BACKGROUND: For patients with sepsis receiving non-invasive ventilation (NIV), early rehabilitation is crucial. The Sitting Baduanjin (SBE) is an efficient early rehabilitation exercise suitable for bed patients. There is no consensus about the effect of SBE on the early rehabilitation of septic patients with NIV. This study focused on how the SBE affected the early rehabilitation of sepsis patients with NIV.
METHODS: 96 sepsis patients with NIV were randomly assigned to either an Baduanjin group that received the SBE based on the routine rehabilitation exercise (n = 48) or a control group (n = 48) that received routine rehabilitation exercise. The primary outcome was the Medical Research Council(MRC)score, and the Barthel Index score, the duration of NIV, length of ICU stay, length of total stay, hospitalization expense as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 245 sepsis patients were screened, with 96 randomly assigned. The study was completed by 90 patients out of the 96 participants.Results revealed that the MRC score increased in both groups, but the improvement of muscle strength in Baduanjin group was more obvious, with statistical significance (p < 0.001).There was statistically significantly difference between the two groups in Barthel Index at the day of transfer out of ICU(P = 0.028).The patients in the Baduanjin group had an average reduction of 24.09 h in the duration of NIV and 3.35 days in total length of hospital stay compared with the control group (p < 0.05).Of note, the Baduanjin group had significantly reduction the total hospitalization expense. No serious adverse events occurred during the intervention period.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with sepsis, the SBE appears to improve muscle strength and activities of daily living (ADL), and lowed the duration of NIV, the length of the total stay, and the hospitalization expense.
BACKGROUND: The study registered on the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( www.chictr.org.cn ), Clinical Trials identifier ChiCTR1800015011 (28/02/2018).

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we tried to analyze the utility of the HACOR score in the acute exacerbation of post-tuberculosis obstructive airway disease (post-TB-OAD).
METHODS: The HACOR score for patients in acute exacerbation of post-TB-OAD who needed noninvasive ventilation (NIV) support was calculated at 1, 12, 24, and 48 hours. The history of NIV success or failure was noted. Using a cutoff score of >5, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted based on the HACOR score 1 hour after the NIV trial. In subjects requiring NIV for up to 2 days, the trend in the HACOR score was analyzed using a paired t-test.
RESULTS: A total of 38 out of 100 patients belonged to the NIV failure group. The mean HACOR score at 1 hour was 9.47 in the NIV failure group. The sensitivity was 89.47%, and the specificity was 87.09% for a score of >5. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 80.95 and 93.10%, respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) for the ROC was 0.853. The mean score showed an upward trend in the NIV failure group and a downward trend in the NIV success group. The change in the score in the NIV success group was statistically significant (t = -4.290, p-value = 0.00044).
CONCLUSIONS: The HACOR score can predict NIV failure in patients with acute exacerbation of post-TB-OAD.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has been the cornerstone for managing acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) with hypercapnic respiratory failure. Nasal high flow (NHF) oxygen therapy has emerged as a potential alternative, offering a more tolerable modality with promising outcomes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether NHF respiratory support is noninferior to NIV with respect to treatment failure, in patients with mild-to-moderate hypercapnic AECOPD.
METHODS: In this multi-center, randomized, noninferiority trial, 105 patients with AECOPD and respiratory failure type II were enrolled. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either NHF therapy or NIV. The primary endpoint was the frequency of treatment failure, defined as the need for intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation or a switch to the alternative treatment group. Secondary endpoints included changes in respiratory parameters, patient comfort indicators, and the occurrence of complications.
RESULTS: The findings revealed no significant difference in the primary outcome between the groups, with a treatment failure rate of 19.6 % (10 out of 51) in the NHF group and 14.8 % (8 out of 54) in the NIV group. Interestingly, NHF users reported significantly lower levels of dyspnea and discomfort at multiple follow-up points. Despite the differences in patient comfort, respiratory parameters such as respiratory rate, arterial blood gases, and use of accessory muscles of respiration showed no significant disparities between the groups throughout the study period.
CONCLUSIONS: NHF therapy was similar to NIV in preventing treatment failure among patients with hypercapnic AECOPD, offering a viable alternative with enhanced comfort.
BACKGROUND: The study was prospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03466385) on March 15, 2018.

OBJECTIVE: Although noninvasive ventilation (NIV) may reduce reintubation in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure following abdominal surgery, this strategy has not been specifically assessed in patients with obesity.
METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing NIV delivered via facial mask to standard oxygen therapy among patients with obesity and acute hypoxemic respiratory failure within 7 days after abdominal surgery. The primary outcome was reintubation within 7 days. Secondary outcomes were invasive ventilation-free days at day 30, intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired pneumonia and 30-day survival.
RESULTS: Among 293 patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure following abdominal surgery, 76 (26%) patients had obesity and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Reintubation rate was significantly lower with NIV (13/42, 31%) than with standard oxygen therapy (19/34, 56%) within 7 days (absolute difference: - 25%, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 49 to - 1%, p = 0.03). NIV was associated with significantly more invasive ventilation-free days compared with standard oxygen therapy (27.1 ± 8.6 vs 22.7 ± 11.1 days; p = 0.02), while fewer patients developed ICU-acquired pneumonia (1/42, 2% vs 6/34, 18%; p = 0.04). The 30-day survival was 98% in the NIV group (41/42) versus 85% in the standard oxygen therapy (p = 0.08). In patients with body mass index (BMI) < 30 kg/m2, no significant difference was observed between NIV (36/105, 34%) and standard oxygen therapy (47/109, 43%, p = 0.03). An interaction test showed no statistically significant difference between the two subsets (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 and BMI < 30 kg/m2).
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with obesity and hypoxemic respiratory failure following abdominal surgery, use of NIV compared with standard oxygen therapy reduced the risk of reintubation within 7 days, contrary to patients without obesity. However, no interaction was found according to the presence of obesity or not, suggesting either a lack of power to conclude in the non-obese subgroup despite existing differences, or that the statistical difference found in the overall sample was driven by a large effect in the obese subsets.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have highlighted the recognition of diaphragmatic dysfunction as a significant factor contributing to respiratory disturbances in severely ill COVID-19 patients. In the field of noninvasive respiratory support, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has shown effectiveness in relieving diaphragm dysfunction. This study aims to investigate the diaphragmatic response to HFNC in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia by utilizing ultrasound.
METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in a medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) at a tertiary care center in Buenos Aires, Argentina (Sanatorio de Los Arcos) over a 16-month period (January 2021-June 2022). The study included patients admitted to the ICU with a diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia who were deemed suitable candidates for HFNC therapy by the attending physician. Diaphragm ultrasound was conducted, measuring diaphragmatic excursion (DE) both before and during the utilization of HFNC for these patients.
RESULTS: A total of 10 patients were included in the study. A statistically significant decrease in respiratory rate was observed with the use of HFNC (p = 0.02), accompanied by a significant increase in DE (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSIONS: HFNC leads to a reduction in respiratory rate and an increase in DE as observed by ultrasound in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, indicating promising enhancements in respiratory mechanics. However, further research is required to validate these findings.

BACKGROUND: Although cumulative studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect of high-flow nasal cannula oxygen (HFNC) in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, randomized trials to compare HFNC with non-invasive ventilation (NIV) as initial treatment in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) patients with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure are limited. The aim of this randomized, open label, non-inferiority trial was to compare treatment failure rates between HFNC and NIV in such patients.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with AECOPD with a baseline arterial blood gas pH between 7.25 and 7.35 and PaCO2 ≥ 50 mmHg admitted to two intensive care units (ICUs) at a large tertiary academic teaching hospital between March 2018 and December 2022 were randomly assigned to HFNC or NIV. The primary endpoint was the rate of treatment failure, defined as endotracheal intubation or a switch to the other study treatment modality. Secondary endpoints were rates of intubation or treatment change, blood gas values, vital signs at one, 12, and 48 h, 28-day mortality, as well as ICU and hospital lengths of stay.
RESULTS: 225 total patients (113 in the HFNC group and 112 in the NIV group) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The failure rate of the HFNC group was 25.7%, while the NIV group was 14.3%. The failure rate risk difference between the two groups was 11.38% (95% CI 0.25-21.20, P = 0.033), which was higher than the non-inferiority cut-off of 9%. In the per-protocol analysis, treatment failure occurred in 28 of 110 patients (25.5%) in the HFNC group and 15 of 109 patients (13.8%) in the NIV group (risk difference, 11.69%; 95% CI 0.48-22.60). The intubation rate in the HFNC group was higher than in the NIV group (14.2% vs 5.4%, P = 0.026). The treatment switch rate, ICU and hospital length of stay or 28-day mortality in the HFNC group were not statistically different from the NIV group (all P > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: HFNC was not shown to be non-inferior to NIV and resulted in a higher incidence of treatment failure than NIV when used as the initial respiratory support for AECOPD patients with acute-moderate hypercapnic respiratory failure.
BACKGROUND: chictr.org (ChiCTR1800014553). Registered 21 January 2018, http://www.chictr.org.cn.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to analyze the effects of sedation administration on clinical parameters, comfort status, intubation requirements, and the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) length of stay (LOS) in children with acute respiratory failure (ARF) receiving noninvasive ventilation (NIV).
METHODS: Thirteen PICUs in Spain participated in a prospective, multicenter, observational trial from January to December 2021. Children with ARF under the age of five who were receiving NIV were included. Clinical information and comfort levels were documented at the time of NIV initiation, as well as at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h. The COMFORT-behavior (COMFORT-B) scale was used to assess the patients\' level of comfort. NIV failure was considered to be a requirement for endotracheal intubation.
RESULTS: A total of 457 patients were included, with a median age of 3.3 months (IQR 1.3-16.1). Two hundred and thirteen children (46.6%) received sedation (sedation group); these patients had a higher heart rate, higher COMFORT-B score, and lower SpO2/FiO2 ratio than did those who did not receive sedation (non-sedation group). A significantly greater improvement in the COMFORT-B score at 3, 6, 12, and 24 h, heart rate at 6 and 12 h, and SpO2/FiO2 ratio at 6 h was observed in the sedation group. Overall, the NIV success rate was 95.6%-intubation was required in 6.1% of the sedation group and in 2.9% of the other group (p = 0.092). Multivariate analysis revealed that the PRISM III score at NIV initiation (OR 1.408; 95% CI 1.230-1.611) and respiratory rate at 3 h (OR 1.043; 95% CI 1.009-1.079) were found to be independent predictors of NIV failure. The PICU LOS was correlated with weight, PRISM III score, respiratory rate at 12 h, SpO2 at 3 h, FiO2 at 12 h, NIV failure and NIV duration. Sedation use was not found to be independently related to NIV failure or to the PICU LOS.
CONCLUSIONS: Sedation use may be useful in children with ARF treated with NIV, as it seems to improve clinical parameters and comfort status but may not increase the NIV failure rate or PICU LOS, even though sedated children were more severe at technique initiation in the present sample.

UNASSIGNED: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a type of multidisciplinary care strongly recommended after severe exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Recently, a national French study reported a very low rate of PR uptake (8.6%); however, important clinical data were missing. Here, we aimed to identify the main factors associated with insufficient PR uptake after hospitalisation for COPD exacerbation.
UNASSIGNED: This multicentre retrospective study included patients hospitalised with COPD exacerbation between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2018, as identified by both coding and a detailed review of medical records. PR was defined as inpatient care in a specialised centre or unit within 90 days of discharge. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify associations between PR uptake and patient characteristics, such as comorbidities, non-invasive ventilation (NIV), inhaled treatment, and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1).
UNASSIGNED: Among the 325 patients admitted for severe COPD exacerbation, 92 (28.3%) underwent PR within 90 days of discharge. In univariate analysis, relative to those who underwent PR, patients without PR had significantly more comorbidities, were less often treated with triple bronchodilator therapy or NIV, and had a higher FEV1. In multivariate analysis, variables independently associated with the lack of PR uptake were the presence of comorbidities (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.28 [1.10-1.53], p = 0.003) and a higher FEV1 (aOR = 1.04 [1.02-1.06], p < 0.001). There was no significant correlation between PR uptake and departmental PR centre capacity (notably, some departments had no PR facilities).
UNASSIGNED: These data highlight the lack of PR in the early stages of COPD. Collaboration among all healthcare providers involved in patient management is crucial for improved PR uptake.
Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is multidisciplinary care strongly recommended after severe exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, referral remains very low in France. We have shown, in three French centres, that early-stage COPD and associated comorbidities are the main factors contributing to insufficient PR after hospitalisation for exacerbation. Collaboration among all healthcare providers involved in patient management is crucial to improve PR uptake in the years ahead because physical medicine and rehabilitation professionals play key roles in the promotion and early initiation of PR programs.

OBJECTIVE: The use of high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy is gaining popularity for the treatment of acute respiratory failure (ARF). However, limited evidence exists regarding the effectiveness of HFNC for hypoxemic ARF in patients with blunt chest trauma (BCT).
METHODS: This retrospective analysis focused on BCT patients with mild-moderate hypoxemic ARF who were treated with either HFNC or non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in the emergency medicine department from January 2021 to December 2022. The primary endpoint was treatment failure, defined as either invasive ventilation, or a switch to the other study treatment (NIV for patients in the NFNC group, and vice-versa).
RESULTS: A total of 157 patients with BCT (72 in the HFNC group and 85 in the NIV group) were included in this study. The treatment failure rate in the HFNC group was 11.1% and 16.5% in the NIV group - risk difference of 5.36% (95% CI, -5.94-16.10%; P = 0.366). The most common cause of failure in the HFNC group was aggravation of respiratory distress. While in the NIV group, the most common reason for failure was treatment intolerance. Treatment intolerance in the HFNC group was significantly lower than that in the NIV group (1.4% vs 9.4%, 95% CI 0.40-16.18; P = 0.039). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that chronic respiratory disease, abbreviated injury scale score (chest) (≥3), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (≥15), partial arterial oxygen tension /fraction of inspired oxygen (≤200) at 1 h of treatment and respiratory rate (≥32 /min) at 1 h of treatment were risk factors associated with HFNC failure.
CONCLUSIONS: In BCT patients with mild-moderate hypoxemic ARF, the usage of HFNC did not lead to higher rate of treatment failure when compared to NIV. HFNC was found to offer better comfort and tolerance than NIV, suggesting it may be a promising new respiratory support therapy for BCT patients with mild-moderate ARF.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is widely employed as the initial treatment for patients with chronic acute exacerbation of obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). Nevertheless, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been increasingly utilized and investigated to mitigate the issues associated with NIV. Flow rate may play a significant role in diaphragmatic function among subjects recovering from AECOPD. Based on these observations, we conducted a physiological study to assess the impact of HFNC therapy on diaphragmatic function, as measured by US, respiratory rate (RR), gas exchange, and patient comfort at various flow rates.
METHODS: A prospective physiological pilot study enrolled subjects with a diagnosis of AECOPD who required NIV for more than 24 h. After stabilization, these subjects underwent a 30-min trial using NIV and HFNC at different sequential flow rates (30-60 L/min). At the end of each trial, diaphragmatic displacement (DD, cm) and diaphragmatic thickness fraction (DTF, %) were measured using ultrasound. Additionally, other physiological variables, such as RR, gas exchange, and patient comfort, were recorded.
RESULTS: A total of 20 patients were included in the study. DD was no different among trials (p = 0.753). DTF (%) was significantly lower with HFNC-30 L/min compared to HFNC-50 and 60 L/min (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). No significant differences were found in arterial pH and PaCO2 at discontinuation of NIV and at the end of HFNC trials (p > 0.050). During HFNC trials, RR remained unchanged without statistically significant differences (p = 0.611). However, we observed that HFNC improved comfort compared to NIV (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Interestingly, HFNC at 30 and 40 L/min showed greater comfort during trials.
CONCLUSIONS: In subjects recovering from AECOPD and receiving HFNC, flows above 40 L/min may not offer additional benefits in terms of comfort and decreased respiratory effort. HFNC could be a suitable alternative to COT during breaks off NIV.