학술논문

International Survey of the Tools Used for Assessment, Monitoring and Management of Home Mechanical Ventilation Patients.
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Chatwin M; Royal Brompton Hospital, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6NP, UK.; National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, University College London, London WC1N 3BG, UK.; Hart N; Lane Fox Respiratory Service St Thomas' Hospital, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK.; Lane Fox Clinical Respiratory Physiology Research Unit, Centre for Human and Applied Physiological Science, King's College London, London SE1 7EH, UK.
Source
Publisher: MDPI AG Country of Publication: Switzerland NLM ID: 101606588 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 2077-0383 (Print) Linking ISSN: 20770383 NLM ISO Abbreviation: J Clin Med Subsets: PubMed not MEDLINE
Subject
Language
English
ISSN
2077-0383
Abstract
Background: There are limited data reporting diagnostic practices, compared to clinical guidelines, for patients with chronic respiratory failure requiring home mechanical ventilation (HMV). There are no data detailing the current use of downloaded physiological monitoring data in day-to-day clinical practice during initiation and follow up of patients on HMV. This survey reports clinicians' practices, with a specific focus on the clinical approaches employed to assess, monitor and manage HMV patients.
Methods: A web-based international survey was open between 1 January and 31 March 2023.
Results: In total, 114 clinicians responded; 84% of the clinicians downloaded the internal physiological ventilator data when initiating and maintaining HMV patients, and 99% of the clinicians followed up with patients within 3 months. Adherence, leak and the apnea-hypopnea index were the three highest rated items. Oxygen saturation was used to support a diagnosis of nocturnal hypoventilation and was preferred over measurements of carbon dioxide. Furthermore, 78% of the clinicians reviewed data for the assessment of patient ventilator asynchrony (PVA), although the confidence reported in identifying certain PVAs was reported as unconfident or extremely unconfident.
Conclusions: This survey confirmed that clinical practice varies and often does not follow the current guidelines. Despite PVA being of clinical interest, its clinical relevance was not clear, and further research, education and training are required to improve clinical confidence.