Article Review
Respiratory conditions are described as the most common illnesses globally, further leading to pediatric hospitalizations. Trauma, as well as pneumonia, has been among the top 10 most diagnosed conditions among all the pediatric age groups. Asides from that, endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation have become an effective and well-established support mechanism for respiratory failure. It has been associated with an increased risk of lung injury and airflow, infection, length of stay, and complications associated with higher costs. However, the most insecure methods of respiratory support include simple and high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula, CPAP, and NIV (Noninvasive ventilation). All of these substances have been referred to as alternatives to treating the respiratory failure to avoid the importance of shortness of breath and prevent the failure of extubation. Even though the lack of evidence that supports HFNC utilization in pediatric patients, HFNC therapy has been a perfect respiratory supportive therapy. The medical caregiver uses HFNC patterns among some of the heterogeneous pediatric ICU population, and this has been unclear. Few data concerning HFNC indications and the epidemiology of diseases that warrant the use of HFNC (Coletti et al. 2). Thus, the purpose of the study is to look at the HFNC application in clinical practice in an urban as well as academic tertiary care for patients in the intensive care unit. Thus, the article tries to identify how HFNC is being utilized. It involves the common diagnoses, the ages of the patients, the physiologic parameters, and the lengths of utilization and relationship to the course of the hospital.
The study was designed in such a way that a retrospective descriptive cohort study was conducted. The research was primarily done to evaluate the clinical as well as demographic characteristics of the pediatric patients who had HFNC respiratory support. The Institutional review board from the University Of Maryland School Of Medicine approved the study (Coletti et al. 2). Data were extracted from an electronic medical record, and the demographic data included the clinical data, primary diagnosis, and hospital stay, the status of the viral respiratory infection, and even how long the patients have been in the hospital.
From the research, it is clear that HFNC has been a productive form of noninvasive support for patients who have several conditions, including preterm infants and bronchiolitis. The study shows that HFNC is being utilized by different diagnoses, such as the fact that it is an asthmatic therapy, and it is used in respiratory support for patients who suffer from congenital heart diseases and respiratory distress. However, 41% of the subjects were given a primary diagnosis for asthamticus, 63% of them were given corticosteroids during HFNC therapy, and they show clinical concern for airway inflammation (Coletti et al. 3). 20% of the people in the cohort were under terbutaline therapy, and this indicates that their asthamticus was severe. HFNC was a perfect adjunctive therapy that was used in asthamticus treatment status.
Finally, further research on the use of HFNCs in the case of asthmaticus should be considered. In vitro studies have been a great alternative to aerosolized drug delivery. However, optical settings have not yet been determined. HFNC capability should be incorporated by the pediatric transport teams in the ambulance transport vehicles to assist in accommodating the patients with the support level. The study is essential since it looks at HFNC usage, and it also looks at its primary diagnoses and the age ranges in pediatric cardiac ICU. The study is limited due to its descriptive nature.
Work Cited
Coletti. K et al. “High-Flow Nasal Cannula Utilization in Pediatric Critical Care.” Pp. 1- 6. ResearchGate, 6 June 2017, doi., 10.4187/respcare.05153