Trial reportMalawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi2024
Comparison of two different Nasal Interfaces used in Non-Invasive Respiratory support in terms of Neonate comfort.
Trial report in Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) is the first choice approach in neonates with sufficient respiratory effort that require respiratory support. The type of nasal interface used in NIV affects both efficacy and patient comfort. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of different nasal interfaces used in NIV support on neonatal patient comfort. Methods: Our study evaluated patients who received NIV support for 24 hours. The patients were randomly divided into two groups according to the type of nasal interface used, which were RAM cannula and short binasal prong (SBP). The patients' demographic and clinical data were noted. Their sleep was monitored for 24 hours with an actigraphy device. Results: A total of 82 patients were evaluated. The sleep efficiency in the RAM cannula group was significantly higher (respectively, 65.7% [10.22-95.25] vs. 57.81% [2.49-77], p=0.004). Although not statistically significant, the neonates in the RAM cannula group exhibited longer total sleep time (respectively, 10.4 ± 4.28 hours vs. 9.02 ± 3.73 hours, p=0.161). Comparison of heart rates and respiratory rates indicate that the patients in the RAM cannula group were more comfortable. Conclusions: Our study found that infants who received NIV support through a RAM cannula experienced more efficient sleep. Holistic approaches in neonatal intensive care units are vital for better neurodevelopmental outcomes in newborns. Although non-invasive, the interface used in NIV should also be a part of this holistic approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.