What is the latest evidence and nursing implications on the use of high frequency ocsillatory ventilation?

Posted on by

Mechanical Ventilation.  In:  DynaMed. 
See a summary of current evidence in the “Ventilator Settings (Evidence)” section>High Frequency Oscillatory Ventilation (HFOV).

A systematic review ( Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013 Feb 28;(2):CD004085) of studies (N=419) with methodological limitations concluded that may reduce mortality and treatment failure.  However it did not include results of two recent RCTs:

1.  HFOV does not reduce mortality compared to conventional ventilation (N Engl J Med 2013 Feb 28;368(9):806)  RCT (N=795 adults with ARDS).  RESULTS:  All-cause mortality rate 41.7% for HFOV group v. 41.1% for conventional ventilation group (not significant).

2. HFOV may increase risk of mortality compared to conventional ventilation protocol.  RCT (N=548 adults with moderate to severe ARDS).  RESULTS:   12% of patients in control group received HFOV for refractory hypoxemia.  In-hospital mortality 47% for HFOV group vs. 35% for control group.

1 thought on “What is the latest evidence and nursing implications on the use of high frequency ocsillatory ventilation?”

  1. Pingback: Are there guidelines for use of high frequency oscillatory ventilation in patients with acute lung injury? | Evidence Matters

Leave a comment