Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Is elective high frequency oscillatory ventilation better than conventional mechanical ventilation in very low birth weight infants?
  1. Sachin Shah
  1. Fellow, Hospital for Sick Children and University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

A 26 week infant is about to be delivered by emergency caesarean section to a mother with placental abruption and fetal distress. No antenatal steroids have been administered to the mother. You are called to attend the delivery. You are setting up the equipment when the respiratory therapist suggests that we should use high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) as primary mode of ventilation. He also cites few articles suggesting benefit of high volume strategy HFOV over conventional ventilation (CV). You wonder if there is enough evidence to support the intervention.

Structured clinical question

In very low birth infants with respiratory distress syndrome [patient], is elective high frequency oscillatory ventilation using high volume strategy [intervention] better than conventional mechanical ventilation [comparison] in decreasing chronic lung disease or mortality at 36 weeks corrected gestational age [outcome]?

Search strategy and outcome

Secondary sources—Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2002): (one relevant systematic review). Medline (1996–2002).

Cochrane: “high frequency ventilation” AND “infant, newborn” OR “infant, …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Bob Phillips