OBJECTIVES: This study aims to examine the effect of 20-minute mindful breathing on the rapid reduction of dyspnea at rest in patients with lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and asthma.
METHODS: We conducted a parallel-group, nonblinded, randomized controlled trial of standard care plus 20-minute mindful breathing vs. standard care alone for patients with moderate to severe dyspnea due to lung disease, named previously, at the respiratory unit of University Malaya Medical Centre in Malaysia, from August 1, 2017, to March 31, 2018.
RESULTS: Sixty-three participants were randomly assigned to standard care plus a 20-minute mindful breathing session (n = 32) or standard care alone (n = 31), with no difference in their demographic and clinical characteristics. There was statistically significant reduction in dyspnea in the mindful breathing group compared with the control group at minute 5 (U = 233.5, n1 = 32, n2 = 31, mean rank1 = 23.28, mean rank2 = 37.72, z = -3.574, P
METHODS: Data from 275 breaths aggregated from all mechanically ventilated patients at Christchurch Hospital were used in this study. The breath specific respiratory elastance is calculated using a time-varying elastance model. A pressure reconstruction method is proposed to reconstruct pressure waves identified as being affected by SB effort. The area under the curve of the time-varying respiratory elastance (AUC Edrs) are calculated and compared, where unreconstructed waves yield lower AUC Edrs. The difference between the reconstructed and unreconstructed pressure is denoted as a surrogate measure of SB effort.
RESULTS: The pressure reconstruction method yielded a median AUC Edrs of 19.21 [IQR: 16.30-22.47]cmH2Os/l. In contrast, the median AUC Edrs for unreconstructed M-wave data was 20.41 [IQR: 16.68-22.81]cmH2Os/l. The pressure reconstruction method had the least variability in AUC Edrs assessed by the robust coefficient of variation (RCV)=0.04 versus 0.05 for unreconstructed data. Each patient exhibited different levels of SB effort, independent from MV setting, indicating the need for non-invasive, real time assessment of SB effort.
CONCLUSION: A simple reconstruction method enables more consistent real-time estimation of the true, underlying respiratory system mechanics of a SB patient and provides the surrogate of SB effort, which may be clinically useful for clinicians in determining optimal ventilator settings to improve patient care.
DISCUSSION: This review presents the significant clinical aspects and variables of ventilation management, the potential risks associated with suboptimal ventilation management, and a review of the major recent attempts to improve ventilation in the context of these variables. The unique aspect of this review is a focus on these key elements relevant to engineering new approaches. In particular, the need for ventilation strategies which consider, and directly account for, the significant differences in patient condition, disease etiology, and progression within patients is demonstrated with the subsequent requirement for optimal ventilation strategies to titrate for patient- and time-specific conditions.
CONCLUSION: Engineered, protective lung strategies that can directly account for and manage inter- and intra-patient variability thus offer great potential to improve both individual care, as well as cohort clinical outcomes.
METHODS AND DESIGN: The CURE RCT compares two groups of patients requiring invasive MV with a partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio ≤ 200; one criterion of the Berlin consensus definition of moderate (≤ 200) or severe (≤ 100) ARDS. All patients are ventilated using pressure controlled (bi-level) ventilation with tidal volume = 6-8 ml/kg. Patients randomised to the control group will have PEEP selected per standard practice (SPV). Patients randomised to the intervention will have PEEP selected based on a minimal elastance using a model-based computerised method. The CURE RCT is a single-centre trial in the intensive care unit (ICU) of Christchurch hospital, New Zealand, with a target sample size of 320 patients over a maximum of 3 years. The primary outcome is the area under the curve (AUC) ratio of arterial blood oxygenation to the fraction of inspired oxygen over time. Secondary outcomes include length of time of MV, ventilator-free days (VFD) up to 28 days, ICU and hospital length of stay, AUC of oxygen saturation (SpO2)/FiO2 during MV, number of desaturation events (SpO2
METHODS: The model-based method uses a single-compartment lung model (SCM) to simulate the resultant tidal volume of patient pairs at a set ventilation setting. If both patients meet specified safe ventilation criteria under similar ventilation settings, the actual mechanical ventilator settings for Co-MV are determined via simulation using a double-compartment lung model (DCM). This method allows clinicians to analyse Co-MV in silico, before clinical implementation.
RESULTS: The proposed method demonstrates successful patient matching and MV setting in a model-based simulation as well as good discrimination to avoid mismatched patient pairs. The pairing process is based on model-based, patient-specific respiratory mechanics identified from measured data to provide useful information for guiding care. Specifically, the matching is performed via estimation of MV delivered tidal volume (mL/kg) based on patient-specific respiratory mechanics. This information can provide insights for the clinicians to evaluate the subsequent effects of Co-MV. In addition, it was also found that Co-MV patients with highly restrictive respiratory mechanics and obese patients must be performed with extra care.
CONCLUSION: This approach allows clinicians to analyse patient matching in a virtual environment without patient risk. The approach is tested in simulation, but the results justify the necessary clinical validation in human trials.
METHODS: This study shows the design and development of the "VENT" protocol, which integrates the single compartment linear lung model with clinical recommendations from landmark studies, to aid clinical decision-making in selecting mechanical ventilation settings. Using retrospective breath data from a cohort of 24 patients, 3,566 and 2,447 clinically implemented VC and PC settings were extracted respectively. Using this data, a VENT protocol application case study and clinical comparison is performed, and the prediction accuracy of the VENT protocol is validated against actual measured outcomes of pressure and volume.
RESULTS: The study shows the VENT protocols' potential use in narrowing an overwhelming number of possible mechanical ventilation setting combinations by up to 99.9%. The comparison with retrospective clinical data showed that only 33% and 45% of clinician settings were approved by the VENT protocol. The unapproved settings were mainly due to exceeding clinical recommended settings. When utilising the single compartment model in the VENT protocol for forecasting peak pressures and tidal volumes, median [IQR] prediction error values of 0.75 [0.31 - 1.83] cmH2O and 0.55 [0.19 - 1.20] mL/kg were obtained.
CONCLUSIONS: Comparing the proposed protocol with retrospective clinically implemented settings shows the protocol can prevent harmful mechanical ventilation setting combinations for which clinicians would be otherwise unaware. The VENT protocol warrants a more detailed clinical study to validate its potential usefulness in a clinical setting.
METHODS: Non-linear autoregressive (NARX) model is used to reconstruct missing airway pressure due to the presence of spontaneous breathing effort in mv patients. Then, the incidence of SB patients is estimated. The study uses a total of 10,000 breathing cycles collected from 10 ARDS patients from IIUM Hospital in Kuantan, Malaysia. In this study, there are 2 different ratios of training and validating methods. Firstly, the initial ratio used is 60:40 which indicates 600 breath cycles for training and remaining 400 breath cycles used for testing. Then, the ratio is varied using 70:30 ratio for training and testing data.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The mean residual error between original airway pressure and reconstructed airway pressure is denoted as the magnitude of effort. The median and interquartile range of mean residual error for both ratio are 0.0557 [0.0230 - 0.0874] and 0.0534 [0.0219 - 0.0870] respectively for all patients. The results also show that Patient 2 has the highest percentage of SB incidence and Patient 10 with the lowest percentage of SB incidence which proved that NARX model is able to perform for both higher incidence of SB effort or when there is a lack of SB effort.
CONCLUSION: This model is able to produce the SB incidence rate based on 10% threshold. Hence, the proposed NARX model is potentially useful to estimate and identify patient-specific SB effort, which has the potential to further assist clinical decisions and optimize MV settings.
METHODS: A retrospective, observational study was performed among infants aged 6 months and below hospitalized for COVID-19 in a tertiary state hospital in Malaysia between February 1 and April 30, 2022. The primary outcome was "serious disease," defined as pneumonia requiring respiratory support or dehydration with warning signs. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine independent predictors for serious disease.
RESULTS: A total of 102 infants were included in the study; 53.9% were males with a median age of 11 weeks (interquartile range: 5-20 weeks). Sixteen patients (15.7%) had pre-existing comorbidities, including preterm birth. Fever was the most common presenting symptom (82.4%), followed by cough (53.9%), and rhinorrhea (31.4%). Forty-one infants (40.2%) presented with serious disease, warranting either respiratory support or intravenous fluid therapy for dehydration. Recent maternal COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a reduced risk of serious disease on univariate analysis but was not significant after multivariate adjustment (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.39; 95% CI: 0.14-1.11; p = 0.08). Exclusive breastfeeding was protective against serious COVID-19 in young infants, independent of other confounding factors (aOR 0.21, 95% CI: 0.06-0.71; p = 0.01).
CONCLUSION: COVID-19 is a serious disease with non-specific clinical manifestations in young infants. Exclusive breastfeeding could play an important protective role.