Chest
Clinical InvestigationsSubjective Effects of Humidification of Oxygen for Delivery By Nasal Cannula: A Prospective Study
Section snippets
Hospital Survey
Hospitals listed in the American Hospital Association Guide to Hospitals9 as having between 575 and 625 beds were contacted by telephone. The director of the hospital's respiratory therapy department, or other knowledgable individual in the department, was asked about departmental policies for humidification of oxygen for delivery by nasal cannula. In those departments in which oxygen was not routinely humidified for all such patients, departmental criteria for selection of patients to receive
Hospital Survey
The results of the telephone survey are presented in Table 2. There was wide variability in the policies for routine oxygen humidification. In nearly half of the hospitals surveyed, all patients received humidified nasal oxygen, and only three hospitals did not routinely humidify nasal oxygen for at least some patients. Twenty-five of the 30 hospitals in which oxygen was not routinely humidified cited recent evidence indicating lack of justification.5, 6
Patient Complaints
Figure 1 shows complaints, by type, of
DISCUSSION
The results of our telephone survey indicated that respiratory therapy departments in medium-sized American hospitals vary widely with regard to their policies for routine humidification of nasal oxygen. Of 55 hospitals surveyed, nearly half humidified oxygen for all patients and most of the remainder delivered humidified oxygen to patients receiving oxygen flow rates in excess of 2-4 L/min. Only three surveyed hospitals did not routinely humidify nasal cannula oxygen at all. By the nature of
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank Dennis Gelgut, R.R.T., for assisting with the hospital survey, Alexander Scott Kennedy for computer data input, and Phyllis Burch, C.R.T.T., for medical records research. We also appreciate the suggestions of Dr. R. M. Senior during the preparation of this manuscript.
REFERENCES (23)
Humidification and mucous flow in the intubated trachea
Br J Anaesth
(1973)- et al.
Cost-benefit comparison of aerosol bronchodilator delivery methods in hospitalized patients
Chest
(1987) Self-administration of bronchodilators: Cost effective?
Chest
(1987)Aerosol therapy
Respiratory therapy equipment
(1981)- et al.
Clinical application of respiratory care
(1979) - et al.
Egan's Fundamentals of respiratory therapy
(1982) - et al.
Humidity in anaesthesiology
III. Heat and moisture patterns in the respiratory tract during anaesthesia with the semi-closed system. Can Anaesth Soc J
(1967) Bubble humidifiers are useful—Fact or myth?
Respir Care
(1982)Subjective effects of dry versus humidified low-flow oxygen
Respir Care
(1980)
ACCP-NHLBI National Conference on Oxygen Therapy
Fulmer, JD, chairman. Chest
Cited by (69)
Operating principles, physiological effects and practical issues of high-flow nasal oxygen therapy
2022, Revue des Maladies RespiratoiresPhysiological Benefits of High Flow Nasal Oxygen
2022, Small Animal Critical Care MedicineImpact of an Improvised System on Preserving Oxygen Supplies in Patients With COVID-19
2021, Archivos de BronconeumologiaHigh-Flow Therapy by Nasal Cannulae Versus High-Flow Face Mask in Severe Hypoxemia After Cardiac Surgery: A Single-Center Randomized Controlled Study—The HEART FLOW Study
2020, Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular AnesthesiaCitation Excerpt :The FIO2 was determined as follows: the FIO2 set on the device for HFNC or on the ventilator for NIV, FIO2 of 100% for HFFM 15L/min,13-15 the FIO2 specified on the manufacturer datasheet for Venturi mask, or corresponding to the oxygen flow for nasal prongs delivering low-flow oxygen.16 Secondary outcomes were the effectiveness of oxygen support (PaO2/FIO2 at 6 and 48 hours, arterial carbon dioxide partial pressure, respiratory and heart rates until 48 hours); treatment failure defined as SpO2 <96% despite HFNC with FIO2 of 100% or HFFM 15L/min, or respiratory rate ≥25 breaths/min, increased work of breathing (dyspnea, in-drawing, or accessory-muscle use), or hypercapnia ≥45 mmHg7,17; the tolerance of the device assessed by (1) a visual 1-5 satisfaction scale on ICU discharge,18 (2) the occurrence of nasal bleeding, and (3) mucus dryness during oxygen therapy (considered if the patient declared dry mouth, nose, or throat)19; and radiologic score on chest X-ray assessing the severity of the infiltrate from day 0 to day 29 outcome in the ICU (invasive ventilation for refractory hypoxemia, hemodynamic instability, length of stay). The follow-up team and the physician who interpreted the chest X-rays were blinded to the randomization group.
Humidification of Blow-By Oxygen During Recovery of Postoperative Pediatric Patients: One Unit's Journey
2018, Journal of Perianesthesia NursingCitation Excerpt :On the basis of the interview data, the patients in this study all preferred the nonhumidified oxygen and no adverse effects were reported.5 Another study compared adult patients receiving continuous humidified (n = 99) and nonhumidified (n = 86) high-flow oxygen delivery and found no difference in complaints of dry nose and throat.6 Similarly, Estey7 found no significant differences or problems between the humidified group versus the nonhumidified group in his studies of randomly selected patients receiving low-flow oxygen (1 to 4 liters per minute nasal cannula).
Supported in part by USPHS Grant No. HL30341 and by The Council for Tobacco Research, U.S.A., Inc.
Manuscript received June 1; revision accepted July 17.