FindTrial
Sign In

Is Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation through nasal route better than free flow oxygen over mouth and nose during endotracheal intubation in neonates?

Use of Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation Versus Free Flow Oxygen during Endotracheal Intubation in Neonates: a Randomized Control Trial

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2020/03/024031
Enrollment
50
Registered
2020-03-18
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2026-01-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: J984- Other disorders of lung

Interventions

Intervention1: Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation (NIPPV): NIPPV involves use of a ventilator to provide intermittent breaths from nares as peak inspiratory pressures and rates similar t

Sponsors

Dipen Vasudev Patel
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: All neonates admitted in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) who are on Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) / NIPPV, requiring endotracheal intubation and spontaneously breathing will be included in this study.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Emergency intubation in neonates will be excluded. 2. Neonates who are not on CPAP before the judgement of intubation is made will be excluded.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
To study the complication during endotracheal intubation with NIPPV Vs. Free Flow Oxygen deliveryTimepoint: Every 12 weeks—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
To study failed intubation rates in both the groupsTimepoint: Every 12 weeks—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactSomashekhar Marutirao Nimbalkar

Shree Krishna Hospital, Pramukhswami Medical College

dipen_patel258@yahoo.co.in9825331453

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026