Skip to content

Pilot Study of High-flow Humidified Nasal Oxygen During Breaks From Noninvasive Ventilation

Pilot Study of Optiflow as a NIV Rest Therapy

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01925534
Acronym
OPTINIV
Enrollment
47
Registered
2013-08-19
Start date
2013-11-30
Completion date
2016-12-31
Last updated
2024-07-03

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

Conditions

Acute Respiratory Failure, Treatment With Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation

Keywords

Optiflow, Humidified high-flow oxygen therapy, Noninvasive ventilation, Acute respiratory failure, Standard oxygen therapy

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to assess whether Optiflow, a high-flow humidified oxygen delivery system, is superior to standard oxygen therapy during breaks off noninvasive ventilation in patients affected by acute respiratory failure and in respiratory distress. The investigators anticipate that the Optiflow will provide oxygen more effectively, be more comfortable and permit longer breaks off NIV, shortening the total duration of NIV.

Detailed description

Background: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) provides respiratory support to many patients affected by acute respiratory failure. This treatment, compared to invasive mechanical ventilation, allows patients to take intermittent breaks during which oxygen therapy is provided through a nasal cannula or mask. During these breaks, the lack of ventilator support may predispose to respiratory distress, retention of CO2 and oxygen desaturation. Optiflow is a nasal humidified (37◦C, 44mg/L H2O) high-flow (up to 60 L/min) therapy which can provide greater support than standard oxygen therapy during the breaks from NIV. Aim of the study is to evaluate Optiflow as an alternative to standard oxygen therapy during breaks from NIV in patients with acute respiratory failure. The investigators hypothesize tha Optiflow will reduce the total length of stay on NIV, and increase the comfort and length of the breaks. Also, the investigators anticipate that it will reduce respiratory rate, accessory muscle use and dyspnea score compared to standard oxygen therapy. Experimental design Prospective open-label, parallel, randomized (1:1) controlled study, with a target enrollment of 70. Study procedures Enrolled patients receiving NIV will be randomized into two arms; a treatment group which will receive Optiflow during breaks and a control arm which will receive standard oxygen therapy during breaks. In both cases, FiO2 will be titrated to maintain oxygen saturation above 90%. The necessity of breaks will be determined together with the patients (talk, eat, medication, communicate with family, inability to tolerate the interface), and the need to resume NIV will be based on clinical data, such as dyspnea, respiratory rate, heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, transcutaneous carbon dioxide (CO2) and patients' desire. Recorded data: The investigators will record demographic baseline data; Glasgow Coma Scale, respiratory and heart rate, blood pressure, dyspnea score, accessory muscle use, and comfort score at randomization, at the end of each NIV session and NIV break; the length of each NIV session and break; the medications administered and all the arterial blood gases (ABG) on a daily basis. Moreover the investigators will record the NIV parameters and inspired oxygen fraction (FiO2) at each session and break. Risks: The investigators don't anticipate any significant risks related to the study procedures and equipment. Some patients may not tolerate the Optiflow and some patients may fail NIV and require intubation.

Interventions

During breaks from NIV oxygen will be provided through the Optiflow with FiO2 and flow-rate titrated to maintain the oxygen saturation (SpO2) above 90%.

During breaks from NIV oxygen will be provided by standard nasal cannula or mask to maintain the SpO2 above 90%.

Sponsors

Fisher and Paykel Healthcare
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
Tufts Medical Center
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients of 18 or more years of age treated with Bipap or CPAP as per hospital protocol, with an underlying clinical diagnosis of acute respiratory failure. * Patients that, prior to administration of NIV, had persistent respiratory acidosis with a pH \<7.35 and arterial CO2 \> 45 mmHg despite controlled oxygen therapy and standard medical management i.e. bronchodilators, corticosteroids and antibiotics, or * Patients with hypoxemic respiratory failure with a PaO2/FiO2 ratio \< 300 and respiratory rate ≥ 24. * Anticipated duration on NIV of at least 24 hrs

Exclusion criteria

* Usual contraindications to NIV * Respiratory arrest * Unable to fit mask * Medically unstable or multiple organ failure or unstable coronary disease * Agitated or uncooperative * Unable to protect airways * Swallowing difficulties * Excessive secretions not managed by clearance techniques * Recent upper airway or gastro-intestinal surgery * Facial deformity or previous head and neck surgery * Undrained pneumothorax * NIV failure within first 2 hours (either intolerance or requirement for intubation) * Managed for greater than 48 hours on NIV prior to randomization * Disorientation, confusion, unable to rate comfort or dyspnea * Expected to require NIV for fewer than 24 hrs from the time of enrollment * Patient previously in study * Patients on CPAP nighttime only due to OSA Withdrawal/Termination criteria: * Patients will be withdrawn from the study when NIV fails and/or the patient is intubated.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Length of Stay on Noninvasive Ventilation (NIV)Day 1-7The investigator will measure the total time on NIV in day(s), hours and minutes. This is done by having nursing staff note times of NIV start to finish of each session of NIV. They were added to get cumulative time.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Assessment of Respiratory Rate During Breakday 1-4Evaluation of respiratory rate. This was counted for a minute at bedside at start and finish of break.
Patients' ComfortDay 2-4Using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Patients rate how comfortable they felt on a 1 to 10 scale with 10 being most comfortable and 1 being the least comfortable.
Length of Breaks From NIVDay 4-10This is done by having nursing staff note times of break start (off NIV) to start of next session of NIV in minutes. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess differences between hypercapnic and hypoxemic patients, not observed in terms of time spent on or off NIV.
Need for IntubationDays 2-10Count of participants who underwent endotracheal intubation
Ease of EatingDay 1-4difficulty eating using patient rating on a visual analog scale of 0 for easy eating and 4 for difficult eating. Results tabulated as number of patients finding it easy to eat (Score of 0-1)
Oxygen Saturation During Breaksday 1-4Using pulse oximetry (SpO2) at beginning and end of breaks

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Optiflow
High-flow humidified nasal oxygen delivery system High-flow humidified nasal oxygen delivery system: During breaks from NIV oxygen will be provided through the Optiflow with FiO2 and flow-rate titrated to maintain the oxygen saturation (SpO2) above 90%.
23
Oxygen Therapy
Standard oxygen therapy Standard oxygen therapy: During breaks from NIV oxygen will be provided by standard nasal cannula or mask to maintain the SpO2 above 90%.
24
Total47

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicOptiflowOxygen TherapyTotal
Age, Continuous67.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.8
63.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14
66.17 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.2
Region of Enrollment
United States
23 participants24 participants47 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
15 Participants14 Participants29 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
8 Participants10 Participants18 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 230 / 24
other
Total, other adverse events
11 / 2315 / 24
serious
Total, serious adverse events
2 / 230 / 24

Outcome results

Primary

Length of Stay on Noninvasive Ventilation (NIV)

The investigator will measure the total time on NIV in day(s), hours and minutes. This is done by having nursing staff note times of NIV start to finish of each session of NIV. They were added to get cumulative time.

Time frame: Day 1-7

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OptiflowLength of Stay on Noninvasive Ventilation (NIV)1404 MinutesStandard Deviation 1386
Oxygen TherapyLength of Stay on Noninvasive Ventilation (NIV)1386 MinutesStandard Deviation 951
Secondary

Assessment of Respiratory Rate During Break

Evaluation of respiratory rate. This was counted for a minute at bedside at start and finish of break.

Time frame: day 1-4

Population: Two groups randomly allocated to High Flow or Standard oxygen therapy

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OptiflowAssessment of Respiratory Rate During BreakRespiratory Rate: Break23.8 breaths/minStandard Deviation 6.8
OptiflowAssessment of Respiratory Rate During BreakRespiratory Rate: NIV23.3 breaths/minStandard Deviation 5.3
Oxygen TherapyAssessment of Respiratory Rate During BreakRespiratory Rate: Break21.8 breaths/minStandard Deviation 5.2
Oxygen TherapyAssessment of Respiratory Rate During BreakRespiratory Rate: NIV20.1 breaths/minStandard Deviation 4.1
Secondary

Ease of Eating

difficulty eating using patient rating on a visual analog scale of 0 for easy eating and 4 for difficult eating. Results tabulated as number of patients finding it easy to eat (Score of 0-1)

Time frame: Day 1-4

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
OptiflowEase of Eating20 Participants
Oxygen TherapyEase of Eating15 Participants
Secondary

Length of Breaks From NIV

This is done by having nursing staff note times of break start (off NIV) to start of next session of NIV in minutes. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess differences between hypercapnic and hypoxemic patients, not observed in terms of time spent on or off NIV.

Time frame: Day 4-10

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OptiflowLength of Breaks From NIV1345 minutesStandard Deviation 902
Oxygen TherapyLength of Breaks From NIV1221 minutesStandard Deviation 770
Secondary

Need for Intubation

Count of participants who underwent endotracheal intubation

Time frame: Days 2-10

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
OptiflowNeed for Intubation2 Participants
Oxygen TherapyNeed for Intubation0 Participants
Secondary

Oxygen Saturation During Breaks

Using pulse oximetry (SpO2) at beginning and end of breaks

Time frame: day 1-4

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OptiflowOxygen Saturation During BreaksSpO2, % mean: Break94.1 arterial oxygen saturation (%)Standard Deviation 3.2
OptiflowOxygen Saturation During BreaksSpO2, % final: Break93.7 arterial oxygen saturation (%)Standard Deviation 5
OptiflowOxygen Saturation During BreaksSpO2, % final: NIV95.9 arterial oxygen saturation (%)Standard Deviation 2.9
Oxygen TherapyOxygen Saturation During BreaksSpO2, % mean: Break94.7 arterial oxygen saturation (%)Standard Deviation 2.1
Oxygen TherapyOxygen Saturation During BreaksSpO2, % final: Break95.4 arterial oxygen saturation (%)Standard Deviation 2.7
Oxygen TherapyOxygen Saturation During BreaksSpO2, % final: NIV96.4 arterial oxygen saturation (%)Standard Deviation 2
Secondary

Patients' Comfort

Using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Patients rate how comfortable they felt on a 1 to 10 scale with 10 being most comfortable and 1 being the least comfortable.

Time frame: Day 2-4

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OptiflowPatients' ComfortVAS Comfort Score Break8.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.7
OptiflowPatients' ComfortVAS Comfort Score NIV5.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.9
Oxygen TherapyPatients' ComfortVAS Comfort Score Break6.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.3
Oxygen TherapyPatients' ComfortVAS Comfort Score NIV6.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.9

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026