Evaluation of passive ventilation provision in domestic housing retrofit

Increasing energy efficiency in the residential sector, while maintaining adequate home ventilation for health and well-being, is proving to be a challenge. This study assesses the efficacy of passive ventilation strategies designed to comply with building regulations and imposed after housing energy-efficiency retrofits. In particular, it focuses on the provision of ventilation using background through-wall vents, which remains a common strategy in a number of European countries including Ireland and the UK, where vent sizes, related to floor area, are stipulated in building regulations. A collective of social housing, with background through-wall vents installed post thermal retrofit, is taken as a case study. These homes are modelled to interrogate the impact of the passive ventilation strategy on house air exchange rate and thermal heating energy loads. The reaction of occupants to through-wall vent installation is decidedly negative and many block vents to limit thermal discomfort and heat loss. Simulation studies show significant external air ingress through vents. A wide range of effective air change rates are observed when vents are sized without reference to building airtightness, and significant energy penalties result for the leakier homes. This study evaluates the provision of passive through-wall ventilation as part of a retrofit programme and shows it to have a number of drawbacks that may impact on the health of the building and its occupants and ultimately be at odds with the aims of achieving energy efficiency in the residential sector.

Compared with specialist registrars, experienced staff nurses shorten the duration of weaning neonates from mechanical ventilation

OBJECTIVE: To compare the overall performance of specially trained neonatal nurses acting autonomously, unsupervised, and without a protocol with specialist registrars when weaning neonates from mechanical ventilation.

DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

SETTING: A single neonatal intensive care unit.

PATIENTS: Neonates requiring conventional mechanical ventilation (n = 50).

INTERVENTIONS: Infants on conventional ventilation were randomly assigned to receive either nurse-led (n = 25) or registrar-led (n = 23) weaning. A total of 48 infants completed the study (two infants in the registrar group were excluded when their parents withdrew consent).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The main outcome measure, median weaning time, was 1200 mins (95% confidence interval [CI], 621-1779 mins) in the nurse group and 3015 mins (95% CI, 2650-3380 mins) in the registrar group (p = .0458). The median time from treatment assignment to the first ventilator change was 60 mins (95% CI, 52-68 mins) in the nurse group and 120 mins (95% CI, 103-137 mins) in the registrar group (p = .35). On average, the nurses made ventilator changes every 4.5 hrs (95% CI, 2.9-6 hrs) and the registrars every 7.2 hrs (95% CI, 5.4-9 hrs; p = .003). The median number (range) of backward steps taken per infant was 0 (0-5 steps) in the nurse group and 1 (0-5 steps) in the registrar group (p = .019).

CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that additional domains of neonatal critical care could be reviewed for their potential transfer to appropriately prepared nurses.

Non-invasive Ventilation of Patients with ARDS: Insights from the LUNG SAFE Study

Background: Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is increasingly used in patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). Whether, during NIV, the categorization of ARDS severity based on the PaO2/FiO2 Berlin criteria is useful is unknown. The evidence supporting NIV use in patients with ARDS remains relatively sparse.

Methods: The Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE (LUNG SAFE) study described the management of patients with ARDS. This sub-study examines the current practice of NIV use in ARDS, the utility of the PaO2/FiO2 ratio in classifying patients receiving NIV and the impact of NIV on outcome.

Results: Of 2,813 patients with ARDS, 436 (15.5%) were managed with NIV on days 1 and 2 following fulfillment of diagnostic criteria. Classification of ARDS severity based on PaO2/FiO2 ratio was associated with an increase in intensity of ventilatory support, NIV failure, and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) mortality. NIV failure occurred in 22.2% of mild, 42.3% of moderate and 47.1% of patients with severe ARDS. Hospital mortality in patients with NIV success and failure was 16.1 % and 45.4%, respectively. NIV use was independently associated with increased ICU (HR 1.446; [1.159-1.805]), but not hospital mortality. In a propensity matched analysis, ICU mortality was higher in NIV than invasively ventilated patients with a PaO2/FiO2 lower than 150 mmHg.

Conclusions: NIV was used in 15% of patients with ARDS, irrespective of severity category. NIV appears to be associated with higher ICU mortality in patients with a PaO2/FiO2 lower than 150 mmHg.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02010073