Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
12 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2016-08-01
2017-03-22
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Diaphragm Electrical Activity of Preterm Infants on nCPAP With Binasal Prongs Versus RAM Cannula
NCT03121781
Crossover Comparison of Tidal Volume Delivery During Nasal Intermittent Positive Pressure Ventilation in Preterm Infants: Infant Cannula vs. Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Prongs
NCT04326270
A Comparison of Methods of Discontinuing Nasal CPAP in Premature Infants <30 Weeks Gestation
NCT03292562
Comparing Weaning of Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) From Preterm Infants
NCT02126501
Level of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) in Preterm Infants After Extubation (L-CPAP Study)
NCT00636324
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
To compare efficacy of delivering continuous distending pressure in preterm neonates using RAM cannula versus the standard prongs (Hudson prongs) by measuring intra-oral pressure. It is hypothesize that CPAP delivered with RAM cannula is comparable to pressure delivered via standard nasal interface in routine clinical practice; and the desired CPAP level is often not achieved in presence of variable leak from mouth irrespective of type of nasal interface.
Aim 1: Compare the level of CPAP in oral cavity between RAM cannula and Hudson prong nasal interface in preterm Hypothesis: The intraoral pressure with CPAP will not be different with use of RAM cannula or Hudson prong nasal interface
Aim 2: Evaluate the effect of nasal interface (RAM cannula and Hudson prong) on respiratory variables Hypothesis: There will be no difference in respiratory variables with CPAP delivered by RAM cannula compared to Hudson prongs.
Method:
This was a single center prospective study. Inclusion criteria: Any preterm with respiratory distress requiring CPAP but not mechanical ventilation or NIPPV was eligible for the study. 12 preterm infant more than 48 hours old and stable on bubble CPAP were recruited for the study Exclusion criteria: Infants with major congenital anomalies, neuromuscular disorders, upper airway anomalies, critically sick infants
CPHS approval and parental consent was obtained prior to enrollment in the study.
Each infant was studied for \~1 hour during which the oral pressure was measured while receiving CPAP with RAM nasal cannula interface and then with Hudson prongs. Blinding of the intervention (nasal interface) was not feasible because of the visible differences in the two nasal interfaces.
Procedure: Intra-oral pressure measured via a differential pressure transducer while infant in receiving CPAP, and digitized data recorded with each nasal interface ( goal to record at least 20 sec of stable waveform on each nasal interface). Standard care provided during the study period and no changes made with CPAP level or flow.
The difference between set pressure and measured pressure with RAM cannula and Hudson prong was compared with standard paired student t-test with 95% confidence limits. Difference in other variables will be similarly compared with t-test. STAT 12 will be used for statistical analysis.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
CASE_CROSSOVER
PROSPECTIVE
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
RAM cannula and Hudson prongs
Measuring intraoral pressure using two different nasal interface for applying nasal continuous positive airway pressure
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
48 Hours
52 Weeks
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Singh N, McNally MJ, Darnall RA. Does the RAM Cannula Provide Continuous Positive Airway Pressure as Effectively as the Hudson Prongs in Preterm Neonates? Am J Perinatol. 2019 Jul;36(8):849-854. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1675330. Epub 2018 Nov 5.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
STUDY00029410
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.