• Pediatric pulmonology · Nov 2017

    Observational Study

    Performance of a tracheostomy removal protocol for pediatric patients in rehabilitation after acquired brain injury: Factors associated with timing and possibility of decannulation.

    • Marco Pozzi, Sara Galbiati, Federica Locatelli, Emilio Clementi, and Sandra Strazzer.
    • Scientific Institute IRCCS Eugenio Medea, Bosisio Parini, Lecco, Italy.
    • Pediatr. Pulmonol. 2017 Nov 1; 52 (11): 1509-1517.

    ObjectivesWe assessed the performance of a tracheostomy decannulation protocol privileging safety over quickness, in pediatric patients undergoing rehabilitation from severe acquired brain injury. We analyzed factors associated with decannulation timing and possibility and examined cases of failure.HypothesisA safe decannulation protocol should minimize failures.Study DesignRetrospective observational study.Patient SelectionPatients aged 0-17 admitted to rehabilitation with tracheostomy in the last 15 years (n = 123).MethodologyWe collected data on clinical and respiratory conditions at admittance, during the first rehabilitation stay and following follow-up controls. We described the sample and tested associations of several factors with the possibility to decannulate patients during either the first stay or follow-up. We described failures, defined as the cases in which tracheostomy tube had to be placed back immediately or after less than 1 month from removal.ResultsAt admittance, 93.5% patients were dysphagic and 37.9% had respiratory complications (mainly accumulation of supraglottic secretions). At first discharge, dysphagia was reduced (62.1%) and respiratory complications increased (41.1%). Tracheostomy was removed during the first stay in 55.3% patients, during follow-up in 13%, without failures among the 80 patients who followed the protocol. Four decannulations performed against protocol recommendations resulted in three failures. Decannulation was mainly prevented by the persistence of respiratory complications and dysphagia that constituted a relevant risk of aspiration and suffocation; decannulation was mainly postponed because of respiratory complications and breath-holding spells in very young children.ConclusionsBy applying a decannulation protocol that privileges safety over quickness, we encountered no failure. Respiratory complications and dysphagia that lead to supraglottic stagnation, and breath-holding spells, are key elements to consider before performing decannulation in pediatric patients.© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…