Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=3 Randomized Treatment

Cross-over Comparison of the V60 System to Other Bi-Level Noninvasive Ventilators

Respiratory Insufficiency · Respiratory Failure

Enrolled (actual)
3
Serious AEs
Results posted
Aug 2009
Primary outcome: Primary: Breathing Comfort — 10; 40; 33.3; 45 visual analog scale

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Use of the V60 Mask Ventilator (Device)
Age
Pediatric, Adult · 7+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
Respironics, California, Inc.
Primary completion
Mar 2009

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Breathing Comfort
10; 40; 33.3; 45
SECONDARY
Saturation of Arterial Oxygen
SECONDARY
Respiratory Rate
SECONDARY
Minute Ventilation
SECONDARY
Heart Rate
SECONDARY
Blood Pressure

Summary

The purpose of this study is to compare a new noninvasive ventilator to existing ventilators already used for patient care.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Age > 7 years and 20 kg (44 lbs)
  • Respiratory failure or respiratory insufficiency
  • Ability to cooperate with the investigators
  • Designated adult able to provide Informed Consent

Exclusion Criteria

  • An endotracheal tube or tracheostomy in place
  • Hemodynamically instability
  • Prolonged apnea
  • Inability to maintain the airway
  • A recent history of cardiac and or respiratory arrest
  • Acute hemorrhage
  • Multiple organ system failure
  • Undrained pneumothorax
  • High risk for aspiration
  • Metastatic or terminal cancer
  • Do-not-resuscitate orders
  • Inability to clear respiratory secretions
  • Inability to fit a mask
  • Facial surgery, trauma, or deformity
  • Upper gastrointestinal or airway surgery
  • Pregnancy
  • Refractory delirium
  • PaO2 < 50 mmHg on present settings
  • Designee unable or unwilling to provide Informed Consent
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00817804). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search