There has been a lack of data comparing NIPPV with CPAP when higher than regular pressures (8 cmH2O) are allowed in the latter from a real-world setting. In this CIHR-funded study – in collaboration and with support from the Evidence-Based Practices for Improving Quality (EPIQ) and Canadian Neonatal Network (CNN) organizations – we compared clinical outcomes across centres who use either NIPPV or CPAP (with pressures higher than 8 cmH2O allowed, as well as rescue with alternate non-invasive modes) to support preterm neonates following extubation.
We noted that while CPAP was not non-inferior (and inferior) to NIPPV for the outcome of extubation failure, CPAP was non-inferior to NIPPV for the outcome of re-intubation. This means that if CPAP levels higher than 8 cmH2O and/or rescue with alternate modes are permitted, CPAP may be reasonable post-extubation mode
​Link to Publication: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38511227/
​
ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT04075123