CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05512689Updated Nov 22, 2023

Optimization of Ventilation Strategies in Preterm and Term Infants in a Single-center Intervention Study

An interventional study of Ventilations while using a respiratory function monitor in Lung-protective Ventilation and Respiratory Function Monitor, sponsored by Medical University of Vienna. Completed at 1 site in Austria. Open to participants aged Up to 12 Months, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-11-22.

Sponsored by Medical University of Vienna · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 7 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Jan 2022, registered Aug 2022).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
90
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
Up to 12 Months
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study was a non-blinded, non-randomized intervention study in a single-center clinical setting, analyzing ventilation quality with and without RFM visibility.

Read the detailed description

The study was conducted at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and the delivery room at the Division of Neonatology, at the Medical University of Vienna.

We aimed to record ventilation parameters (tidal volume, mask leak, ventilation rate, PIP, PEEP) using a CE-certified Respiratory Function Monitor (Neo100, Monivent AB, Gothenburg, Sweden), which was either hidden or visible to the provider responsible for the airway (airway provider), during ventilations on term and preterm patients at the NICU and the delivery room.

The investigators aimed to determine the quality of ventilations performed by healthcare professionals depending on RFM visibility. Analysis occurred, determining whether observing the data displayed on the RFM during PPV of preterm and newborn infants lead to adjustments in applied pressure and an increase in the proportion of inflations performed within a predefined range of 4-8 ml/kg for VTe.

The investigators hypothesized that using a RFM with numeric and graphical display of values during positive pressure ventilation of infants will lead to i) more frequent recognition and correction of tidal volumes outside the predefined range and ii) reduction of mask leak.

This knowledge gain may improve future training using a RFM to improve the quality of ventilations and, thereby, patient safety.

02

Conditions studied

  • Lung-protective Ventilation
  • Respiratory Function Monitor
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Medical University of Vienna is the lead sponsor of 1,076 studies on the registry; 177 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Up to 12 Months
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) and in the delivery room who receive positive pressure ventilation
  • Written consent from parents or legal guardians of patients
  • Preterm and term infants (male and female, any gestational age)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Healthcare professionals or parents/legal guardians, representing their children, that do not consent to participation in this study
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Sequential assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
90 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • No intervention
    Control group

    In the control group, the healthcare professional ventilates the infants without any feedback about the ventilation. This represents the normal clinical setting. The RFM will be recording data on the ventilation quality.

  • Active comparator
    Interventional group

    In the interventional group, healthcare professionals will ventilate the infants using the RFM and are able to adapt their ventilations according to the RFM feedback.

    Device: Ventilations while using a respiratory function monitor

Interventions

  • DeviceVentilations while using a respiratory function monitor

    Healthcare professionals are able to use a feedback device to guide their ventilations.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Proportion of ventilations with VTe between 4-8ml/kg

    percentage of ventilations within range divided through all ventilations performed, for each participant

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

Secondary outcomes

  1. Mean value for mask leak and proportion of ventilations with excessive mask leak (defined as >50%) during all ventilations

    defined as \> 50%

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  2. Occurrence of insufficient tidal volume (defined as <4mL/kg) as a proportion of ventilations given (face mask and endotracheal tube)

    defined as \< 4ml/kg

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  3. Occurrence of excessive tidal volume (defined as >8mL/kg) as a proportion of ventilations given (face mask and endotracheal tube)

    defined as \> 8ml/kg

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  4. Mean value for ventilation rate (defined as ventilations per minute)

    defined as ventilations per minute

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  5. Mean value for peak inflation pressure

    defined as \> 35 cmH2O

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  6. Outcome data and adverse events

    this included diagnoses (i.e., bronchopulmonary dysplasia \[BPD\], persistent ductus arteriosus \[PDA\], IVH, periventricular leukomalacia \[PVL\], and pneumothorax) and the time frame of occurrence (within 24 hours, one week, or during the total hospital stay). BPD was defined as the need of any respiratory support at the GA of 36 weeks, evaluated for infants below 32+0 weeks GA. IVH was determined using the DEGUM classification

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  7. Comparison of elective versus delivery room interventions

    mean values for all evaluated ventilation parameters (VTe, leak, PIP, rate) for this comparison

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  8. Comparison of fellows vs. consultants

    mean values for all evaluated ventilation parameters (VTe, leak, PIP, rate) for this comparison

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  9. Comparison of sef-inflating-bag vs. neo-T

    mean values for all evaluated ventilation parameters (VTe, leak, PIP, rate) for this comparison

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

  10. Comparison of ventilations via face mask vs. endotracheal tube

    mean values for all evaluated ventilation parameters (VTe, leak, PIP, rate) for this comparison

    Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Medical University of Vienna
    Vienna, 1090, Austria
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — IPD will not be made available to other researchers.

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 22, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05512689
Lead sponsor
Medical University of Vienna
Responsible party
Michael Wagner (Principal Investigator, Medical University of Vienna) — Principal investigator
First posted
Aug 23, 2022
Start date
Jan 1, 2022
Primary completion
Mar 1, 2023
Completion
Mar 1, 2023
Last update
Nov 22, 2023

Study contacts

Michael Wagner, MD PhD
study director · Medical University of Vienna

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion