Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

K Enock

Publications and source records attributed to K Enock.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Respiratory function in survivors of the United Kingdom Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Trial.

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) improves survival in mature neonates with reversible lung disease. However, ECMO could result in survival of infants with severe respiratory dysfunction who would otherwise have died. Alternatively, infants receiving ECMO might be spared prolonged ventilation and consequent barotrauma, resulting in improved respiratory function. Our aim was to compare respiratory function at 1 yr of age in infants assigned to receive either ECMO or conventional management (CM). Seventy-eight surviving infants of the United Kingdom (UK) ECMO trial (51 in the ECMO group) were studied at 1 yr of age. Questionnaires provided details of respiratory symptoms, and laboratory measurements of respiratory function were made for respiratory rate, tidal volume, lung volume, airway conductance, specific airway conductance, and maximal expiratory flow at FRC (Vmax (FRC)). Data were exchanged on floppy disk for cross-analysis and to ensure that investigators were blinded to the status of the infants. There was a wide spectrum of respiratory function, from normal to markedly abnormal. There were few differences between the groups, but in the CM group lung volume was increased (95% confidence intervals [CIs] of the difference in ECMO versus CM subjects: -67; -4 ml), and inspiratory specific conductance was lower (95% CI: 0.03; 0.98 s(-)(1). kPa(-)(1)). There was a trend toward a lower V max(FRC) (95% CI: -2; 67 ml/s(-)(1) in the CM group. In addition to providing a survival advantage, ECMO did not worsen lung function in infants assigned to receive it. Indeed, their lung function appeared slightly better than that of infants treated conventionally.

Child Development↗

Project Charlie.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Health Education↗

Costing neonatal care alongside the Collaborative ECMO trial: how much primary research is required?

Researchers working on economic evaluations alongside trials have to balance minimising data collection with maximising the ability to measure differences in costs. Using existing data sources may keep the costs of research down, but these data may not be entirely appropriate to the evaluation question. When evaluating technologies in intensive care it is particularly important to be able to classify patients correctly by their resource requirements especially when those requirements vary considerably from day to day. This paper describes and justifies methods for costing the care provided for babies in (one arm of) an on-going multi-centre trial, the Collaborative ECMO trial. This trial is evaluating alternative policies of life support for mature (full term) newborn babies with severe respiratory failure. The most reliable cost information on neonatal intensive care is available from a study, conducted independently from the trial, which has used simple cost apportionment on a large sample of units. By drawing on clinical opinion and carrying out a case note exercise we assessed whether this available information was appropriate to estimate 'baseline' costs for the control group during their initial 'acute' phase of illness. We concluded that the available cost estimates would need to be weighted to reflect the additional costs of drugs and investigations for this group of babies during the acute phase. Multidisciplinary collaboration on trials can help economists and other researchers to balance the requirement for simple cost measurements with more detailed primary research.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗