Evaluation of the Effect of Warm and Humidified Oxygen as Compared to the Humidified Oxygen Alone in Neonates and Children with Respiratory Distress

Abstract Introduction: Respiratory distress is common for which oxygen forms the mainstay of treatment and is given as humidified oxygen to newborn and children. The aim of the present study is to evaluate and compare the effect of warm and humidified oxygen with humidified oxygen alone in neonates and children with respiratory distress. Materials and Methods: For this study, 60 neonates and 60 children (2-12 years) with respiratory distress were enrolled. Oxygen supplementation was given as humidified oxygen for initial stabilization for 2 hours as per the extant practice and subsequently, neonates and children were divided into two subgroups for schema of evaluation and comparison as warm and humidified followed by humidified oxygen for 2 hours and again warm (36°C-38°C) and humidified oxygen and reversed for other schema. Results were analyzed using two-tailed t-test. Results: A majority of neonates were preterms (n = 32; 53.33%) and respiratory distress syndrome (n = 20; 33.33%) was the commonest cause followed by transient tachypnea of newborn (n = 18; 30%), perinatal asphyxia (n = 6; 10%), and meconium aspiration syndrome (n = 5; 8.33%). A majority of neonates had moderate respiratory distress with Downe’s score of 4.13 ± 2.01 and responded well to supplemental oxygen alone. The difference of the Downe’s score was not statistically significant when compared at 2 hours, 4 hours, and 6 hours (P > .05). Among the children with respiratory distress (asthma), the largest subgroup (n = 13; 36.1%) had moderate to severe exacerbation at presentation. The difference of the respiratory distress score was not statistically significant when compared at 2 hours, 4 hours, and 6 hours (P > .05). Conclusion: The current method of humidified oxygen delivery can be continued for oxygen therapy of neonates. Stand-alone humidifier with warmidification is useful when used as high flow nasal cannula for its additional effect of positive airway pressure. Multicentric and larger randomized control trials may provide further evidence on the subject issue