EFFECTIVENESS OF BUBBLE CPAP IN PRETERM NEONATES ADMITTED IN NICU WITH RDS USING THE DOWNES SCORING

Main Article Content

Dr Kamran Habib
Dr Fatima Khan
Dr Kanwal Jehanzeb
Dr Noor Ul Ain
Dr Abdur Rahman Hashmi
Dr Sobia Akhter

Abstract

Introduction: 


Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS) is a leading cause of mortality in preterm neonates. Bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (bCPAP) is a non-invasive, cost-effective respiratory support method endorsed for managing RDS, particularly in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of bCPAP in preterm neonates with RDS using the Downes scoring system.


Methods: 


A prospective interventional study was conducted in a tertiary care NICU over six months, involving 150 preterm neonates (<37 weeks gestation) with RDS and a Downes Score of ≥4. All neonates received bCPAP therapy. The primary outcome was the change in Downes Score from baseline to 1-, 6-, 12-, and 24-hours post-initiation. Success was defined as clinical improvement avoiding mechanical ventilation.


Results: 


The mean Downes Score showed a statistically significant reduction from a baseline of 6.2 ± 1.1 to 2.9 ± 0.7 at 24 hours (p < 0.001). bCPAP therapy was successful in 124 neonates (82.6%), while 26 (17.4%) required mechanical ventilation. Complications were minimal, with nasal trauma in 5.3% and pneumothorax in 2.0% of neonates. The overall survival rate at discharge was 92%.


Conclusion: 


Bubble CPAP is a highly effective, safe, and cost-efficient first-line intervention for managing RDS in preterm neonates. It leads to rapid and significant improvement in respiratory distress, a high success rate, and a substantial reduction in the need for mechanical ventilation, making it particularly valuable for neonatal care in resource-limited environments.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section

Articles

How to Cite

EFFECTIVENESS OF BUBBLE CPAP IN PRETERM NEONATES ADMITTED IN NICU WITH RDS USING THE DOWNES SCORING. (2025). The Research of Medical Science Review, 3(3), 1381-1385. https://medicalsciencereview.com/index.php/Journal/article/view/2577