Friday, November 9, 2018

Ventilating Head Injury Patients

     Introduction
            Traumatic brain injury is a major cause of death in many persons less than 45 years, and a high prevalence occurs in the male gender. It is a non-degenerative injury that results in anatomical damage or the functional impairment of the scalp, cranium, and meninges. The major causes include traffic accidents, falls, aggressions, cold steel or major catastrophes and sporting activities. The patients with the problems relating to the central nervous system require ventilation support due to the acute respiratory failure (ARF). The normal ventilation is an important therapeutic method for the patients with severe head injuries. The other method is hyperventilation which helps in cerebral vasoconstriction for intracranial pressure (ICP) control and reversal of brain and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) acidosis. The essay offers a discussion of both methods taking the stand that normal ventilation is the standard of care for the immediate management of traumatic head injuries in many instances.  
Position
            The normal ventilation method is recognized as the appropriate method of care for the initial management of a severe traumatic brain injury. However, it is a challenge for the pre-hospital personnel to know how to achieve the normal ventilation method especially when they use a bag and mask. Thus, they ought to utilize the strategies that maximize oxygen delivery and lower the inadequate ventilation. The goal of increasing the oxygen delivery and lowering the inadequate ventilation is achieved by using the ventilation rates that can avoid both hyperventilation and hypoventilation. The main goal of the care providers should be to ensure adequate ventilation of the patients. The guidelines for the use of the normal ventilation method are 12 breaths per minute for adult and 20 breaths per minute for a child eight years of age. The rates are effective in maintaining adequate ventilation. The normal method of ventilation aims to protect the airway thereby avoiding the damages caused by hypoxemia and hypercapnia. By the issues raised, the normal ventilation method can be a better method for managing the traumatic head injuries.       
Review of Literature
            A review of the previous literature shows that normal ventilation is a standard therapy for severe traumatic head injuries. It helps to prevent hypoxia which is a condition of oxygen saturation less than 90% (Oddo, Levine, Mackenzie, et.al. 2011). Early ventilation by use of the normal method supports breathing and helps to keep the pressure low in the head. The process may involve the mechanical placement of a device in the brain cavity to assess and regulate the intracranial pressure (Chesnut, Temkin, Carne, et.al. 2012). There can be the use of medications to put the patient in a drug induced coma that helps to minimize agitation and secondary injury.
            The compromise of the airway and the ventilator are significant concerns after a traumatic brain injury. There is inadequate research data to support an aggressive approach to the management of the airway by personnel who performs the initial first aid. However, there are increasing reports that articulate the association between an early intubation and increased mortality (Maas, Menon, Lingsma, et. al., 2012). From research, hyperventilation is a major contributor to adverse outcomes in the treatment of the traumatic brain injuries. The approach of using hyperventilation against the normal method is worsened by hemodynamic, cerebrovascular, immunologic and cellular effects. The patients with severe TBI require mechanical ventilation and not prophylactic hyperventilation for the first 24 hours of treatment (Haddad & Arabi, 2012).
            The use of hyperventilation tends to compromise the critically reduced cerebral perfusion. For the patients with traumatic brain injury, hyperventilation increases the volume of the severely hypoperfused tissue in the damaged region of the brain. The occurrences are despite the improvements in CPP and ICP. The reduced regional cerebral perfusions are a representation of the regions of potential ischemic brain tissue. An excessive and prolonged hyperventilation is likely to cause cerebral vasoconstriction and ischemia (Haddad & Arabi, 2012). Thus, normal ventilation is more appropriate for use than hyperventilation. The only instance it can work is as a temporizing measure to reduce the elevated ICP (Arabi, Haddad, et al., 2010). The requirement of the prolonged periods of hyperventilation may be during the intracranial hypertension refractory to all treatments including sedation, paralytics, CSF drainage, hypertonic saline solutions (HSSs) and osmotic diuretics (Roberts, Hall, Kramer, et. al., 2011).         
            Mechanical ventilation helps to support gas exchange and lung inflation in a normal method. It is a supportive and replacement therapy, hence not a treatment method. The mechanical method replaces the normal functions of the lungs and chest bellows. Thus, the many adverse effects of intubation and positive-pressure ventilation require nurses to make the ventilation period as short as possible.
            Hyperventilation is a useful method in the management of head trauma despite the other identified impacts. After a head injury, the fluids can leak to the cranial vault thereby increasing the intracranial pressure. The total cranial volume is usually fixed, and the brain is much more compressible than the skull. Thus, with the increased intracranial pressure, the brain is compressed and damaged. As a result, hyperventilation and cerebral vasoconstriction help to reduce the volume of blood in the brain. A reduced volume of blood in the cranial cavity results in the reduced pressure that compresses the brain. However, the practice is not fully reliable since the reduced blood flow to the brain may be a potential cause of ischemic damage (Haddad, AlDawood, et.al. 2011).        
Controversies associated with the topic
            There is controversy over whether or not patients with traumatic brain injury should undergo hyperventilation. The major advantages of hyperventilation are cerebral vasoconstriction for the intracranial pressure (ICP) control and reversal of brain and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) acidosis. The likely disadvantages of the approach are cerebral vasoconstriction that may cause cerebral ischemia and the short-lived impact on the PH of the cerebrospinal fluid with a loss of HCO3-buffer. However, the disadvantage can be addressed by the addition of buffer tromethamine (THAM), which has potential experimental and clinical advantages (Rosenfeld, Maas, Bragge, et. al., 2012). On the contrary, normal ventilation is a key component of intensive care for the brain injuries, but unfamiliar and technical details make it confusing and difficult for the care providers. The rapid complexity of the changes in respiratory medicine escalates the problem. The current literature and all the controversy in mechanical ventilation apply to a small percentage of patients under intubation and ventilation in the care hospitals. 
            Some of the mechanical ventilation practices are invasive that have contraindications. Thus, intubation and mechanical ventilations are not appropriate for a circumstance with any indication of the ventilator support, and when the interventions would result to medically futile therapy (Pelosi, Ferguson, Frutos-Vivar, et.al. 2011). The premise that hyperventilation therapy might cause secondary brain injury makes it unsuitable as an initial method for the treatment of traumatic head injuries. However, the approach can be effective to realize the required levels of gas within a short period. Hyperventilation causes a decrease in cerebrospinal fluid without necessarily reducing the pressure.  
Application in Medicine
            In light of the information available about hyperventilation as a treatment method, it is important for the medical practitioners to make decisions based on the underlying impacts. The nervous system controls the normal ventilation method for the management of traumatic head injuries, both the depth and the frequency. The purpose is to maintain normal amounts of carbon dioxide and also supply appropriate levels of oxygen to the body tissues. An increase in the carbon dioxide levels in the blood makes the brain blood vessels to dilate, but low carbon dioxide levels make the vessels constrict that result to reduced blood flow to the brain (Spiotta, Stiefel, et.al, 2010). The increase in blood PH is as a result of hyperventilation that reduces the level of available calcium. The process affects the nerves and muscles that cause constriction of the blood vessels.  However, for the head injury, the management requires hyperventilation to reach carbon dioxide levels in the blood in the range of 25 to 28 torr. The method is effective in reducing the volume of blood in the cranial cavity thereby resulting in less pressure that compresses the brain. For medical purposes, hyperventilation can be life-saving in the treatment of acute intracranial hypertension. A prolonged hyperventilation benefits patients with severe head injury or cerebral infarction but with some consequences.     
Conclusion
            The treatment of head injuries may be done through the two different methods of the closed or the penetrating head injury. There exists a significant overlap between the treatments of the two types of injury, but still there are certain differences. Most of the head injuries are mild, but others are severe which requires a more comprehensive treatment method. Hyperventilation method can be useful for short-term and usually after 24 hours of treatment due to the associated adverse effects. On the other hand, the normal ventilation method is appropriate for use due to the controversies surrounding the use of hyperventilation. The medical practitioners have a role to analyze the situations that arise and make informed decisions about the method of treatment to adopt.   
Bibliography
Arabi Y, Haddad S, Tamim H, Al-Dawood A, Al-Qahtani S, Ferayan A. et al. (2010) Mortality   Reduction after Implementing a Clinical Practice Guidelines-Based Management     Protocol for Severe Traumatic Brain Injury. J Crit Care; 25(2):190–195.
Chesnut, R. M., Temkin, N., Carney, N., Dikmen, S., Rondina, C., Videtta, W., ... & Machamer, J. (2012). A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury: New         England Journal of Medicine, 367(26), 2471-2481.
Haddad S, AlDawood AS, AlFerayan A, Russell N, Tamim H, Arabi YM. (2011) The      relationship between intracranial pressure monitoring and outcomes in severe traumatic    brain injury patients: Anaesth Intensive Care. 2011; 39(6):1043–1050.
Haddad, S. H., & Arabi, Y. M. (2012) Critical care management of severe traumatic brain injury in adults: Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med, 20(1), 12-27.

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at MeldaResearch.Com in custom nursing essay writing services services if you need a similar paper you can place your order for college essay writing services.


No comments:

Post a Comment