Home invasive mechanical ventilation in Finland in 2015–2019

ERJ Open Res, 2020 · DOI: https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00223-2020 · Published: January 1, 2020

Simple Explanation

This study examines the use of home invasive mechanical ventilation (HIMV) in Finland between 2015 and 2019. The researchers collected data from Finnish hospitals to understand how common HIMV is, what conditions it's used for, and how long people use it. They found that HIMV is rare and becoming less common in Finland, with motor neurone disease and spinal cord injuries being the most frequent reasons for its use.

Study Duration

4 Years

Participants

141 HIMV patients

Evidence Level

Retrospective, cross-sectional study

Key Findings

1
The prevalence of HIMV in Finland decreased from 2.4 in 100,000 in 2015 to 2.0 in 100,000 in 2019.
2
Motor neurone disease (29.1%) and spinal cord injuries (19.9%) were the most common diagnoses among HIMV patients.
3
The mean duration of HIMV treatment was 12.3 years, but varied significantly by underlying diagnosis.

Research Summary

This study investigated the prevalence and characteristics of home invasive mechanical ventilation (HIMV) in Finland from 2015 to 2019, finding a decrease in prevalence during the study period. The most common underlying diagnoses leading to HIMV were motor neurone disease and spinal cord injuries, with treatment durations varying significantly based on the diagnosis. The research highlights the long-term nature of HIMV treatment and the need for 24-hour care for most patients, emphasizing the importance of specialized medical care and governmental support.

Practical Implications

Resource Allocation

The findings can inform healthcare resource allocation and planning for long-term respiratory care services, particularly for patients with neurological conditions.

Treatment Strategies

Understanding the variation in treatment duration based on underlying diagnosis can help tailor treatment strategies and improve patient outcomes.

Policy Development

The study supports the need for continued governmental support and specialized medical care to ensure equitable access to HIMV for all patients, regardless of socioeconomic status or diagnosis.

Study Limitations

1
The study acknowledges the possibility that some patients are missing due to the lack of a long-term register of HIMV use in Finland.
2
The follow-up period was short (4 years) and the sample size was relatively small at 141 patients, thus the prevalence results must be interpreted with caution.
3
The study did not include NIV patients, thus lacking information on prevalence and characteristics of NIV-treated patients in Finland.

Your Feedback

Was this summary helpful?

Back to Critical Care