NCT07837700

Brief Summary

To evaluate how different forms of respiratory support affect parent interaction, how parents feel about different methods of support, and how their child's current respiratory support level is perceived in the setting of long-term outcomes.

Trial Health

63
Monitor

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
60

participants targeted

Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable

Timeline
14mo left

Started Oct 2026

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
not yet recruiting

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Progress1%
Oct 2026Dec 2027

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

September 9, 2026

Completed
14 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

September 23, 2026

Completed
8 days until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

October 1, 2026

Completed
1.2 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

December 1, 2027

Expected
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

December 1, 2027

Last Updated

September 23, 2026

Status Verified

September 1, 2026

Enrollment Period

1.2 years

First QC Date

September 9, 2026

Last Update Submit

September 17, 2026

Conditions

Keywords

parent perceptionNICUrespiratory support

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Parent perception of different respiratory devices

    To assess parent perception of different respiratory devices, namely the OptiPAP Junior, in comparison to other modalities through semi-structured parent interviews.

    From baseline to study completion, an average of 3 months.

Secondary Outcomes (1)

  • Parent perception and recommendations on inpatient pulmonary support and outcome measurements

    From baseline to study completion, an average of 3 months.

Study Arms (2)

OptiPAP Junior

EXPERIMENTAL

The OptiPAP Junior device (Fisher \& Paykel) is an FDA cleared device interface for the provision of pressure-based respiratory support to be used in accordance with its approved labeling.

Device: Nasal CPAP interface: OptiPAP Junior

Flexitrunk

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

The Flexitrunk (Fisher \& Paykel) is a predominant interface used in neonatal care units. Flexitrunk is an FDA cleared device interface for the provision of pressure-based respiratory support to be used in accordance with its approved labeling.

Device: Nasal CPAP interface: FlexiTrunk

Interventions

FDA 510(k)-cleared non-invasive nasal interface used to deliver continuous positive airway pressure. Infants receive CPAP via the OptiPAP Junior interface for 5 consecutive days, either as the first or second interface depending on randomized sequence. CPAP level and duration are managed by the clinical team per standard NICU practice; the device is used in accordance with its cleared labeling

OptiPAP Junior

FDA-cleared Class I, 510(k)-exempt nasal interface that is the standard CPAP interface in many neonatal care units. Infants receive CPAP via the FlexiTrunk interface for 5 consecutive days, either as the first or second interface depending on randomized sequence. CPAP level and duration are managed by the clinical team per standard NICU practice.

Flexitrunk

Eligibility Criteria

AgeUp to 30 Weeks
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsChild (0-17)

You may qualify if:

  • Infants born less than 31 weeks who have been stable for 72 hours on continuous positive pressure level (CPAP) of support via a standard interface.
  • Parents (females or males) must be greater than 18 years of age at the time of the interview after their infant has experienced both respiratory modalities.

You may not qualify if:

  • Infants will be excluded if they have suspected or confirmed abnormalities/trauma to the skull or airway involving any abnormal connection that may allow pressure to be transmitted to unintended anatomical structures or tissues.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women & Newborns

San Diego, California, 92123, United States

Location

Related Publications (10)

  • Ando H, Cousins R, Young C. Achieving Saturation in Thematic Analysis: Development and Refinement of a Codebook. Comprehensive Psychology. 2014;3:03.CP.3.4.

    BACKGROUND
  • Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How Many Interviews Are Enough? Field Methods - FIELD METHOD. 2006;18:59-82.

    BACKGROUND
  • Dorner RA, Boss RD, Vazifedan T, Johnson E, Garzon A, Lemmon ME. Life on the Frontlines: Caregiver Experience of Pediatric Cerebrospinal Shunt Malfunction. Pediatr Neurol. 2023 Oct;147:124-129. doi: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2023.07.021. Epub 2023 Aug 2.

    PMID: 37611406BACKGROUND
  • Dorner RA, Boss RD, Burton VJ, Raja K, Lemmon ME. Parent preferences for neurodevelopmental screening in the neonatal intensive care unit. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2020 Apr;62(4):500-505. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.14457. Epub 2020 Jan 7.

    PMID: 31909496BACKGROUND
  • Dorner RA, Boss RD, Burton VJ, Raja K, Robinson S, Lemmon ME. Isolated and On Guard: Preparing Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Families for Life with Hydrocephalus. Am J Perinatol. 2022 Sep;39(12):1341-1347. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1722344. Epub 2021 Jan 17.

    PMID: 33454943BACKGROUND
  • Thivierge E, Luu TM, Bourque CJ, Barrington KJ, Pearce R, Jaworski M, Janvier A. Pulmonary important outcomes after extremely preterm birth: Parental perspectives. Acta Paediatr. 2023 May;112(5):970-976. doi: 10.1111/apa.16723. Epub 2023 Mar 3.

    PMID: 36815277BACKGROUND
  • Callahan KP, Kielt MJ, Feudtner C, Barkman D, Bamat N, Fierro J, Fiest E, DeMauro SB. Ranking Future Outcomes Most Important to Parents of Children with Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia. J Pediatr. 2023 Aug;259:113455. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113455. Epub 2023 May 10.

    PMID: 37172804BACKGROUND
  • Klingenberg C, Pettersen M, Hansen EA, Gustavsen LJ, Dahl IA, Leknessund A, Kaaresen PI, Nordhov M. Patient comfort during treatment with heated humidified high flow nasal cannulae versus nasal continuous positive airway pressure: a randomised cross-over trial. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2014 Mar;99(2):F134-7. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304525. Epub 2013 Nov 13.

    PMID: 24225220BACKGROUND
  • Manley BJ, Owen L, Doyle LW, Davis PG. High-flow nasal cannulae and nasal continuous positive airway pressure use in non-tertiary special care nurseries in Australia and New Zealand. J Paediatr Child Health. 2012 Jan;48(1):16-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2011.02186.x. Epub 2011 Oct 12.

    PMID: 21988616BACKGROUND
  • Abman SH, Bancalari E, Jobe A. The Evolution of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia after 50 Years. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017 Feb 15;195(4):421-424. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201611-2386ED. No abstract available.

    PMID: 28199157BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Ventilator-Induced Lung InjuryLung InjuryLung DiseasesRespiratory Tract DiseasesInfant, Premature, DiseasesInfant, Newborn, DiseasesCongenital, Hereditary, and Neonatal Diseases and Abnormalities

Central Study Contacts

Rebecca Dorner, MD, MHS

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
SUPPORTIVE CARE
Intervention Model
CROSSOVER
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Principal Investigator

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

September 9, 2026

First Posted

September 23, 2026

Study Start

October 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2027

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2027

Last Updated

September 23, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-09

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will share

Individual participant data, particularly data that underlie the results reported in this article after deidentification will be available with other researchers, including data dictionaries for meta-analysis.

Locations