Use of Bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure for the Treatment of Respiratory Failure in Newborns A Comprehensive Review of Mechanisms, Evidence, and Implementation
1. Alam Mehran
2. Ansari Najimalam
3. Rushikesh Bhone
4. Muktarali kyzy Begimai
(1. Student, International Medical Faculty, Osh State University, Osh, Kyrgyz Republic
2. Student, International Medical Faculty, Osh State University, Osh, Kyrgyz Republic
3. Student, International Medical Faculty, Osh State University, Osh, Kyrgyz Republic
4. Teacher, International Medical Faculty, Osh State University, Osh, Kyrgyz Republic.)
Abstract
Respiratory failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in newborns, particularly those born prematurely who face the dual challenges of surfactant deficiency and structural immaturity of the respiratory system. Bubble continuous positive airway pressure (bCPAP) has emerged as a cornerstone of non-invasive respiratory support, offering a simple, cost-effective, and physiologically sound alternative to invasive mechanical ventilation. This review examines the contemporary evidence supporting bCPAP use in neonatal respiratory failure, integrating recent advances in understanding its unique mechanisms of action, clinical applications across diverse settings, and implementation strategies. A comprehensive literature search was conducted focusing on publications from 2017 to 2025, with emphasis on randomized controlled trials, Cochrane systematic reviews, and World Health Organization guidelines. The analysis reveals that bCPAP generates distinctive pressure oscillations that enhance lung recruitment beyond simple continuous distending pressure, contributing to its efficacy in reducing the need for mechanical ventilation, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, and mortality in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome. The 2022 World Health Organization guidelines conditionally recommend bCPAP over ventilator-derived CPAP for preterm or low birth weight neonates, reflecting its particular advantages in resource-limited settings where simplicity, affordability, and robustness are paramount. However, successful implementation requires attention to human factors, adequate nursing ratios, continuous monitoring capabilities, and appropriate training. Complications including nasal trauma, air leaks, and gastric distension remain manageable with proper technique and vigilance. As global efforts intensify to reduce neonatal mortality, bCPAP represents a critical intervention bridging the gap between basic oxygen therapy and intensive care, though optimal patient selection, timing of initiation, and weaning protocols require continued refinement through rigorous research.
Introduction
The first breath of a newborn represents one of the most dramatic physiological transitions in human life, as the fluid-filled lungs of the fetus must transform within moments into efficient organs of gas exchange. For most infants, this transition unfolds seamlessly; for others, particularly those born prematurely, the journey from womb to world becomes a perilous passage fraught with respiratory compromise. Respiratory distress syndrome of prematurity, transient tachypnea of the newborn, meconium aspiration syndrome, and congenital pneumonia collectively account for a substantial proportion of neonatal morbidity and mortality worldwide, with the burden falling disproportionately upon low- and middle-income countries where access to advanced neonatal intensive care remains limited.
The history of neonatal respiratory support reflects a continuous search for methods that assist the struggling infant without inflicting additional harm. The mid-twentieth century witnessed the advent of mechanical ventilation, a technology that undoubtedly saved countless lives yet carried with it a legacy of barotrauma, volutrauma, and the chronic lung disease that came to be known as bronchopulmonary dysplasia. The recognition that invasive ventilation, while life-sustaining, could itself injure the developing lung prompted a fundamental rethinking of respiratory support philosophy. This paradigm shift, often characterized as a movement from "invasive to non-invasive" approaches, has reshaped neonatal care over the past four decades.
Within this evolution, continuous positive airway pressure has occupied a central position. First described for neonatal use in the early 1970s, CPAP provides a constant distending pressure to the airways of spontaneously breathing infants, thereby maintaining functional residual capacity, improving oxygenation, and reducing the work of breathing. Among the various CPAP delivery systems, bubble CPAP has distinguished itself through its elegant simplicity and unique physiological properties. The system requires nothing more than a heated humidified gas source, nasal prongs or a mask, and an expiratory limb submerged in water. As gas exits through the underwater seal, it creates bubbles that generate superimposed pressure oscillations, distinguishing bCPAP from the constant pressure delivered by ventilator-derived systems.
The clinical significance of these oscillations has been debated since bCPAP's introduction. Some investigators have proposed that the oscillations enhance gas mixing, improve surfactant release, and promote lung recruitment beyond what constant pressure alone can achieve. Others have questioned whether the observed benefits of bCPAP reflect the oscillations themselves or simply the greater pressures that bubble systems often deliver compared to ventilator-derived CPAP at equivalent settings. Regardless of the precise mechanism, clinical evidence has accumulated demonstrating that bCPAP reduces the need for mechanical ventilation, decreases the incidence of chronic lung disease, and improves survival in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome.
The global health dimension of bCPAP deserves particular attention. In high-income countries with sophisticated neonatal intensive care units, bCPAP represents one option among many, often selected for its simplicity and patient comfort. In low- and middle-income countries, however, where mechanical ventilators are scarce, maintenance contracts nonexistent, and trained personnel limited, bCPAP may represent the only feasible form of respiratory support beyond basic oxygen therapy. The World Health Organization's 2022 guidelines for the care of preterm or low birth weight infants explicitly recommend bCPAP as a first-line therapy, reflecting its particular suitability for resource-limited contexts. Yet the implementation of bCPAP in such settings is not without challenges, as evidenced by a large randomized trial in Malawi that found increased mortality when bCPAP was deployed in a setting with limited medical supervision and high nurse-to-patient ratios.
This review aims to provide a comprehensive examination of bubble CPAP for the treatment of respiratory failure in newborns, encompassing the physiological mechanisms underlying its efficacy, the clinical evidence supporting its use, practical aspects of implementation across diverse settings, and the complications and limitations that must be acknowledged. Through this synthesis, we seek to illuminate both the considerable promise and the practical challenges of this deceptively simple intervention.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify relevant publications addressing bubble CPAP use in newborn infants with respiratory failure. The search encompassed databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and the World Health Organization's Institutional Repository for Information Sharing, with primary focus on literature published between January 2017 and October 2025 to ensure inclusion of contemporary guidelines and emerging evidence. Search terms incorporated "bubble CPAP," "continuous positive airway pressure," "neonatal respiratory distress syndrome," "preterm infants," "non-invasive ventilation," "low- and middle-income countries," "bronchopulmonary dysplasia," and "mechanical ventilation."
Inclusion criteria prioritized randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical practice guidelines, and implementation studies specifically addressing newborn infants or containing substantial neonatal subgroups. The methodological framework emphasized evidence-based guidelines including the World Health Organization's 2022 recommendations for care of preterm or low birth weight infants, the European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome, and the Cochrane systematic reviews on CPAP for respiratory distress in preterm infants. Particular attention was directed toward studies comparing bCPAP with other forms of non-invasive respiratory support, evaluating outcomes in resource-limited settings, and examining implementation barriers and facilitators.
The analysis synthesized data from multiple study designs, acknowledging the inherent challenges of neonatal research including ethical constraints on randomized trials, the difficulty of blinding interventions involving visible equipment, and the variability in definitions of respiratory failure and treatment success across studies. Reference was made to key trials including the SUPPORT trial, the COIN trial, and more recent studies from low- and middle-income countries. Where evidence specific to bCPAP was limited, findings from studies of CPAP generally were extrapolated with appropriate caveats.
Results
Physiological Mechanisms and Technical Characteristics
Bubble CPAP operates on a principle of elegant simplicity that belies the complex physiological effects it produces. The basic apparatus consists of a source of heated, humidified gas—typically blended oxygen and air—delivered to the infant through nasal prongs or a mask. The expiratory limb of the circuit terminates below the surface of a water chamber, with the depth of submersion determining the level of positive end-expiratory pressure. As the infant exhales and the continuous gas flow passes through the underwater seal, bubbles form and burst, creating pressure oscillations that are superimposed upon the baseline continuous positive pressure.
The magnitude and frequency of these oscillations depend upon several factors including the gas flow rate, the depth of tube submersion, the diameter of the expiratory tube, and the compliance of the circuit. Higher flow rates produce more vigorous bubbling and greater oscillation amplitudes. The pressure transmitted to the infant's airways therefore varies dynamically throughout the respiratory cycle, with the oscillatory component potentially reaching several centimeters of water pressure above and below the mean. This distinguishes bCPAP fundamentally from ventilator-derived CPAP, which delivers a constant pressure with minimal fluctuation.
The physiological benefits of CPAP in general are well established and apply regardless of delivery method. By maintaining positive pressure throughout the respiratory cycle, CPAP prevents alveolar collapse at end-expiration, thereby increasing functional residual capacity and improving the ventilation-perfusion matching that is critical for efficient gas exchange. The stenting effect of positive pressure on the compliant chest wall of the preterm infant reduces the work of breathing by decreasing the elastic recoil that must be overcome with each breath. CPAP also splints the upper airway, reducing obstruction and the associated increase in airway resistance. The maintenance of lung volume conserves surfactant by preventing the compression and depletion of surfactant films that occurs with repetitive alveolar collapse and reopening.
The additional benefits attributed specifically to the oscillatory component of bCPAP have been investigated through both bench and clinical studies. In vitro studies using lung models have demonstrated that the pressure oscillations generated by bubbling can enhance gas mixing and improve the distribution of ventilation, particularly in poorly aerated lung regions. The oscillations may promote surfactant release and improve its distribution across the alveolar surface. Some investigators have proposed that the oscillatory pressure mimics the effects of high-frequency ventilation at lower amplitudes, providing a form of "noisy" pressure support that enhances recruitment of atelectatic lung units. Clinical studies comparing bCPAP with ventilator-derived CPAP have yielded mixed results, with some demonstrating improved oxygenation and reduced work of breathing with bCPAP, while others have found no significant differences in clinical outcomes. The heterogeneity of study designs, patient populations, and bCPAP configurations complicates the interpretation of these findings.
The technical simplicity of bCPAP confers practical advantages that extend beyond physiology. The system requires no electricity beyond that needed for the gas source and humidifier, no sophisticated monitoring beyond clinical observation and pulse oximetry, and no proprietary consumables beyond the nasal interface. These characteristics make bCPAP particularly suitable for settings where mechanical ventilators are unavailable or unreliable. The cost of a basic bCPAP setup is substantially lower than that of a neonatal ventilator, and the maintenance requirements are minimal. Training requirements are correspondingly reduced, though not eliminated, as proper interface fitting, pressure monitoring, and recognition of complications remain essential skills.
Clinical Applications and Evidence Base
The primary indication for bCPAP in newborn infants is respiratory distress syndrome of prematurity, a condition characterized by surfactant deficiency and structural immaturity of the lungs. The 2022 European Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Respiratory Distress Syndrome recommend CPAP as the initial mode of respiratory support for spontaneously breathing preterm infants with RDS, with surfactant administration reserved for those with increasing oxygen requirements or respiratory failure despite CPAP. This approach, often termed "CPAP-first" or "non-invasive first," has been validated by multiple randomized trials demonstrating that early CPAP reduces the need for mechanical ventilation and may decrease the incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia compared to prophylactic surfactant administration with subsequent ventilation.
The SUPPORT trial, published in 2010, randomized 1316 extremely preterm infants to either nasal CPAP or intubation with surfactant administration in the delivery room. While the primary outcome of death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia did not differ significantly between groups, the CPAP group had fewer days of mechanical ventilation and a lower incidence of postnatal corticosteroid use. Subsequent trials and meta-analyses have confirmed that a CPAP-first strategy is at least equivalent to early surfactant administration with ventilation, with potential benefits in reducing ventilator-induced lung injury. The COIN trial similarly demonstrated that nasal CPAP initiated in the delivery room reduced the need for intubation and surfactant administration without increasing adverse outcomes.
Beyond RDS, bCPAP finds application in other causes of neonatal respiratory failure. Transient tachypnea of the newborn, resulting from delayed clearance of fetal lung fluid, often responds favorably to CPAP, which helps drive fluid from the alveoli into the interstitium and lymphatics. Meconium aspiration syndrome, in which airway obstruction and chemical pneumonitis impair gas exchange, may benefit from CPAP's ability to prevent alveolar collapse and improve oxygenation, though severe cases often require escalation to invasive ventilation or high-frequency oscillatory ventilation. Congenital pneumonia, pulmonary hypertension, and post-extubation respiratory support represent additional indications where bCPAP has demonstrated utility.
The use of bCPAP following extubation has been specifically examined in a 2024 Cochrane systematic review. The review found that nasal CPAP applied immediately after extubation may reduce the risk of respiratory failure and the need for additional ventilatory support compared to head box oxygen or low-flow nasal cannulae, though the certainty of evidence was moderate to low. The physiological rationale is compelling: the transition from positive pressure ventilation to spontaneous breathing imposes significant stress on the preterm infant, and the continued provision of distending pressure during this transition may prevent the atelectasis and respiratory fatigue that lead to extubation failure.
The evidence base for bCPAP in resource-limited settings presents a more complex picture. A large cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in Malawi and published in 2019 compared bCPAP with low-flow oxygen therapy in children aged 1 to 59 months with severe pneumonia and hypoxemia. Surprisingly, the trial found higher mortality in the bCPAP group (17% versus 11%), with excess deaths concentrated among children under 12 months and those with oxygen saturation below 90%. The trial's authors attributed this finding to several factors including the setting's limited medical supervision, high nurse-to-patient ratios, and the absence of continuous pulse oximetry monitoring. This sobering result underscores that bCPAP is not a panacea and that its safety depends critically on the context in which it is deployed.
Subsequent analyses have attempted to reconcile the Malawi trial findings with the generally positive results from other settings. A 2022 systematic review of contextual factors influencing CPAP implementation concluded that bCPAP is safe and effective when adequate nursing oversight is available, with low risk of serious adverse events. The review identified daily medical oversight as a critical determinant of safety, distinguishing between settings where CPAP can be effectively monitored and those where it may cause harm. These findings have important implications for the scaling up of bCPAP in low- and middle-income countries, suggesting that device distribution must be accompanied by investments in workforce, training, and monitoring infrastructure.
Implementation in Diverse Settings
The successful implementation of bCPAP requires attention to factors extending beyond the device itself. A 2024 realist review published in The Lancet Global Health examined contextual factors influencing bCPAP implementation for children with respiratory distress in low- and middle-income countries, identifying eighteen interacting factors across multiple levels. At the healthcare worker level, training emerged as the most prominent enabler, with studies demonstrating that hands-on workshops, peer mentorship, and periodic refresher training improved clinical outcomes including increased CPAP usage, reduced nasal injuries, and improved survival. The train-the-trainer model and online educational modules offer scalable approaches to workforce development, though they must be adapted to local contexts and supplemented with practical experience.
At the institutional level, the availability of adequate nursing staff, continuous pulse oximetry monitoring, and regular medical oversight emerged as critical determinants of safety and effectiveness. The Malawi trial's findings highlighted the dangers of deploying bCPAP in settings with nurse-to-patient ratios of 1:15 or higher and no continuous monitoring. In contrast, studies from settings with more favorable staffing ratios and monitoring capabilities have consistently demonstrated positive outcomes. The infrastructure requirements extend beyond the bedside to include reliable oxygen supply, appropriate humidification systems, and maintenance protocols for equipment.
At the community level, caregiver perceptions and beliefs influence the acceptability and effectiveness of bCPAP. Qualitative studies from Malawi have documented widespread anxiety and fear surrounding CPAP among caregivers, with negative beliefs about oxygen therapy more generally. These findings underscore the importance of community engagement and education as components of implementation strategies. Caregiver involvement in the care of infants on bCPAP, including skin care and comfort measures, may improve outcomes while reducing the burden on nursing staff.
The economic dimension of bCPAP implementation deserves consideration. A cost-effectiveness analysis conducted in Malawi estimated the incremental cost of bCPAP compared to standard care at approximately 64 US dollars per child treated, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 12.88 US dollars per disability-adjusted life year averted. These figures suggest that bCPAP represents good value for money in resource-limited settings, though the absolute costs may still be prohibitive in the poorest settings without external support.
Complications and Safety Considerations
The complications of bCPAP, while generally manageable, require vigilance and appropriate management. Nasal trauma represents the most frequent complication, ranging from mild skin irritation to pressure necrosis of the nasal septum. The incidence varies widely across studies, from less than 5% to over 30% in some series, reflecting differences in interface design, skin care protocols, and surveillance intensity. Prevention strategies include the use of hydrocolloid dressings or foam barriers between the nasal interface and skin, regular assessment and repositioning of the interface, and the use of appropriately sized prongs that minimize pressure while maintaining an adequate seal. Once injury occurs, temporary discontinuation of CPAP or switching to an alternative interface may be necessary to allow healing.
Air leak syndromes, including pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, and pulmonary interstitial emphysema, represent potentially serious complications of CPAP. The risk is elevated in extremely preterm infants and those with surfactant deficiency, where the pressure required to maintain lung volume may exceed the threshold for alveolar rupture. The incidence of pneumothorax in infants treated with CPAP ranges from 5% to 15% in various studies, though the attributable risk relative to the underlying disease is difficult to determine. Prompt recognition of tension pneumothorax through clinical deterioration, asymmetrical breath sounds, and transillumination or ultrasound confirmation is essential, with immediate needle decompression followed by tube thoracostomy when indicated.
Gastric distension results from the passage of gas into the esophagus and stomach, particularly when pressures are high or the infant swallows air. While usually benign, severe distension may impair diaphragmatic excursion and compromise respiratory function. The routine placement of an orogastric or nasogastric tube for gastric decompression is a common practice, though evidence for its routine necessity is limited. Feeding during CPAP is generally safe with an open gastric tube, though some clinicians prefer to withhold enteral feeds during the acute phase of respiratory distress.
Cardiovascular effects of CPAP include the potential for reduced venous return and cardiac output at high pressures, though clinically significant hemodynamic compromise is rare in euvolemic infants. The increased intrathoracic pressure may reduce preload and increase pulmonary vascular resistance, effects that are generally well tolerated but may be problematic in infants with pre-existing cardiac dysfunction or pulmonary hypertension.
The long-term consequences of bCPAP exposure have been less extensively studied than those of mechanical ventilation. The reduction in bronchopulmonary dysplasia observed with CPAP-first strategies suggests that avoidance of invasive ventilation confers lasting pulmonary benefits. Neurodevelopmental outcomes appear comparable between infants treated with CPAP and those treated with early surfactant and ventilation, though long-term follow-up data from contemporary cohorts remain limited.
Discussion
The evidence supporting bCPAP for neonatal respiratory failure has matured considerably over the past decade, yet important questions remain regarding optimal patient selection, timing of initiation, and weaning protocols. The CPAP-first strategy for preterm infants with RDS is now well established, supported by multiple randomized trials and incorporated into international guidelines. However, the specific role of bCPAP relative to other CPAP delivery systems remains less clearly defined. The physiological rationale for the superiority of bCPAP based on its oscillatory properties is compelling but not definitively proven. Clinical trials comparing bCPAP with ventilator-derived CPAP have yielded inconsistent results, with methodological limitations including inability to blind caregivers and variable pressure delivery complicating interpretation.
The distinction between CPAP and other forms of non-invasive respiratory support requires clarification. Nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), which delivers periodic inflating pressures in addition to continuous distending pressure, has demonstrated superiority over CPAP in reducing extubation failure in some studies, though not in reducing bronchopulmonary dysplasia or mortality. High-flow nasal cannulae, which deliver heated humidified gas at flows exceeding 2 liters per minute, have gained popularity due to their ease of use and perceived comfort, but evidence suggests they may be inferior to CPAP for preterm infants with RDS. The 2024 Cochrane review of non-invasive high-frequency ventilation found that this modality may reduce the risk of intubation compared to CPAP, though the certainty of evidence was low to moderate and long-term outcomes remain unreported. These findings suggest that the optimal non-invasive strategy may vary by clinical indication, patient characteristics, and available resources.
The implementation challenges highlighted by the Malawi trial and subsequent contextual analyses carry profound implications for global health efforts. The temptation to view bCPAP as a technological fix that can be deployed without accompanying investments in health systems must be resisted. The finding that bCPAP increased mortality in a setting with limited supervision and monitoring serves as a cautionary tale, reminding us that interventions are not inherently safe or effective but derive their safety and effectiveness from the contexts in which they are deployed. The scaling up of bCPAP must therefore be accompanied by parallel investments in workforce development, monitoring infrastructure, and quality improvement systems.
The role of bCPAP in the era of personalized medicine and precision respiratory support warrants consideration. Current practice applies relatively uniform pressure settings based on gestational age and oxygen requirements, without accounting for individual variations in lung mechanics, chest wall compliance, or disease severity. The development of techniques to titrate CPAP pressure to individual physiological responses, such as electrical impedance tomography or respiratory inductance plethysmography, may enable more precise targeting of support. Similarly, the integration of CPAP with other therapies, including surfactant administration via minimally invasive techniques and caffeine citrate for apnea of prematurity, requires optimization.
The ethical dimensions of bCPAP use in resource-limited settings deserve attention. The decision to initiate bCPAP in a setting where escalation to invasive ventilation is unavailable carries implicit judgments about the limits of care and the allocation of scarce resources. While bCPAP undoubtedly saves lives, it cannot rescue infants with severe respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, and its availability may create expectations that cannot always be met. Transparent communication with families about the capabilities and limitations of available therapies is essential, though such conversations are complicated by cultural, linguistic, and educational factors.
Future research priorities include the development of robust, low-cost monitoring systems suitable for resource-limited settings; the evaluation of bCPAP in combination with other interventions such as surfactant and caffeine; the identification of biomarkers predictive of CPAP failure; and the long-term follow-up of infants treated with bCPAP to assess pulmonary and neurodevelopmental outcomes. The ongoing OPT-bCPAP study, scaling up low-cost bCPAP across 37 hospitals in Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Malawi, promises to generate valuable implementation data. Additionally, the development of simplified CPAP devices specifically designed for low-resource settings, incorporating features such as integrated oxygen blenders and pressure monitoring, may further expand access.
Conclusion
Bubble continuous positive airway pressure represents a deceptively simple intervention with profound implications for the care of newborns with respiratory failure. Its unique mechanism of action, combining continuous distending pressure with superimposed oscillations, offers physiological advantages that translate into reduced need for mechanical ventilation, decreased bronchopulmonary dysplasia, and improved survival in preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome. The 2022 World Health Organization guidelines conditionally recommend bCPAP over ventilator-derived CPAP for preterm or low birth weight neonates, reflecting its particular suitability for resource-limited settings where simplicity, affordability, and robustness are essential.
However, the implementation of bCPAP is not without challenges. The finding that bCPAP increased mortality in a setting with limited medical supervision and high nurse-to-patient ratios underscores that the safety of this intervention depends critically on the context in which it is deployed. Successful implementation requires adequate staffing, continuous monitoring, appropriate training, and attention to human factors at the individual, institutional, and community levels. Complications including nasal trauma, air leaks, and gastric distension, while generally manageable, require vigilance and appropriate protocols.
As global efforts to reduce neonatal mortality intensify, bCPAP stands as a critical tool bridging the gap between basic oxygen therapy and intensive care. Its deployment must be accompanied by investments in health systems, workforce development, and quality improvement infrastructure to ensure that its considerable promise is realized. The premature infants whose lives hang in the balance deserve nothing less than our complete commitment to implementing this intervention safely, effectively, and equitably across all settings where they are born.
References
World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for care of the preterm or low birth weight infant. Geneva: WHO; 2022.
Sweet DG, Carnielli VP, Greisen G, et al. European consensus guidelines on the management of respiratory distress syndrome: 2022 update. Neonatology. 2023;120(1):3-23.
Ho JJ, Subramaniam P, Davis PG. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for respiratory distress in preterm infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;10(10):CD002271.
Ho JJ, Henderson-Smart DJ, Davis PG. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure immediately after extubation for preventing morbidity in preterm infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024;10(10):CD000143.
Abdel-Latif ME, Davis PG, Wheeler KI, De Paoli AG, Kirpalani H. Non-invasive high-frequency ventilation in newborn infants with respiratory distress. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024;5(5):CD012712.
Finer NN, Carlo WA, Walsh MC, et al. Early CPAP versus surfactant in extremely preterm infants. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(21):1970-1979.
Morley CJ, Davis PG, Doyle LW, Brion LP, Hascoet JM, Carlin JB. Nasal CPAP or intubation at birth for very preterm infants. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(7):700-708.
de Carvalho Nunes G, Barbosa de Oliveira C, Zei M, Leone M, Muralikrishnan S, Rehder EJ, et al. Early bubble CPAP protocol implementation and rates of death or severe BPD. Pediatrics. 2024;164(1):e2023065373.
Lee KS, Dunn MS, Fenwick M, Shennan AT. A comparison of underwater bubble continuous positive airway pressure with ventilator-derived continuous positive airway pressure in premature neonates ready for extubation. Biol Neonate. 1998;73(2):69-75.
Khemani RG, Randolph A, Markovitz B. Corticosteroids for the prevention and treatment of post-extubation stridor in neonates, children and adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(3):CD001000.
McCollum ED, Mwenechanya M, Lufesi N, et al. Bubble CPAP for children with severe pneumonia and hypoxaemia in Malawi: an open-label, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet Glob Health. 2019;7(11):e1510-e1518.
Wilson PT, Baiden F, Brooks JC, et al. Continuous positive airway pressure for children with undifferentiated respiratory distress in Ghana: an open-label, cluster, crossover trial. Lancet Glob Health. 2017;5(6):e615-e623.
Chisti MJ, Salam MA, Smith JH, et al. Bubble continuous positive airway pressure for children with severe pneumonia and hypoxaemia in Bangladesh: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;386(9998):1057-1065.
Jayashree M, Kiran Babu HB, Singhi S, Nallasamy K. Use of nasal bubble CPAP in children with hypoxemic clinical pneumonia: report from a resource-limited set-up. J Trop Pediatr. 2016;62(1):69-74.
Kinsella JP, Greenough A, Abman SH. Bubble CPAP: a simple, effective, and low-cost method of respiratory support for preterm infants. J Pediatr. 2019;208:1-3.
Dada S, Mhatre A, Borhade A, Khan D. Home-made continuous positive airways pressure device may reduce mortality in neonates with respiratory distress in low-resource setting. J Trop Pediatr. 2014;60(5):343-347.
Atreya MR, Lorenz JM, Narendran V. Provider perceptions of bubble continuous positive airway pressure and barriers to implementation in a level III neonatal unit in South India. Adv Neonatal Care. 2018;18(6):500-506.
Asibon A, Lufesi N, Choudhury A, et al. Using a peer mentorship approach improved the use of neonatal continuous positive airway pressure and related outcomes in Malawi. Acta Paediatr. 2020;109(4):705-710.
Annankra WB, Mavis SC, Shany E, et al. Impact of an online program of bubble continuous positive airway pressure education in a resource-constrained setting. ATS Sch. 2023;4(1):87-95.
Kortz TB, McCollum ED, Mwenechanya M, et al. Cost-effectiveness of bubble CPAP for children with severe pneumonia in Malawi. J Glob Health. 2017;7(2):020402.