4.6 Article

Performance of different continuous positive airway pressure helmets equipped with safety valves during failure of fresh gas supply

期刊

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 1031-1035

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-011-2207-3

关键词

Helmet; Continuous positive airway pressure; Carbon dioxide rebreathing; Safety valves

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We assessed the performance of different continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) helmets equipped with a safety valve during discontinuation of fresh gas flow. This was a physiological study of five healthy volunteers. We delivered CPAP (fresh gas flow 60 l/min, FiO(2) 60%, PEEP 5 cmH(2)O) with three different helmets in a random sequence: 4Vent (Rusch), HelmHAR-cp (Harol) and CaStar CP210 (StarMed). For each helmet we randomly applied, for up to 4 min, three disconnections of fresh gas flow: helmet inlet (D(inlet)), flowmeter (D(flowmeter)) and gas source (D(source)). We continuously recorded from a nostril: end-tidal CO(2) (PetCO(2)), inspiratory CO(2) (PiCO(2)), fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO(2)) and respiratory rate (RR). During every disconnection we observed an increase in PiCO(2) and PetCO(2) with a drop in FiO(2), while RR did not change. FiO(2) decreased more quickly in the CaStar, equipped with the largest safety valve, during D(source) and D(flowmeter), while FiO(2) decreased more quickly during D(inlet) in CaStar and in 4Vent. PiCO(2) resulted in a lower increase in CaStar during D(source) and D(flowmeter) compared to 4Vent. PetCO(2) in CaStar increases more slowly compared to 4Vent during D(source) and more slowly compared to the other two helmets during D(flowmeter). During D(inlet) similar degrees of CO(2) rebreathing and PetCO(2) were recorded among all the helmets. To minimize CO(2) rebreathing during disconnection of the fresh gas supply while performing helmet CPAP, it is desirable to utilize large helmets with a large anti-suffocation valve. Monitoring and alarm systems should be employed for safe application of helmet CPAP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据