Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2023 article

Bias and Precision of Continuous P 0.1 Measurement by Various Ventilators: A Simulation Study

9Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
1Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : jp. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Most ventilators measure airway occlusion pressure (occlusion P 0.1 ) by occluding the breathing circuit; however, some ventilators can predict P 0.1 for each breath without occlusion. Nevertheless, few studies have verified the accuracy of continuous P 0.1 measurement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of continuous P 0.1 measurement compared with that of occlusion methods for various ventilators using a lung simulator. METHODS: A total of 42 breathing patterns were validated using a lung simulator in combination with 7 different inspiratory muscular pressures and 3 different rise rates to simulate normal and obstructed lungs. PB980 and Dräger V500 ventilators were used to obtain occlusion P 0.1 measurements. The occlusion maneuver was performed on the ventilator, and a corresponding reference P 0.1 was recorded from the ASL5000 breathing simulator simultaneously. Hamilton-C6, Hamilton-G5, and Servo-U ventilators were used to obtain sustained P 0.1 measurements (continuous P 0.1 ). The reference P 0.1 measured with the simulator was analyzed by using a Bland-Altman plot. RESULTS: The 2 lung mechanical models capable of measuring occlusion P 0.1 yielded values equivalent to reference P 0.1 (bias and precision values were 0.51 and 1.06, respectively, for the Dräger V500, and were 0.54 and 0.91, respectively, for the PB980). Continuous P 0.1 for the Hamilton-C6 was underestimated in both the normal and obstructive models (bias and precision values were –2.13 and 1.91, respectively), whereas continuous P 0.1 for the Servo-U was underestimated only in the obstructive model (bias and precision values were –0.86 and 1.76, respectively). Continuous P 0.1 for the Hamilton-G5 was mostly similar to but less accurate than occlusion P 0.1 (bias and precision values were 1.62 and 2.06, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of continuous P 0.1 measurements varies based on the characteristics of the ventilator and should be interpreted by considering the characteristics of each system. Moreover, measurements obtained with an occluded circuit could be desirable for determining the true P 0.1 .

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé, mais le titre doit être comparé manuellement.

Titre Crossref
Bias and Precision of Continuous P <sub>0.1</sub> Measurement by Various Ventilators: A Simulation Study
Date Crossref
23/05/2023
Éditeur
SAGE Publications
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Respiratory Support and MechanismsChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchAirway Management and Intubation Techniques

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.