Loading…
In vitro comparison of performance including imposed work of breathing of CPAP systems used in low-resource settings
Respiratory distress due to preterm birth is a significant cause of death in low-resource settings. The introduction of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) systems to treat respiratory distress significantly reduced mortality in high-resource settings, but CPAP was only recently introduced in...
Saved in:
Published in: | PloS one 2020-12, Vol.15 (12), p.e0242590-e0242590 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-5eb1fffcee71e5929d1b805f5a4fba8efca1269d762a50ae3abf9bea7b99f2303 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-5eb1fffcee71e5929d1b805f5a4fba8efca1269d762a50ae3abf9bea7b99f2303 |
container_end_page | e0242590 |
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | e0242590 |
container_title | PloS one |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | Heenan, Megan Rojas, Jose D Oden, Z Maria Richards-Kortum, Rebecca |
description | Respiratory distress due to preterm birth is a significant cause of death in low-resource settings. The introduction of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) systems to treat respiratory distress significantly reduced mortality in high-resource settings, but CPAP was only recently introduced in low-resource settings due to cost and infrastructure limitations. We evaluated pressure stability and imposed work of breathing (iWOB) of five CPAP systems used in low resource settings: the Fisher and Paykel bubble CPAP, the Diamedica baby CPAP, the Medijet nCPAP generator, and the first (2015) and second (2017) generation commercially available Pumani CPAPs. Pressure changes due to fresh gas flow were evaluated for each system by examining the relationship between flow and pressure at the patient interface for four pressures generated at the bottle (0, 3, 5, and 7 cm H2O); for the Medijet nCPAP generator, no bottle was used. The slope of the resulting relationship was used to calculate system resistance. Poiseuille's law of resistance was used to investigate significant contributors to resistance. Resistance ranged from 0.05 to 1.40 [Formula: see text]; three CPAP devices had resistances < 0.4 [Formula: see text]: the Fisher and Paykel system, the Diamedica system, and the second generation Pumani bubble CPAP. The other two systems, the Medijet nCPAP generator and the first generation Pumani bCPAP, had resistances >1.0 [Formula: see text]. Imposed WOB was measured using an ASL5000 test lung to simulate the breath cycle for an infant (5.5 kg), a term neonate (4.0 kg), and a preterm neonate (2.5 kg). Imposed WOB ranged from 1.4 to 39.5 mJ/breath across all systems and simulated infant sizes. Changes in pressure generated by fresh gas flow, resistance, and iWOB differ between the five systems evaluated under ideal laboratory conditions. The available literature does not indicate that these differences affect clinical outcomes. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0242590 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2466774112</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A643673309</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_ac37213bc9774e7086e6b716637806ad</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A643673309</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-5eb1fffcee71e5929d1b805f5a4fba8efca1269d762a50ae3abf9bea7b99f2303</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk11v0zAUhiMEYqPwDxBEQkJw0eKPxm5ukKqKj0qTNvF1aznOceuS2JntbOzf467Z1KBdIF_EOX7e9xyf5GTZS4xmmHL8Yed6b2Uz65yFGSJzUpToUXaKS0qmjCD6-Gh_kj0LYYdQQReMPc1OKCUcMYZOs7i2-ZWJ3uXKtZ30JjibO5134LXzrbQKcmNV09fGbnLTdi5AnV87_3tPVR5k3O5P0svqYnmRh5sQoQ15v8eMzRt3PfUQUq3JKECMCQ7PsydaNgFeDM9J9vPzpx-rr9Oz8y_r1fJsqlhJ4rSACmutFQDHUJSkrHG1QIUu5FxXcgFaSUxYWXNGZIEkUFnpsgLJq7LUhCI6yV4ffLvGBTE0LAgyZ4zzOcYkEesDUTu5E503rfQ3wkkjbgPOb4T00agGhFSUE0wrVSYtcLRgwCqOGaN8gZisk9fHIVtftVArsNHLZmQ6PrFmKzbuSnCOUzE0GbwbDLy77CFE0ZqgoGmkBdff1s0Z5iylnGRv_kEfvt1AbWS6gLHapbxqbyqWbE4ZpxSViZo9QKVVQ2tU-ru0SfGR4P1IkJgIf-JG9iGI9fdv_8-e_xqzb4_YLcgmboNr-micDWNwfgCVdyF40PdNxkjsh-OuG2I_HGIYjiR7dfyB7kV300D_AtHmC48</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2466774112</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>In vitro comparison of performance including imposed work of breathing of CPAP systems used in low-resource settings</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><creator>Heenan, Megan ; Rojas, Jose D ; Oden, Z Maria ; Richards-Kortum, Rebecca</creator><contributor>Oei, Ju Lee</contributor><creatorcontrib>Heenan, Megan ; Rojas, Jose D ; Oden, Z Maria ; Richards-Kortum, Rebecca ; Oei, Ju Lee</creatorcontrib><description>Respiratory distress due to preterm birth is a significant cause of death in low-resource settings. The introduction of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) systems to treat respiratory distress significantly reduced mortality in high-resource settings, but CPAP was only recently introduced in low-resource settings due to cost and infrastructure limitations. We evaluated pressure stability and imposed work of breathing (iWOB) of five CPAP systems used in low resource settings: the Fisher and Paykel bubble CPAP, the Diamedica baby CPAP, the Medijet nCPAP generator, and the first (2015) and second (2017) generation commercially available Pumani CPAPs. Pressure changes due to fresh gas flow were evaluated for each system by examining the relationship between flow and pressure at the patient interface for four pressures generated at the bottle (0, 3, 5, and 7 cm H2O); for the Medijet nCPAP generator, no bottle was used. The slope of the resulting relationship was used to calculate system resistance. Poiseuille's law of resistance was used to investigate significant contributors to resistance. Resistance ranged from 0.05 to 1.40 [Formula: see text]; three CPAP devices had resistances < 0.4 [Formula: see text]: the Fisher and Paykel system, the Diamedica system, and the second generation Pumani bubble CPAP. The other two systems, the Medijet nCPAP generator and the first generation Pumani bCPAP, had resistances >1.0 [Formula: see text]. Imposed WOB was measured using an ASL5000 test lung to simulate the breath cycle for an infant (5.5 kg), a term neonate (4.0 kg), and a preterm neonate (2.5 kg). Imposed WOB ranged from 1.4 to 39.5 mJ/breath across all systems and simulated infant sizes. Changes in pressure generated by fresh gas flow, resistance, and iWOB differ between the five systems evaluated under ideal laboratory conditions. The available literature does not indicate that these differences affect clinical outcomes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242590</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33270660</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Babies ; Bioengineering ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Breathing ; Care and treatment ; Comparative analysis ; Continuous Positive Airway Pressure ; Engineering and Technology ; Flow resistance ; Gas flow ; Gases ; Health Resources ; Humans ; Infants ; Medical equipment ; Medically underserved areas ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Newborn babies ; Patient outcomes ; Pediatric research ; Physical Sciences ; Premature birth ; Pressure ; Pressure changes ; Respiration ; Respiratory distress syndrome ; Rheology ; Silicones ; Stability analysis ; Systems analysis ; Viscosity ; Work of Breathing</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2020-12, Vol.15 (12), p.e0242590-e0242590</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2020 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2020 Heenan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2020 Heenan et al 2020 Heenan et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-5eb1fffcee71e5929d1b805f5a4fba8efca1269d762a50ae3abf9bea7b99f2303</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-5eb1fffcee71e5929d1b805f5a4fba8efca1269d762a50ae3abf9bea7b99f2303</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2347-9467</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2466774112/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2466774112?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,75126</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33270660$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Oei, Ju Lee</contributor><creatorcontrib>Heenan, Megan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rojas, Jose D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oden, Z Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richards-Kortum, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><title>In vitro comparison of performance including imposed work of breathing of CPAP systems used in low-resource settings</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Respiratory distress due to preterm birth is a significant cause of death in low-resource settings. The introduction of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) systems to treat respiratory distress significantly reduced mortality in high-resource settings, but CPAP was only recently introduced in low-resource settings due to cost and infrastructure limitations. We evaluated pressure stability and imposed work of breathing (iWOB) of five CPAP systems used in low resource settings: the Fisher and Paykel bubble CPAP, the Diamedica baby CPAP, the Medijet nCPAP generator, and the first (2015) and second (2017) generation commercially available Pumani CPAPs. Pressure changes due to fresh gas flow were evaluated for each system by examining the relationship between flow and pressure at the patient interface for four pressures generated at the bottle (0, 3, 5, and 7 cm H2O); for the Medijet nCPAP generator, no bottle was used. The slope of the resulting relationship was used to calculate system resistance. Poiseuille's law of resistance was used to investigate significant contributors to resistance. Resistance ranged from 0.05 to 1.40 [Formula: see text]; three CPAP devices had resistances < 0.4 [Formula: see text]: the Fisher and Paykel system, the Diamedica system, and the second generation Pumani bubble CPAP. The other two systems, the Medijet nCPAP generator and the first generation Pumani bCPAP, had resistances >1.0 [Formula: see text]. Imposed WOB was measured using an ASL5000 test lung to simulate the breath cycle for an infant (5.5 kg), a term neonate (4.0 kg), and a preterm neonate (2.5 kg). Imposed WOB ranged from 1.4 to 39.5 mJ/breath across all systems and simulated infant sizes. Changes in pressure generated by fresh gas flow, resistance, and iWOB differ between the five systems evaluated under ideal laboratory conditions. The available literature does not indicate that these differences affect clinical outcomes.</description><subject>Babies</subject><subject>Bioengineering</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Breathing</subject><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Continuous Positive Airway Pressure</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Flow resistance</subject><subject>Gas flow</subject><subject>Gases</subject><subject>Health Resources</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infants</subject><subject>Medical equipment</subject><subject>Medically underserved areas</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Newborn babies</subject><subject>Patient outcomes</subject><subject>Pediatric research</subject><subject>Physical Sciences</subject><subject>Premature birth</subject><subject>Pressure</subject><subject>Pressure changes</subject><subject>Respiration</subject><subject>Respiratory distress syndrome</subject><subject>Rheology</subject><subject>Silicones</subject><subject>Stability analysis</subject><subject>Systems analysis</subject><subject>Viscosity</subject><subject>Work of Breathing</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk11v0zAUhiMEYqPwDxBEQkJw0eKPxm5ukKqKj0qTNvF1aznOceuS2JntbOzf467Z1KBdIF_EOX7e9xyf5GTZS4xmmHL8Yed6b2Uz65yFGSJzUpToUXaKS0qmjCD6-Gh_kj0LYYdQQReMPc1OKCUcMYZOs7i2-ZWJ3uXKtZ30JjibO5134LXzrbQKcmNV09fGbnLTdi5AnV87_3tPVR5k3O5P0svqYnmRh5sQoQ15v8eMzRt3PfUQUq3JKECMCQ7PsydaNgFeDM9J9vPzpx-rr9Oz8y_r1fJsqlhJ4rSACmutFQDHUJSkrHG1QIUu5FxXcgFaSUxYWXNGZIEkUFnpsgLJq7LUhCI6yV4ffLvGBTE0LAgyZ4zzOcYkEesDUTu5E503rfQ3wkkjbgPOb4T00agGhFSUE0wrVSYtcLRgwCqOGaN8gZisk9fHIVtftVArsNHLZmQ6PrFmKzbuSnCOUzE0GbwbDLy77CFE0ZqgoGmkBdff1s0Z5iylnGRv_kEfvt1AbWS6gLHapbxqbyqWbE4ZpxSViZo9QKVVQ2tU-ru0SfGR4P1IkJgIf-JG9iGI9fdv_8-e_xqzb4_YLcgmboNr-micDWNwfgCVdyF40PdNxkjsh-OuG2I_HGIYjiR7dfyB7kV300D_AtHmC48</recordid><startdate>20201203</startdate><enddate>20201203</enddate><creator>Heenan, Megan</creator><creator>Rojas, Jose D</creator><creator>Oden, Z Maria</creator><creator>Richards-Kortum, Rebecca</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2347-9467</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20201203</creationdate><title>In vitro comparison of performance including imposed work of breathing of CPAP systems used in low-resource settings</title><author>Heenan, Megan ; Rojas, Jose D ; Oden, Z Maria ; Richards-Kortum, Rebecca</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-5eb1fffcee71e5929d1b805f5a4fba8efca1269d762a50ae3abf9bea7b99f2303</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Babies</topic><topic>Bioengineering</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Breathing</topic><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Continuous Positive Airway Pressure</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Flow resistance</topic><topic>Gas flow</topic><topic>Gases</topic><topic>Health Resources</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infants</topic><topic>Medical equipment</topic><topic>Medically underserved areas</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Newborn babies</topic><topic>Patient outcomes</topic><topic>Pediatric research</topic><topic>Physical Sciences</topic><topic>Premature birth</topic><topic>Pressure</topic><topic>Pressure changes</topic><topic>Respiration</topic><topic>Respiratory distress syndrome</topic><topic>Rheology</topic><topic>Silicones</topic><topic>Stability analysis</topic><topic>Systems analysis</topic><topic>Viscosity</topic><topic>Work of Breathing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Heenan, Megan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rojas, Jose D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oden, Z Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richards-Kortum, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medicine (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>https://resources.nclive.org/materials</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest advanced technologies & aerospace journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials science collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Heenan, Megan</au><au>Rojas, Jose D</au><au>Oden, Z Maria</au><au>Richards-Kortum, Rebecca</au><au>Oei, Ju Lee</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>In vitro comparison of performance including imposed work of breathing of CPAP systems used in low-resource settings</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2020-12-03</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>e0242590</spage><epage>e0242590</epage><pages>e0242590-e0242590</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Respiratory distress due to preterm birth is a significant cause of death in low-resource settings. The introduction of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) systems to treat respiratory distress significantly reduced mortality in high-resource settings, but CPAP was only recently introduced in low-resource settings due to cost and infrastructure limitations. We evaluated pressure stability and imposed work of breathing (iWOB) of five CPAP systems used in low resource settings: the Fisher and Paykel bubble CPAP, the Diamedica baby CPAP, the Medijet nCPAP generator, and the first (2015) and second (2017) generation commercially available Pumani CPAPs. Pressure changes due to fresh gas flow were evaluated for each system by examining the relationship between flow and pressure at the patient interface for four pressures generated at the bottle (0, 3, 5, and 7 cm H2O); for the Medijet nCPAP generator, no bottle was used. The slope of the resulting relationship was used to calculate system resistance. Poiseuille's law of resistance was used to investigate significant contributors to resistance. Resistance ranged from 0.05 to 1.40 [Formula: see text]; three CPAP devices had resistances < 0.4 [Formula: see text]: the Fisher and Paykel system, the Diamedica system, and the second generation Pumani bubble CPAP. The other two systems, the Medijet nCPAP generator and the first generation Pumani bCPAP, had resistances >1.0 [Formula: see text]. Imposed WOB was measured using an ASL5000 test lung to simulate the breath cycle for an infant (5.5 kg), a term neonate (4.0 kg), and a preterm neonate (2.5 kg). Imposed WOB ranged from 1.4 to 39.5 mJ/breath across all systems and simulated infant sizes. Changes in pressure generated by fresh gas flow, resistance, and iWOB differ between the five systems evaluated under ideal laboratory conditions. The available literature does not indicate that these differences affect clinical outcomes.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>33270660</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0242590</doi><tpages>e0242590</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2347-9467</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
ispartof | PloS one, 2020-12, Vol.15 (12), p.e0242590-e0242590 |
issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2466774112 |
source | Open Access: PubMed Central; Publicly Available Content (ProQuest) |
subjects | Babies Bioengineering Biology and Life Sciences Breathing Care and treatment Comparative analysis Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Engineering and Technology Flow resistance Gas flow Gases Health Resources Humans Infants Medical equipment Medically underserved areas Medicine and Health Sciences Newborn babies Patient outcomes Pediatric research Physical Sciences Premature birth Pressure Pressure changes Respiration Respiratory distress syndrome Rheology Silicones Stability analysis Systems analysis Viscosity Work of Breathing |
title | In vitro comparison of performance including imposed work of breathing of CPAP systems used in low-resource settings |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T23%3A40%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=In%20vitro%20comparison%20of%20performance%20including%20imposed%20work%20of%20breathing%20of%20CPAP%20systems%20used%20in%20low-resource%20settings&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Heenan,%20Megan&rft.date=2020-12-03&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=e0242590&rft.epage=e0242590&rft.pages=e0242590-e0242590&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0242590&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA643673309%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-5eb1fffcee71e5929d1b805f5a4fba8efca1269d762a50ae3abf9bea7b99f2303%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2466774112&rft_id=info:pmid/33270660&rft_galeid=A643673309&rfr_iscdi=true |