Loading…
Improved response time with a new miniaturised main-stream multigas monitor
Background For paediatric monitoring and demanding applications such as metabolic monitoring and measurements of functional residual capacity combining gas concentration with flow/volume measurements the performance of side-stream monitors (SSGM) is suboptimal. The objective was to evaluate the perf...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of clinical monitoring and computing 2009-12, Vol.23 (6), p.355-361 |
---|---|
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!
|
Summary: | Background
For paediatric monitoring and demanding applications such as metabolic monitoring and measurements of functional residual capacity combining gas concentration with flow/volume measurements the performance of side-stream monitors (SSGM) is suboptimal. The objective was to evaluate the performance of a miniaturised mainstream multigas monitor (MSGM) alleged to offer fast response gas monitoring. The MSGM uses infrared technique for measurements of carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and inhalation agents and fuel cell technique for oxygen monitoring. The MSGM performance was com- pared to a state of the art side-stream monitor in a bench study.
Methods
Response time was measured in two bench study set ups; a high flow oxygen flush to achieve one step change in gas concentrations and during continuous ventilation using a circuit with an oxygen consuming/carbon dioxide producing lung model connected to a ventilator. Averaged tracings from the tested monitors were used for calculation of the 90–10% decline of CO
2
, the corresponding 10–90% incline of O
2
and N
2
O and of Isoflurane concentrations in the flush set up and at different inspired O
2
for the O
2
upslope and corresponding CO
2
down- slope during continuous ventilation at different breathing frequencies. Calibration gases with different concentrations of CO
2
, O
2
and N
2
O were used for testing of accuracy.
Results
The MSGM response time for CO
2
was 96 (88–100) compared to 348 (340–352) ms for the SSGM (
P
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 1387-1307 1573-2614 1573-2614 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s10877-009-9203-y |