首页> 外文期刊>Chest: The Journal of Circulation, Respiration and Related Systems >Humidification performance of 48 passive airway humidifiers: comparison with manufacturer data.
【24h】

Humidification performance of 48 passive airway humidifiers: comparison with manufacturer data.

机译:48个被动气道加湿器的加湿性能:与制造商数据的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

INTRODUCTION: Heat and moisture exchangers (HMEs) are increasingly used in the ICU for gas conditioning during mechanical ventilation. Independent assessments of the humidification performance of HMEs are scarce. The aim of the present study was thus to assess the humidification performance of a large number of adult HMEs. METHOD: We assessed 48 devices using a bench test apparatus that simulated real-life physiologic ventilation conditions. Thirty-two devices were described by the manufacturers as HMEs, and 16 were described as antibacterial filters. The test apparatus provided expiratory gases with an absolute humidity (AH) of 35 mg H(2)O/L. The AH of inspired gases was measured after steady state using the psychrometric method. We performed three hygrometric measurements for each device, measured their resistance, and compared our results with the manufacturer data. RESULTS: Of the 32 HMEs tested, only 37.5% performed well (>/= 30 mg H(2)O/L), while 25% performed poorly (< 25 mg H(2)O/L). The mean difference (+/- SD) between our measurements and the manufacturer data was 3.0 +/- 2.7 mg H(2)O/L for devices described as HMEs (maximum, 8.9 mg H(2)O/L) [p = 0.0001], while the mean difference for 36% of the HMEs was > 4 mg H(2)O/L. The mean difference for the antibacterial filters was 0.2 +/- 1.4 mg H(2)O/L. The mean resistance of all the tested devices was 2.17 +/- 0.70 cm H(2)O/L/s. CONCLUSIONS: Several HMEs performed poorly and should not be used as HMEs. The values determined by independent assessments may be lower than the manufacturer data. Describing a device as an HME does not guarantee that it provides adequate humidification. The performance of HMEs must be verified by independent assessment.
机译:简介:ICU中越来越多使用热湿交换器(HME)在机械通风期间进行气体调节。对HME加湿性能的独立评估很少。因此,本研究的目的是评估大量成人HME的加湿性能。方法:我们使用模拟现实生活中生理通风条件的台式测试仪评估了48种设备。制造商将32种设备描述为HME,将16种设备描述为抗菌过滤器。测试设备提供的呼气中绝对湿度(AH)为35 mg H(2)O / L。吸气后的AH值在稳态后使用干湿法进行测量。我们对每个设备进行了三个湿度测量,测量了它们的电阻,并将我们的结果与制造商的数据进行了比较。结果:在测试的32个HME中,只有37.5%表现良好(> / = 30 mg H(2)O / L),而25%表现不佳(<25 mg H(2)O / L)。我们的测量值和制造商数据之间的平均差(+/- SD)为描述为HME的设备的3.0 +/- 2.7 mg H(2)O / L(最大,8.9 mg H(2)O / L)[p = 0.0001],而36%的HME的平均差异为> 4 mg H(2)O / L。抗菌过滤器的平均差为0.2 +/- 1.4 mg H(2)O / L。所有测试设备的平均电阻为2.17 +/- 0.70 cm H(2)O / L / s。结论:若干HME表现不佳,不应用作HME。由独立评估确定的值可能低于制造商数据。将设备描述为HME并不能保证其提供足够的湿度。 HME的性能必须通过独立评估来验证。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号