English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the measurement accuracy of two currently available devices for measuring tidal breathing in infants. A mechanical model pump was used to generate flow profiles which simulated those observed in infants. A range of flows was applied simultaneously to two different devices, namely the commercially available SensorMedics 2600 (SM 2600) and more recently developed, custom-made equipment based on the flow-through technique (FTT). Automatically derived values from both devices were compared with one another and with manual calculations of printouts of the same breaths. There were no differences in the raw flow signal obtained from the two devices, nor between values calculated automatically or manually from the FTT. Similarly, the deviations between the FTT and SM 2600 were &lt;3% for tidal volume, respiratory frequency and minute ventilation. However, when comparing either with manually calculated values or those derived automatically from the FTT, there was a systematic and highly significant underestimation of shape-dependent parameters, such as the time to peak tidal expiratory flow as a proportion of tidal expiratory time (tPTEF/tE), derived by the SM 2600. The lower the applied flow, the higher the observed deviations, the underestimation being up to 60% when flows simulating those observed in preterm neonates were applied. These errors appear to result from differences in signal processing such as the algorithms used for breath detection and can only be detected if appropriate nonsinusoidal flow profiles representing those seen in infants are used to evaluate equipment.

In vitroassessment of equipment and software to assess tidal breathing parameters in infants