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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Goals of modern mechanical ventilation in infants focus on preventing over-distention by limiting tidal volume. Accurate measurement of these volumes is essential. We hypothesized that tidal volume accuracy differs dependent upon the type of airway sensor utilized in tidal volumes less than 10 mL. Intubated, sedated Sprague Dawley rats (n = 40) were ventilated utilizing both control and support ventilator modes. Accuracy of volume delivery was compared between a fixed orifice flow sensor (FOF) and a hot wire anemometer (HWA) to a Hans Rudolph linear pneumotachograph positioned at the patient wye. Rats median weight was 476 grams (range 370-544), tidal volume (V T ) 3.5 mL (1.2-11.4), f 50 (18-102), and PIP 9.5 cm H 2 O (1-34). Across all modes, bias and precision were HWA -0.76, 1.09; FOF 0.22, 0.61. This study confirms that there are differences in the accuracy of small tidal volumes measured with a FOF as compared to a HWA. Utilizing a FOF, control modes exhibit improved precision and decreased bias as compared to support modes.

Accuracy of small tidal volume measurement comparing two ventilator airway sensors