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 Tools annual

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 monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Knowledge of transport ventilator performance impacts patient safety. This study compared minute ventilation (V E ) of the MOVES and Uni-Vent 731 when ventilating the VentAid Training Test Lung with compliance (C) ranging from 0.02 to 0.10 L/cm H 2 O and three different airway resistances (R) (none, Rp5, or Rp20). Tidal volume (V T ) was 800 ± 25 mL. Respiratory rate was increased to ventilator's maximum or until auto-PEEP &gt; 5 cm H 2 O. Respiratory parameters were recorded with the RSS 100HR Research Pneumotach. Data were reported as median (interquartile range). Peak inspiratory pressure (PIP) of the Uni-Vent and MOVES ranged from 22.3 (22.2-22.5) to 82.6 (82.2-83.2) and 20.8 (20.6-20.9) to 50.6 (50.2-50.9) cm H 2 O, respectively. V E of the Uni-Vent and MOVES ranged from 17.7 (17.7-17.7) to 31.5 (31.5-31.5) and 11.3 (10.5-11.3) to 20.2 (19.7-20.5) L/min, respectively. Linear regression demonstrated strong, negative correlation of V E with PIP for the MOVES (V E [L/min] = 26 - 0.31 × PIP [cm H 2 O], r = -0.97) but weak, positive correlation for the Uni-Vent (r = 0.05). Uni-Vent V E exceeded MOVES V E under each test condition (p = 0.0002). If patient V E requirements exceed those predicted by the MOVES regression equation, then using the Uni-Vent should be considered.

Minute Ventilation Limitations of Two Field Transport Ventilators