Maria Sehlin, Helge Brändström, Ola Winsö, Michael Haney, Karin Wadell, Fredrik Ohberg
{"title":"Simulated flying altitude and performance of continuous positive airway pressure devices.","authors":"Maria Sehlin, Helge Brändström, Ola Winsö, Michael Haney, Karin Wadell, Fredrik Ohberg","doi":"10.3357/ASEM.4013.2014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is used in air ambulances to treat patients with impaired oxygenation. Differences in mechanical principles between CPAP devices may affect their performance at different ambient air pressures, as will occur in an air ambulance during flight.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two different CPAP systems, a threshold resistor device and a flow resistor device, at settings of 5 and 10 cm H₂O were examined. Static pressure, static airflow, and pressure during simulated breathing were measured at ground level and at three different altitudes [2400 m (7874 ft), 3000 m (9843 ft), and 10,700 m (35,105 ft)].</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When altitude increased, the performance of the two CPAP systems differed during both static and simulated breathing pressure measurements. With the threshold resistor CPAP, measured pressure levels were close to the preset CPAP level. Static pressure decreased 0.71 ± 0.35 cm H₂O at CPAP 10 cm H₂O compared to ground level and 35,105 ft (10,700 m). With the flow resistor CPAP, as the altitude increased, CPAP produced pressure levels increased. At 35,105 ft (10,700 m), the increase was 5.13 ± 0.33 cm H₂O at CPAP 10 cm H₂O.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The velocity of airflow through the flow resistor CPAP device is strongly influenced by reduced ambient air pressure, leading to a higher delivered CPAP effect than the preset CPAP level. Threshold resistor CPAP devices seem to have robust performance regardless of altitude. Thus, the threshold resistor CPAP device is probably more appropriate for CPAP treatment in an air ambulance cabin, where ambient pressure will vary during patient transport.</p>","PeriodicalId":8676,"journal":{"name":"Aviation, space, and environmental medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1092-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3357/ASEM.4013.2014","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aviation, space, and environmental medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3357/ASEM.4013.2014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Introduction: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is used in air ambulances to treat patients with impaired oxygenation. Differences in mechanical principles between CPAP devices may affect their performance at different ambient air pressures, as will occur in an air ambulance during flight.
Methods: Two different CPAP systems, a threshold resistor device and a flow resistor device, at settings of 5 and 10 cm H₂O were examined. Static pressure, static airflow, and pressure during simulated breathing were measured at ground level and at three different altitudes [2400 m (7874 ft), 3000 m (9843 ft), and 10,700 m (35,105 ft)].
Results: When altitude increased, the performance of the two CPAP systems differed during both static and simulated breathing pressure measurements. With the threshold resistor CPAP, measured pressure levels were close to the preset CPAP level. Static pressure decreased 0.71 ± 0.35 cm H₂O at CPAP 10 cm H₂O compared to ground level and 35,105 ft (10,700 m). With the flow resistor CPAP, as the altitude increased, CPAP produced pressure levels increased. At 35,105 ft (10,700 m), the increase was 5.13 ± 0.33 cm H₂O at CPAP 10 cm H₂O.
Discussion: The velocity of airflow through the flow resistor CPAP device is strongly influenced by reduced ambient air pressure, leading to a higher delivered CPAP effect than the preset CPAP level. Threshold resistor CPAP devices seem to have robust performance regardless of altitude. Thus, the threshold resistor CPAP device is probably more appropriate for CPAP treatment in an air ambulance cabin, where ambient pressure will vary during patient transport.
简介:持续气道正压通气(CPAP)用于空中救护车治疗氧合受损患者。CPAP设备之间机械原理的差异可能会影响它们在不同环境气压下的性能,就像飞行中的空中救护车一样。方法:对两种不同的CPAP系统,阈值电阻装置和流量电阻装置,在5和10 cm H₂O的设置下进行了测试。在地面和三个不同高度[2400米(7874英尺)、3000米(9843英尺)和10,700米(35,105英尺)]测量了模拟呼吸期间的静压、静态气流和压力。结果:当海拔升高时,两种CPAP系统在静态和模拟呼吸压力测量中表现不同。使用阈值电阻CPAP,测量的压力水平接近预设的CPAP水平。与地面和35105英尺(10,700米)高度相比,CPAP高度为10 cm H₂O的静压降低了0.71±0.35 cm H₂O。使用流量电阻CPAP时,随着海拔高度的增加,CPAP产生的压力水平也随之增加。在海拔35,105英尺(10,700米)处,当CPAP为10 cm H₂O时,增加了5.13±0.33 cm H₂O。讨论:通过流动电阻CPAP装置的气流速度受到环境气压降低的强烈影响,导致输送的CPAP效果高于预设的CPAP水平。无论海拔高低,阈值电阻CPAP装置似乎都具有稳健的性能。因此,阈值电阻器CPAP装置可能更适合在空中救护舱内进行CPAP治疗,因为在病人运输过程中环境压力会发生变化。