Total inspiratory work with modern demand valve devices compared to continuous flow CPAP.
The inspiratory work exerted by an electromechanical lung model in drawing a 500 ml breath, was assessed by planimetry of pressure/volume loops for six commercial demand valve CPAP devices (Servo B and C from Siemens, EV-A and UV-2 from Dräger, the Puritan Bennett 7200 and the Engström ERICA) and compared to the loading of a conventional high flow CPAP system. The effect of trigger sensitivity and inspiratory pressure support on inspiratory work was also investigated in some cases. The lung model allowed for calibrated changes in compliance and airway resistance. In the non-assisted CPAP mode, all machines required slightly larger amounts of inspiratory work than the continuous flow CPAP system. Most machines were comparable in performance but the ERICA and the Servo B required up to 22% more work than the continuous flow CPAP system and represented the maximal increase of total work due to any given machine. The greater part of total inspiratory work was due to lung compliance and airway resistance, factors external to the machines. Halving compliance doubled the work and exchanging a 7 for a 9 mm i.d. endotracheal tube in the circuit increased work by about 3% regardless of machine. Decreasing trigger sensitivity from 0 to 2 cm H2O for the Servo B increased work by up to 24%. Using 5 cm H2O of inspiratory pressure support decreased work for all machines up to 36% maximally.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
D000403:Airway Resistance; D004867:Equipment Design; D006801:Humans; D008170:Lung Compliance; D008954:Models, Biological; D011175:Positive-Pressure Respiration / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D015300:Ventilator Weaning / Q000379:methods*; D014939:Work of Breathing