Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
Effectiveness of hypothermia prevention devices for preterm infants: A laboratory study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Loganathan Prakash Kannan, Dorkins Charles, Marlow George, Zahra James, Tulsianey Mudit A, Rowles Toby J, Chadwick Paula
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Newborn hypothermia at birth remains as global challenge across all settings. The prevention of delivery room hypothermia at birth could potentially reduce neonatal morbidity and mortality.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the heat conservation efficacy of Neohelp and Neowrap and evaluate the heat production efficacy of trans-warmer infant mattress (TWM) in a laboratory setting.
METHODS: A beaker of water was heated at 60∘C was covered by Neohelp or two layers of Neowrap and left to cool in an open room for 90 minutes and calculated the decay constant. Using infra-red camera, we measured the maximum temperature and time taken to reach the temperature in the TWM.
RESULTS: Neowrap took 863 seconds for the temperature to drop from 37∘C to 35∘C, compared with 941 seconds with Neohelp. When activated TWM reached a maximum temperature of 39.3 ± 0.1∘C. It took 30 seconds when the activator was placed in the centre, compared with 88 seconds when it was at the corner.
CONCLUSION: Compared to Neowrap, Neohelp had better heat conservation properties. Activating the metal disk from the TWM center would deliver quicker heat.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the heat conservation efficacy of Neohelp and Neowrap and evaluate the heat production efficacy of trans-warmer infant mattress (TWM) in a laboratory setting.
METHODS: A beaker of water was heated at 60∘C was covered by Neohelp or two layers of Neowrap and left to cool in an open room for 90 minutes and calculated the decay constant. Using infra-red camera, we measured the maximum temperature and time taken to reach the temperature in the TWM.
RESULTS: Neowrap took 863 seconds for the temperature to drop from 37∘C to 35∘C, compared with 941 seconds with Neohelp. When activated TWM reached a maximum temperature of 39.3 ± 0.1∘C. It took 30 seconds when the activator was placed in the centre, compared with 88 seconds when it was at the corner.
CONCLUSION: Compared to Neowrap, Neohelp had better heat conservation properties. Activating the metal disk from the TWM center would deliver quicker heat.