Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2024
The evaluation of a non-invasive respiratory monitor in ards patients in supine and prone position.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Pozzi Tommaso, Coppola Silvia, Chiodaroli Elena, Cucinotta Federico, Becci Francesca, Chiumello Davide
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The Prone positioning in addition to non invasive respiratory support is commonly used in patients with acute respiratory failure. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of an impedance-based non-invasive respiratory volume monitor (RVM) in supine and in prone position.
METHODS: In sedated, paralyzed and mechanically ventilated patients in volume-controlled mode with acute respiratory distress syndrome scheduled for prone positioning it was measured and compared non-invasively tidal volume and respiratory rate provided by the RVM in supine and, subsequently, in prone position, by maintaining unchanged the ventilatory setting.
RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled. No significant difference was found between measurements in supine and in prone position either for tidal volume (p = 0.795; p = 0.302) nor for respiratory rate (p = 0.181; p = 0.604). Comparing supine vs. prone position, the bias and limits of agreements for respiratory rate were 0.12 bpm (-1.4 to 1.6) and 20 mL (-80 to 120) for tidal volume.
CONCLUSIONS: The RVM is accurate in assessing tidal volume and respiratory rate in prone compared to supine position. Therefore, the RVM could be applied in non-intubated patients with acute respiratory failure receiving prone positioning to monitor respiratory function.
METHODS: In sedated, paralyzed and mechanically ventilated patients in volume-controlled mode with acute respiratory distress syndrome scheduled for prone positioning it was measured and compared non-invasively tidal volume and respiratory rate provided by the RVM in supine and, subsequently, in prone position, by maintaining unchanged the ventilatory setting.
RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled. No significant difference was found between measurements in supine and in prone position either for tidal volume (p = 0.795; p = 0.302) nor for respiratory rate (p = 0.181; p = 0.604). Comparing supine vs. prone position, the bias and limits of agreements for respiratory rate were 0.12 bpm (-1.4 to 1.6) and 20 mL (-80 to 120) for tidal volume.
CONCLUSIONS: The RVM is accurate in assessing tidal volume and respiratory rate in prone compared to supine position. Therefore, the RVM could be applied in non-intubated patients with acute respiratory failure receiving prone positioning to monitor respiratory function.