Skip to main content
 

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Open Forum
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Association for Respiratory Care
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
American Association for Respiratory Care

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Open Forum
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
CorrectionCorrection

CORRECTION

Respiratory Care February 2015, 60 (2) e43-e45; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.03988
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

In the paper “Neonatal and Adult ICU Ventilators to Provide Ventilation in Neonates, Infants, and Children: A Bench Model Study” by Laurence Vignaux, Lise Piquilloud, Pierre Tourneux, Philippe Jolliet, and Peter C Rimensberger (Respir Care 2014;59(10):1463–1475), there were several errors in the figures and legends. We regret these errors. The corrected figures and legends appear below.

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Measured parameters. Trigger delay (Td) is the time between the beginning of the inspiratory effort and the minimum value measured on the pressure curve during the triggering phase. The pressure-time product at 300 ms (PTP300) is expressed as a percentage of the ideal PTP, which corresponds to the PTP300 that would have been delivered if the pressurization delivered had immediately reached its maximum value (ie, no trigger delay and no rise time), and is represented by the rectangle. Tip = inspiratory time of the patient (duration of inspiration by the patient [driver ventilator]); Tiex = inspiratory time in excess (duration of pressurization by the ventilator in excess of patient inspiratory duration); Paw = airway pressure.

Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

Trigger delay with the 10 ventilators tested with 3 different types of patients: a preterm infant (resistance 100 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 2 mL/cm H2O, inspiratory time [TI] 400 ms, inspiratory effort 1 and 2 cm H2O [R100C2]), a full-term infant (resistance 50 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 5 mL/cm H2O, TI 500 ms, inspiratory effort 2 and 4 cm H2O [R50C5]), and a child (resistance 30 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 10 mL/cm H2O, TI 600 ms, inspiratory effort 5 and 10 cm H2O [R30C10]). Two pressure support levels (10 and 15 cm H2O) were tested; results are pooled. Dotted lines indicate (from top to bottom) child limit, term limit, and preterm limit. Histogram bars are mean ± SD.

Fig. 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4.

Pressure-time product at 300 ms (PTP300) with the 10 ventilators tested with 3 different patient types: a preterm infant (resistance 100 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 2 mL/cm H2O, inspiratory time [TI] 400 ms, inspiratory effort 1 and 2 cm H2O [R100C2]), a full-term infant (resistance 50 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 5 mL/cm H2O, TI 500 ms, inspiratory effort 2 and 4 cm H2O [R50C5]), and a child (resistance 30 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 10 mL/cm H2O, TI 600 ms, inspiratory effort 5 and 10 cm H2O [R30C10]). Two pressure support levels (10 and 15 cm H2O) were tested; results are pooled. Histogram bars are mean ± SD.

Fig. 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 5.

Inspiratory time in excess with the 10 ventilators tested with 3 different patient types: a preterm infant (resistance 100 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 2 mL/cm H2O, inspiratory time [TI] 400 ms, inspiratory effort 1 and 2 cm H2O [R100C2]), a full-term infant (resistance 50 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 5 mL/cm H2O, TI 500 ms, inspiratory effort 2 and 4 cm H2O [R50C5]), and a child (resistance 30 cm H2O/L/s, compliance 10 mL/cm H2O, TI 600 ms, inspiratory effort 5 and 10 cm H2O [R30C10]). Two pressure support levels (10 and 15 cm H2O) were tested; results are pooled. Note that the Leoni Plus could be tested only with an expiratory trigger setting of 25%. Histogram bars are mean ± SD.

Fig. 7.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 7.

Pressure-time product at 300 ms (PTP300) for the 10 ventilators tested under 3 conditions: in the absence of leaks and with the noninvasive ventilation (NIV) algorithm deactivated (LONIVO), in the presence of leaks and with the NIV algorithm deactivated (L+NIVO), and in the presence of leaks and with the NIV algorithm activated (L+NIV+). All results are pooled. Histogram bars are mean ± SD. * P <.05 versus LONIVO; † P <.05 versus L+NIVO (analysis of variance).

  • Copyright © 2015 by Daedalus Enterprises
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Respiratory Care: 60 (2)
Respiratory Care
Vol. 60, Issue 2
1 Feb 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Monthly Podcast

 

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Association for Respiratory Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
CORRECTION
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Association for Respiratory Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Association for Respiratory Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
CORRECTION
Respiratory Care Feb 2015, 60 (2) e43-e45; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.03988

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
CORRECTION
Respiratory Care Feb 2015, 60 (2) e43-e45; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.03988
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Info For

  • Subscribers
  • Institutions
  • Advertisers

About Us

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Reprints/Permissions

AARC

  • Membership
  • Meetings
  • Clinical Practice Guidelines

More

  • Contact Us
  • RSS
American Association for Respiratory Care

Print ISSN: 0020-1324        Online ISSN: 1943-3654

© Daedalus Enterprises, Inc.

Powered by HighWire