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 Call for Abstracts
    • 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 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
Research ArticleOriginal Research

Performance of Different Low-Flow Oxygen Delivery Systems in the Acute Emergency Setting

Frédéric Duprez, Florence Dupriez, Julien De Greef, Julie Gabriel, Arnaud Bruyneel, Grégory Reychler, Christophe De Terwangne and William Poncin
Respiratory Care October 2021, respcare.09312; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.09312
Frédéric Duprez
Unité de soins intensifs, Centre Hospitalier EpiCURA, rue de Mons 63, 7301 Hornu, Belgium and Laboratoire de physiologie respiratoire, Condorcet, Tournai, Belgium.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Florence Dupriez
Service des urgences, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julien De Greef
Service de médecine interne et maladies infectieuses, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julie Gabriel
Service de médecine interne, Centre Hospitalier EpiCURA, rue de Mons 63, 7301 Hornu, Belgium.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Arnaud Bruyneel
Économie de la santé, gestion des institutions de soins et Sciences infirmières, Ecole de Santé Publique, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium and Société des infirmier(e)s des soins intensifs, Brussels, Belgium.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Grégory Reychler
Institut de recherche expérimentale et clinique (IREC), pôle de Pneumologie, ORL et Dermatologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, Avenue Hippocrate 55, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; Service de pneumologie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium and Secteur de kinésithérapie et ergothérapie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christophe De Terwangne
Service de gériatrie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William Poncin
Institut de recherche expérimentale et clinique (IREC), pôle de Pneumologie, ORL et Dermatologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, Avenue Hippocrate 55, 1200 Brussels, Belgium; Service de pneumologie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium and Secteur de kinésithérapie et ergothérapie, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The delivery of a high and consistent FIO2 is imperative to treat acute hypoxemia. The objective of this study was to analyze the effective inspired oxygen concentration delivered by different low-flow oxygen therapy systems challenged with different oxygen flows and respiratory patterns in an experimental lung model.

METHODS: An adult lung model ventilated in volume control mode simulated different respiratory patterns to obtain mean inspiratory flow of 22.5, 30.0, 37.5, or 45.0 L/min. The oxygen concentration sampled inside the lung model by nasal cannula, simple face mask, non-rebreather mask, and double-trunk mask above nasal cannula tested at oxygen flows of 10, 12.5, and 15 L/min was quantified. The 3 masks were sealed tight onto the model’s airway opening. They were also tested with standardized leaks to determine their clinical performance.

RESULTS: All oxygen delivery systems delivered higher oxygen concentration with increasing oxygen flows, regardless of the respiratory pattern. Within each device, the increase in inspiratory flow decreased oxygen concentration when using nasal cannula (P = .03), the simple face mask (P = .03), but not the non-rebreather mask (P = .051) nor the double-trunk mask (P = .13). In sealed condition, the double-trunk mask outperformed the non-rebreather mask and simple face mask (P < .001); mean oxygen concentration was 84.2%, 68.5%, and 60.8%, respectively. Leaks amplified oxygen concentration differences between the double-trunk mask and the other masks as the oxygen delivery decreased by 4.6% with simple face mask (95% CI 3.1–6.1%, P < .001), 7.8% with non-rebreather mask (95% CI 6.3–9.3%, P < .001), and 2.5% with double-trunk mask (95% CI 1–4%, P = .002). With leaks, the oxygen concentration provided by the simple face mask and the non-rebreather mask was similar (P = .15).

CONCLUSIONS: Lung oxygen concentration values delivered by the double-trunk mask were higher than those obtained with other oxygen delivery systems, especially when leaks were present.

  • respiratory distress
  • oxygen face mask
  • non-rebreather mask
  • double-trunk mask
  • performance
  • low-flow oxygen therapy

Footnotes

  • Correspondence: William Poncin PT PhD, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200 Brussels, Belgium. E-mail: william.poncin{at}uclouvain.be
  • Copyright © 2021 by Daedalus Enterprises

Pay Per Article - You may access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 1 day for US$30.00

Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article purchase if your access period has not yet expired.

Log in using your username and password

Forgot your user name or password?
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Respiratory Care: 67 (6)
Respiratory Care
Vol. 67, Issue 6
1 Jun 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author

 

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.
Performance of Different Low-Flow Oxygen Delivery Systems in the Acute Emergency Setting
(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
Performance of Different Low-Flow Oxygen Delivery Systems in the Acute Emergency Setting
Frédéric Duprez, Florence Dupriez, Julien De Greef, Julie Gabriel, Arnaud Bruyneel, Grégory Reychler, Christophe De Terwangne, William Poncin
Respiratory Care Oct 2021, respcare.09312; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.09312

Citation Manager Formats

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

Share
Performance of Different Low-Flow Oxygen Delivery Systems in the Acute Emergency Setting
Frédéric Duprez, Florence Dupriez, Julien De Greef, Julie Gabriel, Arnaud Bruyneel, Grégory Reychler, Christophe De Terwangne, William Poncin
Respiratory Care Oct 2021, respcare.09312; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.09312
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
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Keywords

  • respiratory distress
  • oxygen face mask
  • non-rebreather mask
  • double-trunk mask
  • performance
  • low-flow oxygen therapy

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