File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: A comparison of expiratory flow rates in two breathing circuits used for manual inflation of the lungs

TitleA comparison of expiratory flow rates in two breathing circuits used for manual inflation of the lungs
Authors
KeywordsBagging
breathing systems
expiratory flow rate
physiotherapy
test-lung
Issue Date1991
PublisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/physt
Citation
Physiotherapy, 1991, v. 77 n. 9, p. 593-597 How to Cite?
AbstractManual inflation of the lungs by the 'bag squeezing method' (bagging) is commonly used by physiotherapists in the management of intubated patients. A wide variety of 'bagging' circuits are available and the peak expiratory flow rate that can be achieved is influenced by the circuit components. A high expiratory flow rate is desirable as it is believed to be one of the factors that determines the effectiveness of secretion mobilisation during a simulated cough in intubated patients. This study was designed to compare the expiratory flow rates resulting from the elastic recoil of a test-lung using the Mapleson-C breathing system and the Laerdal self-inflating resuscitator. Our data demonstrated that for any given pressure gradient the measured peak expiratory flow was higher with the Laerdal self-inflating resuscitator (p < 0.001). Further studies are required to assess the influence of circuit-type pulmonary secretion mobilisation in clinical practice.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/178097
ISSN
2021 Impact Factor: 3.704
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.961

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorJones, AYMen_US
dc.contributor.authorJones, RDen_US
dc.contributor.authorBaconShone, Jen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-12-19T09:42:28Z-
dc.date.available2012-12-19T09:42:28Z-
dc.date.issued1991en_US
dc.identifier.citationPhysiotherapy, 1991, v. 77 n. 9, p. 593-597en_US
dc.identifier.issn0031-9406en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/178097-
dc.description.abstractManual inflation of the lungs by the 'bag squeezing method' (bagging) is commonly used by physiotherapists in the management of intubated patients. A wide variety of 'bagging' circuits are available and the peak expiratory flow rate that can be achieved is influenced by the circuit components. A high expiratory flow rate is desirable as it is believed to be one of the factors that determines the effectiveness of secretion mobilisation during a simulated cough in intubated patients. This study was designed to compare the expiratory flow rates resulting from the elastic recoil of a test-lung using the Mapleson-C breathing system and the Laerdal self-inflating resuscitator. Our data demonstrated that for any given pressure gradient the measured peak expiratory flow was higher with the Laerdal self-inflating resuscitator (p < 0.001). Further studies are required to assess the influence of circuit-type pulmonary secretion mobilisation in clinical practice.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/physten_US
dc.relation.ispartofPhysiotherapyen_US
dc.subjectBagging-
dc.subjectbreathing systems-
dc.subjectexpiratory flow rate-
dc.subjectphysiotherapy-
dc.subjecttest-lung-
dc.titleA comparison of expiratory flow rates in two breathing circuits used for manual inflation of the lungsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailBaconShone, J: johnbs@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityBaconShone, J=rp00056en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0026333348en_US
dc.identifier.volume77en_US
dc.identifier.issue9en_US
dc.identifier.spage593en_US
dc.identifier.epage597en_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridJones, AYM=7407102183en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridJones, RD=7501542949en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBaconShone, J=6602137416en_US
dc.identifier.issnl0031-9406-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats