Prospective clinical comparison of two methods for mechanical ventilation of neonates: Rapid rate and short inspiratory time versus slow rate and long inspiratory time
A prospective comparison was made of the clinical courses of two groups of neonates ventilated according to different protocols: one group at rates of 20 to 40/minute with a one-second IT, and the other at a rate of 60/minute and 0.5 second IT. Other ventilator settings were adjusted within protocol...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of pediatrics 1981-06, Vol.98 (6), p.957-961 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 961 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 957 |
| container_title | The Journal of pediatrics |
| container_volume | 98 |
| creator | Heicher, Donna A. Kasting, David S. Harrod, James R. |
| description | A prospective comparison was made of the clinical courses of two groups of neonates ventilated according to different protocols: one group at rates of 20 to 40/minute with a one-second IT, and the other at a rate of 60/minute and 0.5 second IT. Other ventilator settings were adjusted within protocol limits to maintain desired blood gas values. Mean starting and highest PIP were lower in the rapid rate group. The results showed no difference in mortality, failure to remain within protocol limits, time requiring respirator treatment or Fi
O
2
more than 0.6, and incidence of PDA or chronic lung disease. There was a difference (
P=0.011) in number of infants developing pneumothoraces (14% in the rapid group vs 35% in the slow group). Rapid rate ventilation can be used to decrease the incidence of pneumothorax, reserving long IT and higher PIP for infants who cannot be oxygenated or ventilated without them. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0022-3476(81)80604-X |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_75629314</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S002234768180604X</els_id><sourcerecordid>75629314</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-b516c15114220a0162884f2d26c4bd41354025cb188903d2bd2e993e2a858c863</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkctu1TAQhi1EVQ6FR6jkFYJFYOw4icMGoYqbVKkVF6k7y7EnHKPEDrbPqfpEvGbd5qgsWLDyZb5_RvP_hJwyeM2AtW--AXBe1aJrX0r2SkILorp6RDYM-q5qZV0_JpsH5Al5mtIvAOgFwDE57oAJycSG_LmMIS1ostsjNZPzzuiJmjAvOroUPA0jzdeBzpi3wSY6hljuZqtXcI8-u0lnt5Ieg9cZ01v6VS_O0lgeVHtL0zbETJ1Piyt_Id7Q7GYs8ph2iaYpXP9lp-B__oM-I0ejnhI-P5wn5MfHD9_PPlfnF5--nL0_rwzvmlwNDWsNaxgTnIMuNnEpxcgtb40YrGB1I4A3ZmBS9lBbPliOfV8j17KRRrb1CXmx9l1i-L3DlNXsksFp0mW3XVJd0_K-ZqKAzQqaYmCKOKolulnHG8VA3QWk7gNSd-4rydR9QOqq6E4PA3bDjPZBdUik1N-tdSxb7h1GlYxDb9C6WGJSNrj_TLgFHiejmw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>75629314</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prospective clinical comparison of two methods for mechanical ventilation of neonates: Rapid rate and short inspiratory time versus slow rate and long inspiratory time</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Heicher, Donna A. ; Kasting, David S. ; Harrod, James R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Heicher, Donna A. ; Kasting, David S. ; Harrod, James R.</creatorcontrib><description>A prospective comparison was made of the clinical courses of two groups of neonates ventilated according to different protocols: one group at rates of 20 to 40/minute with a one-second IT, and the other at a rate of 60/minute and 0.5 second IT. Other ventilator settings were adjusted within protocol limits to maintain desired blood gas values. Mean starting and highest PIP were lower in the rapid rate group. The results showed no difference in mortality, failure to remain within protocol limits, time requiring respirator treatment or Fi
O
2
more than 0.6, and incidence of PDA or chronic lung disease. There was a difference (
P=0.011) in number of infants developing pneumothoraces (14% in the rapid group vs 35% in the slow group). Rapid rate ventilation can be used to decrease the incidence of pneumothorax, reserving long IT and higher PIP for infants who cannot be oxygenated or ventilated without them.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-3476</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6833</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3476(81)80604-X</identifier><identifier>PMID: 7014814</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Mosby, Inc</publisher><subject>Humans ; Infant, Newborn ; Inspiratory Capacity ; Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation ; Lung Diseases, Obstructive - therapy ; Lung Volume Measurements ; Pneumothorax - prevention & control ; Positive-Pressure Respiration ; Respiration, Artificial</subject><ispartof>The Journal of pediatrics, 1981-06, Vol.98 (6), p.957-961</ispartof><rights>1981 The C. V. Mosby Company</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-b516c15114220a0162884f2d26c4bd41354025cb188903d2bd2e993e2a858c863</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-b516c15114220a0162884f2d26c4bd41354025cb188903d2bd2e993e2a858c863</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3476(81)80604-X$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7014814$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Heicher, Donna A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kasting, David S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrod, James R.</creatorcontrib><title>Prospective clinical comparison of two methods for mechanical ventilation of neonates: Rapid rate and short inspiratory time versus slow rate and long inspiratory time</title><title>The Journal of pediatrics</title><addtitle>J Pediatr</addtitle><description>A prospective comparison was made of the clinical courses of two groups of neonates ventilated according to different protocols: one group at rates of 20 to 40/minute with a one-second IT, and the other at a rate of 60/minute and 0.5 second IT. Other ventilator settings were adjusted within protocol limits to maintain desired blood gas values. Mean starting and highest PIP were lower in the rapid rate group. The results showed no difference in mortality, failure to remain within protocol limits, time requiring respirator treatment or Fi
O
2
more than 0.6, and incidence of PDA or chronic lung disease. There was a difference (
P=0.011) in number of infants developing pneumothoraces (14% in the rapid group vs 35% in the slow group). Rapid rate ventilation can be used to decrease the incidence of pneumothorax, reserving long IT and higher PIP for infants who cannot be oxygenated or ventilated without them.</description><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Inspiratory Capacity</subject><subject>Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation</subject><subject>Lung Diseases, Obstructive - therapy</subject><subject>Lung Volume Measurements</subject><subject>Pneumothorax - prevention & control</subject><subject>Positive-Pressure Respiration</subject><subject>Respiration, Artificial</subject><issn>0022-3476</issn><issn>1097-6833</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1981</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkctu1TAQhi1EVQ6FR6jkFYJFYOw4icMGoYqbVKkVF6k7y7EnHKPEDrbPqfpEvGbd5qgsWLDyZb5_RvP_hJwyeM2AtW--AXBe1aJrX0r2SkILorp6RDYM-q5qZV0_JpsH5Al5mtIvAOgFwDE57oAJycSG_LmMIS1ostsjNZPzzuiJmjAvOroUPA0jzdeBzpi3wSY6hljuZqtXcI8-u0lnt5Ieg9cZ01v6VS_O0lgeVHtL0zbETJ1Piyt_Id7Q7GYs8ph2iaYpXP9lp-B__oM-I0ejnhI-P5wn5MfHD9_PPlfnF5--nL0_rwzvmlwNDWsNaxgTnIMuNnEpxcgtb40YrGB1I4A3ZmBS9lBbPliOfV8j17KRRrb1CXmx9l1i-L3DlNXsksFp0mW3XVJd0_K-ZqKAzQqaYmCKOKolulnHG8VA3QWk7gNSd-4rydR9QOqq6E4PA3bDjPZBdUik1N-tdSxb7h1GlYxDb9C6WGJSNrj_TLgFHiejmw</recordid><startdate>198106</startdate><enddate>198106</enddate><creator>Heicher, Donna A.</creator><creator>Kasting, David S.</creator><creator>Harrod, James R.</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198106</creationdate><title>Prospective clinical comparison of two methods for mechanical ventilation of neonates: Rapid rate and short inspiratory time versus slow rate and long inspiratory time</title><author>Heicher, Donna A. ; Kasting, David S. ; Harrod, James R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c275t-b516c15114220a0162884f2d26c4bd41354025cb188903d2bd2e993e2a858c863</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1981</creationdate><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Inspiratory Capacity</topic><topic>Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation</topic><topic>Lung Diseases, Obstructive - therapy</topic><topic>Lung Volume Measurements</topic><topic>Pneumothorax - prevention & control</topic><topic>Positive-Pressure Respiration</topic><topic>Respiration, Artificial</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Heicher, Donna A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kasting, David S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harrod, James R.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of pediatrics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Heicher, Donna A.</au><au>Kasting, David S.</au><au>Harrod, James R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prospective clinical comparison of two methods for mechanical ventilation of neonates: Rapid rate and short inspiratory time versus slow rate and long inspiratory time</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of pediatrics</jtitle><addtitle>J Pediatr</addtitle><date>1981-06</date><risdate>1981</risdate><volume>98</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>957</spage><epage>961</epage><pages>957-961</pages><issn>0022-3476</issn><eissn>1097-6833</eissn><abstract>A prospective comparison was made of the clinical courses of two groups of neonates ventilated according to different protocols: one group at rates of 20 to 40/minute with a one-second IT, and the other at a rate of 60/minute and 0.5 second IT. Other ventilator settings were adjusted within protocol limits to maintain desired blood gas values. Mean starting and highest PIP were lower in the rapid rate group. The results showed no difference in mortality, failure to remain within protocol limits, time requiring respirator treatment or Fi
O
2
more than 0.6, and incidence of PDA or chronic lung disease. There was a difference (
P=0.011) in number of infants developing pneumothoraces (14% in the rapid group vs 35% in the slow group). Rapid rate ventilation can be used to decrease the incidence of pneumothorax, reserving long IT and higher PIP for infants who cannot be oxygenated or ventilated without them.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>7014814</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0022-3476(81)80604-X</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0022-3476 |
| ispartof | The Journal of pediatrics, 1981-06, Vol.98 (6), p.957-961 |
| issn | 0022-3476 1097-6833 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_75629314 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
| subjects | Humans Infant, Newborn Inspiratory Capacity Intermittent Positive-Pressure Ventilation Lung Diseases, Obstructive - therapy Lung Volume Measurements Pneumothorax - prevention & control Positive-Pressure Respiration Respiration, Artificial |
| title | Prospective clinical comparison of two methods for mechanical ventilation of neonates: Rapid rate and short inspiratory time versus slow rate and long inspiratory time |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T06%3A58%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prospective%20clinical%20comparison%20of%20two%20methods%20for%20mechanical%20ventilation%20of%20neonates:%20Rapid%20rate%20and%20short%20inspiratory%20time%20versus%20slow%20rate%20and%20long%20inspiratory%20time&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20pediatrics&rft.au=Heicher,%20Donna%20A.&rft.date=1981-06&rft.volume=98&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=957&rft.epage=961&rft.pages=957-961&rft.issn=0022-3476&rft.eissn=1097-6833&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0022-3476(81)80604-X&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E75629314%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=75629314&rft_id=info:pmid/7014814&rft_els_id=S002234768180604X&rfr_iscdi=true |