Scoring System to Evaluate the Performance of ICU Ventilators in the Pandemic of COVID-19: A Lung Model Study

Bench assessment of PC-CMVs modes in transport and emergency ventilators under ICU conditions

Although there has been an increase in bench test evaluation of mechanical ventilators in recent years, a publication gap remains in assessing Pressure Control Continuous Mandatory Ventilation Modes with a set point targeting scheme PC-CMVs. This study evaluates the operational variability in PC-CMVs of eleven transport and emergency ventilators used in ICU units in Brazil during the COVID-19 pandemic. The assessment involved a comprehensive set of test scenarios derived from existing literature and the NBR ISO 80601-2-12:2014 standard. Nine parameters were computed for five consecutive breaths, offering a comprehensive characterization of pressure and flow waveforms. Most ventilators had Inspiratory pressure and PEEP values that fell outside of the tolerance ranges. Notably, three mechanical ventilators failed to reach the target pressures within the specified inspiratory times during test scenarios with a higher time constant (τ). We observed significant differences among emergency and transport ventilators in all assessed parameters, indicating a performance difference in PC-CMVs modes. The current results might help clinicians determine which ventilator models are suitable for specific clinical situations, particularly when unfavorable circumstances compel doctors to use ventilators that may not provide adequate support for patients in intensive care units.

High potential of technology to face new respiratory viruses: mechanical ventilation devices for effective healthcare to next pandemic emergencies

Some countries in the presence of unforeseen Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), have experienced lower total deaths, though higher numbers of COVID-19 related infections. Results here suggest that one of the explanations is the critical role of ventilator technology in clinical health environment to cope with the initial stage of COVID-19 pandemic crisis. Statistical evidence shows that a large number of ventilators or breathing devices in countries (26.76 units per 100,000 inhabitants) is associated with a fatality rate of 1.44% (December 2020), whereas a higher fatality rate given by 2.46% is in nations with lower numbers of ventilator devices (10.38 average units per 100,000 people). These findings suggest that a large number of medical ventilators in clinical setting has a high potential for more efficient healthcare and improves the effective preparedness of crisis management to cope with new respiratory pandemic diseases in society. Hence, a forward-thinking and technology-oriented strategy in healthcare sector, based on investments in high-tech ventilator devices and other new medical technologies, can help clinicians deliver effective care and reduce negative effects of present and future respiratory infectious diseases, in particular when new drugs and appropriate treatments are missing in clinical environment to face unknown respiratory viral agents .

High-flow nasal cannula: Evaluation of the perceptions of various performance aspects among Chinese clinical staff and establishment of a multidimensional clinical evaluation system

Objective

In order to facilitate education for clinical users, performance aspects of the high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) devices were evaluated in the present study. A multidimensional HFNC clinical evaluation system was established accordingly.

Materials and Methods

Clinical staff from Chinese hospitals were invited to participate in an online questionnaire survey. The questionnaire was mainly about the accuracy of temperature, flow rate, and oxygen concentration of HFNC, as well as its humidification capacity. We also investigated how the clinical staff of different professions made decisions on HFNC evaluation indicators. Based on the results of the questionnaire survey of clinicians with rich experience in using HFNC, the relative weights of temperature accuracy, flow velocity accuracy, oxygen concentration accuracy, and humidification ability of HFNC equipment were calculated by the AHP to establish a clinical evaluation system. Four kinds of common HFNC devices were tested and evaluated, and the clinical performance of the four kinds of HFNC devices was evaluated by the new scoring system.

Results

A total of 356 clinicians participated in and completed the questionnaire survey. To ensure the reliability of the HFNC evaluation system, we only adopted the questionnaire results of clinicians with rich experience in using HFNCs. Data from 247 questionnaires (80 doctors, 105 nurses, and 62 respiratory therapists [RTs]) were analyzed. A total of 174 participants used HFNC more than once a week; 88.71% of RTs used HFNC ≥ 1 score daily, 62.86% of nurses used HFNC ≥ 1 score daily, and 66.25% of doctors used HFNC ≥ 1 daily. There was no significant difference in the frequency of use between doctors and nurses. Finally, the relative weights of temperature accuracy (0.088), humidification capacity (0.206), flow velocity accuracy (0.311), and oxygen concentration accuracy (0.395) in the HFNC clinical evaluation system were obtained. The relative weights of clinicians with different occupations and the frequency of HFNC use were obtained. After testing four kinds of HFNC devices through the evaluation system, it was found that the four kinds of HFNC devices have different advantages in different clinical performances, and AiRVO₂ has excellent performance with regard to temperature accuracy and humidification ability. HF-75A and NeoHiF-i7 are good at ensuring the stability of oxygen concentration and the accuracy of the flow velocity of the transported gas, while OH-80S is relatively stable in all aspects.

Conclusion

The clinical evaluation system of HFNC is based on the weight of the experience of clinical personnel with different medical backgrounds. Although the existing practitioners have different educational backgrounds (academic qualifications, majors), our evaluation system can enhance clinical staff’s awareness of HFNC and further optimize the clinical use of HFNC.