OBJECTIVE: To compare helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV), in terms of patient-ventilator interaction and performance, using 2 different circuits for connection: a double tube circuit (with one inspiratory and one expiratory line) and a standard circuit (a Y-piece connected only to one side of the helmet, closing the other side). METHODS: A manikin, connected to a test lung set at 2 breathing frequencies (20 and 30 breaths/min), was ventilated in pressure support ventilation (PSV) mode with 2 different settings, randomly applied, of the ratio of pressurization time to expiratory trigger time (T(press)/T(exp-trigger)) 50%/25%, default setting, and T(press)/T(exp-trigger) 80%/60%, fast setting, through a helmet. The helmet was connected to the ventilator randomly with the double and the standard circuit. We measured inspiratory trigger delay (T(insp-delay)), expiratory trigger delay (T(exp-delay)), T(press)), time of synchrony (T(synch)), trigger pressure drop, inspiratory pressure-time product (PTP), PTP at 300 ms and 500 ms, and PTP at 500 ms expressed as percentage of an ideal PTP500 (PTP500 index). RESULTS: At both breathing frequencies and ventilator settings, helmet NIV with the double tube circuit showed better patient-ventilator interaction, with shorter T(insp-delay), T(exp-delay), and T(press); longer T(synch); and higher PTP300, PTP500, and PTP500 index (all P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The double tube circuit had significantly better patient-ventilator interaction and a lower rate of wasted effort at 30 breaths/min.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare helmet noninvasive ventilation (NIV), in terms of patient-ventilator interaction and performance, using 2 different circuits for connection: a double tube circuit (with one inspiratory and one expiratory line) and a standard circuit (a Y-piece connected only to one side of the helmet, closing the other side). METHODS: A manikin, connected to a test lung set at 2 breathing frequencies (20 and 30 breaths/min), was ventilated in pressure support ventilation (PSV) mode with 2 different settings, randomly applied, of the ratio of pressurization time to expiratory trigger time (T(press)/T(exp-trigger)) 50%/25%, default setting, and T(press)/T(exp-trigger) 80%/60%, fast setting, through a helmet. The helmet was connected to the ventilator randomly with the double and the standard circuit. We measured inspiratory trigger delay (T(insp-delay)), expiratory trigger delay (T(exp-delay)), T(press)), time of synchrony (T(synch)), trigger pressure drop, inspiratory pressure-time product (PTP), PTP at 300 ms and 500 ms, and PTP at 500 ms expressed as percentage of an ideal PTP500 (PTP500 index). RESULTS: At both breathing frequencies and ventilator settings, helmet NIV with the double tube circuit showed better patient-ventilator interaction, with shorter T(insp-delay), T(exp-delay), and T(press); longer T(synch); and higher PTP300, PTP500, and PTP500 index (all P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The double tube circuit had significantly better patient-ventilator interaction and a lower rate of wasted effort at 30 breaths/min.