Roger P Rassool1,2, Bryn A Sobott1,2, David J Peake1, Bagayana S Mutetire3, Peter P Moschovis4, Jim Fp Black5,6. 1. FREO2 Foundation Australia, Melbourne, Australia. 2. School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. 3. Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Mbarara, Uganda. 4. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. FREO2 Foundation Australia, Melbourne, Australia. jim@freo2.org. 6. Nossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Widespread access to medical oxygen would reduce global pneumonia mortality. Oxygen concentrators are one proposed solution, but they have limitations, in particular vulnerability to electricity fluctuations and failure during blackouts. The low-pressure oxygen storage system addresses these limitations in low-resource settings. This study reports testing of the system in Melbourne, Australia, and nonclinical field testing in Mbarara, Uganda. METHODS: The system included a power-conditioning unit, a standard oxygen concentrator, and an oxygen store. In Melbourne, pressure and flows were monitored during cycles of filling/emptying, with forced voltage fluctuations. The bladders were tested by increasing pressure until they ruptured. In Mbarara, the system was tested by accelerated cycles of filling/emptying and then run on grid power for 30 d. RESULTS: The low-pressure oxygen storage system performed well, including sustaining a pressure approximately twice the standard working pressure before rupture of the outer bag. Flow of 1.2 L/min was continuously maintained to a simulated patient during 30 d on grid power, despite power failures totaling 2.9% of the total time, with durations of 1-176 min (mean 36.2, median 18.5). CONCLUSIONS: The low-pressure oxygen storage system was robust and durable, with accelerated testing equivalent to at least 2 y of operation revealing no visible signs of imminent failure. Despite power cuts, the system continuously provided oxygen, equivalent to the treatment of one child, for 30 d under typical power conditions for sub-Saharan Africa. The low-pressure oxygen storage system is ready for clinical field trials.
BACKGROUND: Widespread access to medical oxygen would reduce global pneumonia mortality. Oxygen concentrators are one proposed solution, but they have limitations, in particular vulnerability to electricity fluctuations and failure during blackouts. The low-pressure oxygen storage system addresses these limitations in low-resource settings. This study reports testing of the system in Melbourne, Australia, and nonclinical field testing in Mbarara, Uganda. METHODS: The system included a power-conditioning unit, a standard oxygen concentrator, and an oxygen store. In Melbourne, pressure and flows were monitored during cycles of filling/emptying, with forced voltage fluctuations. The bladders were tested by increasing pressure until they ruptured. In Mbarara, the system was tested by accelerated cycles of filling/emptying and then run on grid power for 30 d. RESULTS: The low-pressure oxygen storage system performed well, including sustaining a pressure approximately twice the standard working pressure before rupture of the outer bag. Flow of 1.2 L/min was continuously maintained to a simulated patient during 30 d on grid power, despite power failures totaling 2.9% of the total time, with durations of 1-176 min (mean 36.2, median 18.5). CONCLUSIONS: The low-pressure oxygen storage system was robust and durable, with accelerated testing equivalent to at least 2 y of operation revealing no visible signs of imminent failure. Despite power cuts, the system continuously provided oxygen, equivalent to the treatment of one child, for 30 d under typical power conditions for sub-Saharan Africa. The low-pressure oxygen storage system is ready for clinical field trials.
Authors: Neelima Navuluri; Maria L Srour; Peter S Kussin; David M Murdoch; Neil R MacIntyre; Loretta G Que; Nathan M Thielman; Eric D McCollum Journal: J Glob Health Date: 2021-05-08 Impact factor: 4.413
Authors: Ryan Calderon; Melissa C Morgan; Mark Kuiper; Harriet Nambuya; Nicholas Wangwe; Akos Somoskovi; Daniel Lieberman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-02-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Hamish Graham; Bryn Sobott; Sheillah Bagayana; Rami Subhi; Graham Moore; Joseph Mugerwa; David Peake; Eleanor Nakintu; Daniel Murokora; Roger Rassool; Marc Sklar Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-28 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Stephen Rc Howie; Bernard E Ebruke; Mireia Gil; Beverly Bradley; Ebrima Nyassi; Timothy Edmonds; Sainimere Boladuadua; Senimili Rasili; Eric Rafai; Grant Mackenzie; Yu Ling Cheng; David Peel; Joan Vives-Tomas; Syed Ma Zaman Journal: J Glob Health Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 7.664
Authors: David Peake; James Black; Elias Kumbakumba; Sheillah Bagayana; Celestine Barigye; Peter Moschovis; Ivan Muhumuza; Frank Kiwanuka; Patrick Semata; Kevin Rassool; Bryn Sobott; Roger Rassool Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-03-09 Impact factor: 3.240