• Daniel W Chipman, Maria P Caramez, Eriko Miyoshi, Joseph P Kratohvil, and Robert M Kacmarek.
• Department of Respiratory Care, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston MA 02114, USA.
• Resp Care. 2007 Jun 1;52(6):740-51.

BackgroundNumerous mechanical ventilators are designed and marketed for use in patient transport. The complexity of these ventilators differs considerably, but very few data exist to compare their operational capabilities.MethodsUsing bench and animal models, we studied 15 currently available transport ventilators with regard to their physical characteristics, gas consumption (duration of an E-size oxygen cylinder), battery life, ease of use, need for compressed gas, ability to deliver set ventilation parameters to a test lung under 3 test conditions, and ability to maintain ventilation and oxygenation in normal and lung-injured sheep.ResultsMost of the ventilators tested were relatively simple to operate and had clearly marked controls. Oxygen cylinder duration ranged from 30 min to 77 min. Battery life ranged from 70 min to 8 hours. All except 3 of the ventilators were capable of providing various F(IO2) values. Ten of the ventilators had high-pressure and patient-disconnect alarms. Only 6 of the ventilators were able to deliver all settings as specifically set on the ventilator during the bench evaluation. Only 4 of the ventilators were capable of maintaining ventilation, oxygenation, and hemodynamics in both the normal and the lung-injured sheep.ConclusionsOnly 2 of the ventilators met all the trial targets in all the bench and animal tests. With many of the ventilators, certain of the set ventilation parameters were inaccurate (differed by > 10% from the values from a cardiopulmonary monitor). The physical characteristics and high gas consumption of some of these ventilators may render them less desirable for patient transport.

8 keywords...

hide…