-
Critical care medicine · Apr 1989
Comparative StudyHigh-frequency percussive ventilation compared with conventional mechanical ventilation.
- T J Gallagher, P G Boysen, D D Davidson, J R Miller, and S B Leven.
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville 32610-0254.
- Crit. Care Med. 1989 Apr 1; 17 (4): 364-6.
AbstractIn seven patients with severe respiratory distress, conventional mechanical ventilation and PEEP were used initially for respiratory support, which was changed to high-frequency percussive ventilation (HFPV) at the same level of airway pressure and FIO2. During both modes of ventilation, patients could breathe spontaneously via a low-threshold demand valve. With HFPV, PaO2 improved significantly (p less than .01) compared with PaO2 during conventional methods. Cardiac output was unaffected by the change to HFPV.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.