ArticlePloS one2022
A low-cost, highly functional, emergency use ventilator for the COVID-19 crisis.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- High potential of technology to face new respiratory viruses: mechanical ventilation devices for effective healthcare to next pandemic emergencies.Technology in society · 2023Article
- Validation of a specialized evaluation system for COVID-19 in Japan: A retrospective, multicenter cohort study.Journal of infection and chemotherapy : official journal of the Japan Society of Chemotherapy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Respiratory failure complicates most critically ill patients with COVID-19 and is characterized by heterogeneous pulmonary parenchymal involvement, profound hypoxemia and pulmonary vascular injury. The high incidence of COVID-19 related respiratory failure has exposed critical shortages in the supply of mechanical ventilators, and providers with the necessary skills to treat. Traditional mass-produced ventilators rely on an internal compressor and mixer to moderate and control the gas mixture delivered to a patient. However, the current emergency has energized the pursuit of alternative designs, enabling greater flexibility in supply chain, manufacturing, storage, and maintenance considerations. To achieve this, we hypothesized that using the medical gasses and flow interruption strategy would allow for a high performance, low cost, functional ventilator. A low-cost ventilator designed and built-in accordance with the Emergency Use guidance from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is presented wherein pressurized medical grade gases enter the ventilator and time limited flow interruption determines the ventilator rate and tidal volume. This simple strategy obviates the need for many components needed in traditional ventilators, thereby dramatically shortening the time from storage to clinical deployment, increasing reliability, while still providing life-saving ventilatory support. The overall design philosophy and its applicability in this new crisis is described, followed by both bench top and animal testing results used to confirm the precision, safety and reliability of this low cost and novel approach to mechanical ventilation. The ventilator meets and exceeds the critical requirements included in the FDA emergency use guidelines. The ventilator has received emergency use authorization from the FDA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.