MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383187269 · doi:10.1186/s13054-023-04542-2

A new reservoir-based CPAP with low oxygen consumption: the Bag-CPAP

2023· article· en· W4383187269 on OpenAlexaff
Eloïse de Beaufort, Guillaume Carteaux, François Morin, Arnaud Lesimple, Anne-Fleur Haudebourg, Emeline Fresnel, Damien Duval, Alexandre Broc, Alain Mercat, Laurent Brochard, Dominique Savary, François Beloncle, Armand Mekontso Dessap, Jean-Christophe M. Richard

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContinuous positive airway pressureFraction of inspired oxygenAnesthesiaRespiratory rateOxygenOxygen saturationWork of breathingIntensive careMechanical ventilationIntensive care medicineInternal medicineHeart rateBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Several noninvasive ventilatory supports rely in their design on high oxygen consumption which may precipitate oxygen shortage, as experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this bench-to-bedside study, we assessed the performance of a new continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) device integrating a large reservoir (“Bag-CPAP”) designed to minimize oxygen consumption, and compared it with other CPAP devices. Methods First, a bench study compared the performances of Bag-CPAP and four CPAP devices with an intensive care unit ventilator. Two FiO 2 targets (40–60% and 80–100%) at a predefined positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) level between 5 and 10 cm H 2 O were tested and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO 2 ) and oxygen consumption were measured. Device-imposed work of breathing (WOB) was also evaluated. Second, an observational clinical study evaluated the new CPAP in 20 adult patients with acute respiratory failure in two hospitals in France. Actual FiO 2 , PEEP, peripheral oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, and dyspnea score were assessed. Results All six systems tested in the bench study reached the minimal FiO 2 target of 40% and four reached at least 80% FiO 2 while maintaining PEEP in the predefined range. Device-delivered FiO 2 /consumed oxygen ratio was the highest with the new reservoir-based CPAP irrespective of FiO 2 target. WOB induced by the device was higher with Bag-CPAP. In the clinical study, Bag-CPAP was well tolerated and could reach high (> 90%) and moderate (> 50%) FiO 2 with an oxygen flow rate of 15 [15–16] and 8 [7–9] L/min, respectively. Dyspnea score improved significantly after introduction of Bag-CPAP, and SpO 2 increased. Conclusions In vitro, Bag-CPAP exhibited the highest oxygen saving properties albeit had increased WOB. It was well accepted clinically and reduced dyspnea. Bag-CPAP may be useful to treat patients with acute respiratory failure in the field, especially when facing constraints in oxygen delivery.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207