Talk:Ventilator

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ventilators, historical

The inflation pressure can be varied by sliding the moveable weight on top of the bellows, it can be seen in the photograph. And where is the photograph? Seems to me like some badly copy & paste. --81.21.45.44 16:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you look at the history/diffs, you can see he tried to link to a photograph, it apparently just wasn't uploaded. That said, the section does need some cleanup. VoxLuna 10:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

The ambulance ventilation equipment shown in the top picture is not ventilation equipment at all. It is a suction unit and an IV bag warmer. I would know I am both a paramedic and a respiratory therapist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.12.116.66 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an EMT-IV and Paramedic student. That's IV flud warming equipment and a mounted suction.
- Chance Gearheart
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.146.110.158 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Changed photo to mechanical ventilator Hallbrianh 20:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

mechanical ventilator

The person in the picture labeled "An ER patient on a ventilator" on this page appears to be wearing a face mask; she is not on a ventilator. Chrisalta 07:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, and User:Rcej rightly commented out the picture as seen in this diff. There's nothing wrong with using the image on other pages though, such as oxygen therapy (as an alternative to nasal cannula). --Kyoko 00:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HFPV

I have had a fair amount of experience with HFPV. Prior to my edit, there was no information about it. Some may think that it is worthy of a separate article, but I have no such lofty goals for now.VK35 20:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The initial statement refers to ventilators as moving "non-medical gas." Oxygen IS a medical gas. Yes, I KNOW they are refering to anesthesia, but oxygen is oxygen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.229.10.49 (talk) 04:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion request

A lot of people only think about ventilators when they're trying to write a living will. The history is lovely, but can we get some simple information that would be useful to a basically healthy person who's trying to figure out if they'd ever want a machine to make them breathe? WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:19, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add a redirect

Positive-pressure_airway_ventilator, please add this as a redirect.
~ender 2008-05-29 18:09:PM MST — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.240.27.73 (talk • contribs) 01:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

I don't think that when you try to get to ventilator it should redirect here. this is a subterm of the term and so it should go directly to ventilator and have redirects to here from there. the term ventilator covers all the subtopics such as this under its non specific heading unlike this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsandbits1 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

note

Is it coincidence that all of the products mentioned are from the same brand and are not even the most inovative ones? 13.1.2012 10.42AM Leo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.150.138.5 (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Ventilator" is not always a medical word

The word "ventilator" is also used in non-medical context to devices and other means of doing any of the things listed on the Ventilation disambiguation page. But currently Ventilator redirects to this article with no link to the general Ventilation disambiguation page. 77.215.46.17 (talk) 00:39, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've put in the dab template. The problem is that there's no ventilator dab page, but only a ventilation dab page. There are some places there where there is ventilation without a ventilator (as in some buildings). Sometimes a non medical machine that ventilates is called something else. But I agree that one should go look for non-medical ventilators in the articles on the ventilation dab. SBHarris 03:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The profession "Respiratory Therapists" is unknown in Germany. Ventilators are set by medical doctors! Dr. Sven Goddon, Anaesthetist and Intensivist, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Germany. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.67.161.63 (talk) 11:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Puritan Bennett ventilators

The Puritan Bennett MA-1 was introduced in 1967 and was the first ventilator that was volume delivered, pressure limited. There is no mention of Puritan Bennett at all in this article and they gave us the foundation for the ventilators we know today. Also, Bird produced several types of mechanical ventilators including the Mark-7, Mark-8, Mark 10, Mark 14, and the 'Baby Bird', the first infant ventilator. This company also was the first to produce a 'pneumovest' that vibrated for clearing of secretions and the first curiass that was completely driven by pneumatic and not electrical power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.190.38.199 (talk) 01:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other Significant Ventilators

Bourns produced ventilators that spanned the range from the LS104-150 (which was the gold standard for ventilating very low birth weight children) through the BP200 and the Bear-1. Engström had a range of volume ventilators that were also capable of being used in the Operating Theater. Emerson had a very interesting ventilator that included a pressure cooker as its humidifier. John Emerson was also credited for creating the original "Iron Lung." The RPR was one of the French contributions to the art and was fairly versatile. Automatic Ventilation of the Lungs Mushin et al (ISBN 0 632 00286 7) describes quite a few devices in detail. Docdave (talk) 01:22, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ventilators in hyperbaric environments

The comment "Ventilators used under increased pressure (hyperbaric) require special precautions and few ventilators can operate under these conditions" going on to cite a specific device capable of such use is strange. In the early 1970s, I routinely ventilated patients at up to 5 atmospheres with the relatively primitive Bird Mk7 and I know that Vickers had a small hyperbaric chamber that came with a fluidic "respirator" the name of which escapes me. Docdave (talk) 01:31, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ventilator industry

Here are a couple of WP:RS which describe the ventilator industry in the context of increasing production to meet the upcoming needs of the coronavirus epidemic.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51914490
Coronavirus: Plan to ramp up ventilator production 'unrealistic'
By Simon Gompertz & Esyllt Carr
BBC News
16 March 2020

https://www.forbes.com/sites/baldwin/2020/03/14/ventilator-maker-we-can-ramp-up-production-five-fold/#79e0ff9a5e9a
Ventilator Maker: We Can Ramp Up Production Five-Fold
William Baldwin
Forbes
Mar 14, 2020

--Nbauman (talk) 15:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

open source

I feel its good to put this here:

Projects

There are several projects rushing to meet the demand for ventilators:

  • single ventilator for multiple simulated patients to meet disaster surge.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16885402/ Criticisms of this: that it hasn’t been tested in real patients and that patients’ lung compliances change during Advanced Respiratory Distress syndrome so it’s hard to match 4 patients who have similar lung compliances.

  • The Project Open Air

https://www.projectopenair.org/ “working on medical devices, such as open-source ventilators, to have a fast and easy solution that can be reproduced and assembled locally worldwide.”

  • The Pandemic Ventilator Project

https://panvent.blogspot.com This blog documents our attempt to construct a ventilator design for use in a Flu Pandemic that can be made from readily available materials at the last minute. Hopefully, the situation never arrives where this device will need to be used for a pandemic. But just in case... The Post below is the most recent. See the right-side panel for other posts. This Blog was started on Feb 22, 2007

  • The zFrugal Ventilator

Frugal/Jugaad innovation: 10 minutes to make a $1.25 shampoo bottle DIY ventilator, with a 2-year lancet-published randomized control trial finding that it improves outcomes in infants, especially when coupled with oxygen. No evidence on use with adults 🔗https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40498395 🔗http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)60249-5/fulltext

  • Bubble CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) demo vids here and here.

Open-source project for ventilators and oxygen concentrators Project page DELETE ME IS THIS RELATED TO THIS DOCUMENT? DELETE ME Join the slack channel This slack channel has moved link needs updating DELETE ME Introduce yourself THIS LINK IS BROKEN - DELETE ME Google drive with documents here DELETE ME Repeating daily at 1 pm UTC. Join us on this zoom call if you can. (Time zones) DELETE ME Project Includes: DIY Oxygen Concentrator O2 Concentrator Pzroject Trying to generate a set of instructions that allow for people with only mild DIY skills to build an oxygen concentrator.

  • DIY Ventilator

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RDihfZIOEYs60kPEIVDe7gmsxdYgUosF9sr45mgFxY8/edit# List of projects - but warning from https://panvent.blogspot.com/2020/02/im-back.html saying "Be very cautious with the article from Mechanical Engineering Group at MIT" Do we need more ventilators? - Yes.

  • The Pandemic Ventilator : 6 Steps (with Pictures)

The EndCoronavirus.org Ventilator https://medium.com/@brucefenton/we-need-ventilators-we-need-you-to-help-build-them-30805e5ee2ea The ventilators subgroup of EndCoronavirus.org (@endcovid19), an effort by The New England Complex Systems Institute, staffed with scientists from Harvard and MIT and others who have an understanding of pandemics, medicine, systems, risk and the key numbers and data behind this threat.

I've added info about the New England Complex Systems Institute (NECSI) / endcoronavirus.org project to the article, expanding on Victor Grigas's suggestion for listing this. In the interest of speed, I have not previously discussed my additions on the talk page, but others can make improvements as needed. Omygoshogolly (talk) 22:47, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Vortran Automatic Resuscitator

This device which is manufactured commercially is the closest to what we could build.

  • OpenRespirator.org

https://OpenRespirator.org Open source hardware project focused on ventilators, intubation kits, and whatever else can help close the gap. Not tied to a specific solution.

  • Ultimate Medical Hackathon

https://hackaday.com/2020/03/12/ultimate-medical-hackathon-how-fast-can-we-design-and-deploy-an-open-source-ventilator/?fbclid=IwAR2oIOeqWPOib1u04HnJB8zN_GWC9XRxs9XeNdNkpiISKPHUm128DTY-W3o “How fast can we design and deploy an open source ventilator?”

  • Other sources and initiatives working on the topic:

https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenSourceVentilators/

Victor Grigas (talk) 16:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Differences between various ventilators

I am adding information to the "Open-source ventilators" section of the article, talking about the differences between various ventilators. In the interest of speed, I have not previously discussed my additions on the talk page, but others can make improvements as needed. I have taken care to include many and properly verified sources from a medical and general perspective. Omygoshogolly (talk) 18:59, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's a separate article on open-source ventilator -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 19:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of open source projects

I'd like to request wikipedia editors to host a status/features comparison for all open source ventilators initiatives. As you may have heard a lot of engineers are trying to come with a simple and working solution for the ventilators supply problem for COVID-19. There is a lot of redundant effort and designers reinventing stuff ("not invented here syndrome"). It would be very important that people that want to contribute may find an general overview of all these projects, so one may decide where to join or which project is worth trying to print/manufacture. I think wikipedia is the ideal place for hosting this comparison given it's importance, visibility and easiness of updating as these projects (hopefully) evolve.

Ventilator design Site Status Concept Schematics/drawings available Mandatory ventilation mode Breathing support mode Max pressure limit PEEP Inspiratory:Expiratory ratio (I:E) Respiratory Rate Tidal Volume (Vt) FiO2 range Display (info?) Cylinder O2 / Wall (regulator?) Compressed air required? Power supply Battery Connectors Cleaning/Infection control HMEF filter Alarms
CITI-OpenLung https://github.com/emersonmoretto/CITI-OpenLung In development Sliding piston compresses ambu-bag. step motor. arduino based. Only some preliminary mechanical drawings for ambu-bag mechanism.
MIT 2010 (Husseini et al) https://web.mit.edu/2.75/projects/DMD_2010_Al_Husseini.pdf Prototyped (2nd version). MIT says "did not move past the prototype stage". Rotating cam compresses AMBU bag, angle sensed, DC gear motor, H-bridge for reversal, Arduino. Github page is dead. Backup here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1DJboju0iwRJ_DEyZjsaUarbmyRdGogQ8 yes yes (Assist Control mode). negatice pressure trigger back to tidal volume mode. Overpressure triggers alarm not included Not implemented but possible. 5-30 bpm 200-750 mL No O2 mix LCD planned (future version?) ? Not required Wall outlet PS yes ? ? Not included Overpressure only. Other alarms planned.
MIT E-Vent https://e-vent.mit.edu/ There is a working prototype (3rd version) but doesn't seem to be using the final components they claim. Ambu-bag is compressed by rotating arms actuated by a single geared DC motor with encoder. Plan is to use Arduino, but prototype pictures show National Instruments board instead. Apparently not. yes (volume mode) yes (assist control mode) Yes. Also uses pressure to fallback to volume mode. Assumed to be included with the Ambu bag. Yes 0-24 bpm Pot adjustable in terms of arm's movement range. bag size is unknown so it doesn't know about mL equivalency. No O2 mix LCD for pressure displaying No Not required ATX power supply Yes (optional) ? ? ? Yes (overpressure, motor problem, pressure not increasing). More to be added.
Open Source Ventilator Ireland https://opensourceventilator.ie/ Still getting organized. Good technical discussion here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RDihfZIOEYs60kPEIVDe7gmsxdYgUosF9sr45mgFxY8/edit# Bag Valve Mask (BVM) Ventilator, DC motor, H-Bridge No
OpenLung BVM Ventilator https://gitlab.com/open-source-ventilator/OpenLung Mechanical concept being reviewed.
OpenVentilator https://github.com/popsolutions/openventilator Unknown (any working prototype?) Compress a bellows made with a tire chamber (or ambu, optionally). Arduino based. DC or step motor? Files available at github. Not finished though (?) yes ? seems planned ? May be implemented in software 3-30 (software) ? ? Yes (?) ? Not required ? Being discussed May be implemented in software
OxyGEN https://www.oxygen.protofy.xyz/ Working (5th version), start to test with 4 hospitals in Barcelona Rotating cam compresses AMBU bag. DC windshield motor. No motor reversal. No microcontroler. yes yes no no not included Changeable by replacing cam with a different shape Manual/analog adjustable (dimmer) Probably fixed. (May be cam-changed? No O2 mix No No Not required 12V ATX power supply Not included (easy to add) ? ? Not included No
Pandemic Ventilator Project https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Dz7eMgXowFBtBA_0PKzfAXweHnNMbGlIAXPshCbI2Vk/edit#heading=h.r1wktxbs8nwb Supposedly three prototypes have being built but software development has yet to start. Uses centrifugal blower (possibly repurpose a vacuum cleaner) and quick acting valves to regulate pressure. Arduino controls rate and PEEP. No Set by Arduino or by water depth (alternative concept).
Project Open Air https://www.projectopenair.org/ Seems like a collection of other initiatives
Projeto Respirador Hacker https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x7G5CbkijJWCOzE0SckrtT1vbTyRyPlI0n-fVixpFnw/edit# Initial discussions on existing ideas and requirements Unknown
Projeto Ventilador Pulmonar UFRJ https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/12JQGZV7p5xM-7cdM3cZFkQG02_cHs7PZ Prototype tested with lung simulator devices. Reportedly waiting for authorization for human trials. Uses a CPAP Boussignac (device generating Continuous Positive Airway Pressure + air/oxygen mixing), mechanical PEEP, valve actuated by microcontroler to set I:E ratio. No (?) Yes No (?) Yes (manually adjusted on inlet valves) Yes (spring load type) Yes, set by microcontroler. Yes. Depends on choosen pressure range and mechanical characteristics of the breathing system. Yes (manually adjusted on inlet valves - but not yet measured) No Both cylinder/wall supported (regulator included) Yes. ? Not implemented. ? ? Yes. No.
Reespirator by Coronavirus Makers https://www.coronavirusmakers.org/index.php/es/ Mechanical design preliminary. Software and electronics already in the works and available. Bag-compressing concept using step motor actuating on a lever. Software and electronics already in the works using Arduino Mega, Step motor, LCD, encoder for rotation. Partialy (software and PCBs available but no mechanical drawings) Yes
Rice Design https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-DRXnVkJOlDCmvTzh-DgWDxeLSrZTiBYyH0ypzv8tNA/edit Prototype was built. Servo motor failed after 11h. CO2 acumulation. Linear moving arms (rack and pinion) compressing Ambu-bag. Servo Motor. PICAXE 20x2 microcontroller. Rice did not allow sharing files (?) yes No No pressure sensor (?) Not included Not implemented but possible. 3 predefined settings: slow, medium, fast 3 predefined settings: adult, child, infant (changes the movement range) No O2 mix No (only LED indicators) No Not required External power suppy Not implemented ? ? No No
Ventilaid https://www.ventilaid.org/ Prototype version 1 completed. Cylindrical bellows produced in 3d printer driven by industrial pneumatic actuator. Version 2 will remove compressed air/actuator requirement. Yes, mechanical drawings and STL files. Not much information on microcontroler/firmware (if any) yes No Yes. No

The table is available in Google docs (also includes another important table with minimum requirements for low cost ventilators according different sources, specially for COVID-19). Please check the following link for both tables (colors make them more easily visualized): [1]

187.99.254.27 (talk) 01:56, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's a separate article on open-source ventilator, perhaps you should post this request there? -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 19:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Labeled picture

Given the severity of the COVID-19 and other bacteria and viruses, and the need for better, more thorough, understanding of these devices, it would be good to label the different parts and controls and buttons on the picture provided of the Bird ventilator (or another), with links to articles about what those functions and buttons and values mean and their relationship to the device and to respiration and circulation, in the context of ventilation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.47.132 (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal (2020)

No consensus to merge. Guy (help! - typo?) 14:10, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


I propose to merge Ventilator into Mechanical ventilation. I think that the content in the Ventilator article can easily be explained in the context of Mechanical ventilation, and the latter article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Ventilator will not cause any problems as far as article size is concerned.

Moreover, it will focus our limited editorial attentions on getting one, rather than two, articles up to readable, WP:VERIFY-compliant quality. At present, the two are a travesty for the encyclopedia. 2601:246:C700:19D:7197:10A0:DD58:78FD (talk) 22:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose both are large articles, and there are many types of ventillators covered in different articles, not just this one. That would produced undue bias in the form of ventilator covered at mechanical ventilation. This one covers standard intubation positive pressure ventilaors, while the article on mechanical ventilation also covers positive airway pressure devices (BiPAP, CPAP), ambu bags, iron lungs, etc. You already missed the other subarticle Modes of mechanical ventilation, which would be merged first if there were any merge. -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 08:10, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: First, ventilator is a machine, but mechanical ventilation is a medical term; Second, both ventilator and mechanical ventilation are large article. --DavidHuai1999※Talk 12:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose one is the process of ventilation. One is a machine. These are not the same and the overall article will be both confusing and likely quite long. Strong oppose. --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:25, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose at this time Though there is room to consider it at a later date, this is the wrong time to be making major changes to pages in this topic area. Potentially very disruptive to the current information flow of which Wikipedia is (for better or worse) a significant part. Further, there are extensive problems with both pages -- particularly sloppy organization, overlooked or dismissed substantial topics (e.g.: negative pressure ventilators), and incredibly weak sourcing (especially on the "Mechanical ventilation" page, but also on the "Ventilator" page, where there are whole sections with scarcely a reference citation. Given that this is an extremely important topic, at an extremely important moment in human history, it's probably the wrong time merge two messes into one humongous mess.
~ Penlite (talk) 13:10, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


  • Support At this stage both articles are a huge mess. Especially the Mechanical Ventilation article. Both should be merged and made into a single well structured article. It's especially needed at this time (a well written article). Although if the restructuring will take a lot of time it may not be desirable now. Jain Elizabeth (talk) 07:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Biomedical Engineer's Technical Assessment: Open Source Ventilator

Note: a vandal removed my warning about Homemade Ventilators. Sorry about that. The vandal has been reported.

People can be injured by the manual "bagging" method - not uncommon - that's the central device proposed in most of these efforts.

Ventilators monitor breathing, oxygen intake and carbon dioxide output, and adjusting automatically. The control software is pretty complicated - based on use-cases in emergency care.

To understand abit more about these devices, read the Kindle book "The Ventilator Book" by Dr. Owens. These appear to be complicated.

Please take care with this. There is homework left to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackie42.chan (talk • contribs) on 23 March

@Jackie42.chan: I have moved your comment to the talk page. Do you have a WP:reliable source for this information ? It cannot be added if you dont have one. Cedix (talk) 16:13, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We do have a separate article on Open-source ventilator, if the information deals with these devices only, it should go to that article. Also, home-made and open-source are not synonymous, so perhaps and additional "home made ventilator" article needs to be made? An open source design could easily be virtually identical to a professional medical grade one -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 15:28, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Cedix, let's turn it around. If we required WP:MEDRS reliable sources for the Open-source ventilators section, most of it would be gone. Vice and NPR aren't good sources for reliable evaluations of life-critical medical devices. I've seen a lot of stories in popular sources, including the New York Times, that reported enthusiastically about devices that don't even have a working prototype, and haven't ever been used in real patients or subjects. In the absence of WP:MEDRS, I would be willing to use other reliable sources, with an emphasis on including critical viewpoints, according to WP:WEIGHT. --Nbauman (talk) 20:54, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nbauman, to be clear I am not against Jackie, neither am I challenging him. I think he raised an important point, that must be mentioned somewhere, that is why I started this discussion. Please take a look at these reports.[2] and then https://www.ft.com/content/5f393d77-8e5b-4a85-b647-416efbc575ec . I will be very thankful if you can include the useful information at the appropriate locations. Cedix (talk) 17:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BARDA/Newport Ventilator Development Project

First, I will self-disclose that I worked for Medtronic but am retired >9 years. I did not work in the cardiopulmonary division but had some involvement with them perhaps 20 yrs. ago, nothing to do with this.

This section of the article references solely the NY Times article and does not discuss information that surfaced after it was published. In particular, it does not discuss Medtronic's response to the article. [1][2]

The contract discussed was during the time frame 2010-13 and was between BARDA and Newport Medical. In 2013, Covidien bought Newport Medical. Medtronic bought Covidien in 2015.

There are some portions of the Medtronic response that might be questioned or difficult to verify (e.g., "Covidien management attempted through 2013 to address and fill the gaps in Newport’s capabilities, however, they were unable to do so."). However, there are other parts that appear solidly factual enough to be incorporated, specifically: 

• Covidien/Newport was unable to deliver a product that met the target cost of manufacture required by the contract.
• Covidien/Newport was unable to secure FDA approval for pediatric usage which was also a contract requirement.
• In November 2013, BARDA and Covidien/Newport mutually agreed to terminate the project.
• On termination, BARDA retained ownership of all equipment, tooling and intellectual property rights in the project.

Jeisenberg (talk) 16:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://newsroom.medtronic.com/news-releases/news-release-details/medtronic-statement-regarding-new-york-times-article-march-29
  2. ^ https://www.massdevice.com/medtronic-responds-to-ny-times-story-about-failed-ventilator-contract/

Iron Lung

Despite its medieval connotations, if given a choice, I think I would rather be in an Iron Lung than receive positive pressure ventilation. I'm trying to understand, from a patient's perspective, why a modern ventilator is preferable? There seems to be advantages to health care personnel, but not necessarily the patient. 108.200.234.93 (talk) 01:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT -- Those two links below, I didn't put there. That's some formatting issue with WP.

OneBreath

by Stanford University. lower-cost ventilator for emergency stockpiles and the developing world, looks similar to a modern ICU ventilator. Project started around 2010 and is expected to ship its first product in 2020. [3] [4] [5] Setenzatsu.2 (talk) 18:47, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"one for more"

modification of one ventilator to ventilate two or four patients simultaneously How to Use One Ventilator to Save Multiple Lives study it was based on from 2006/2007 by Neyman & Irvin [6]

A response from an Italian doctor to the method: “This is unfortunately not as good of an idea as it seems. In trauma and shootings, it’s one thing because lung compliance is unlikely to change quickly. However, in ARDS (and COVID19), we expect to have dramatic changes in lung compliance. When one patients lung compliance changes, there is a significant risk of underventilating the patient with lowest compliance and overventilating patients with highest compliance – both potentially deadly. I worry that instead of saving one person, you create a situation where you increase the odds of losing both (or all 4) patients“. This (maybe) can be fixed with flow restrictors.

for ventilation of patients with different pressures using a flow restrictor: 3D printed circuit splitter and flow restriction devices for multiple patient lung ventilation using one anaesthesia workstation or ventilator, 2020

Use of a Single Ventilator to Support 4 Patients: Laboratory Evaluation of a Limited Concept; review of study by Neyman & Irvin

cross-contamination? Each patient with their own circuit or patients sharing one circuit? Pressure control ventilation, not volume control ventilation. 185.18.60.122 (talk) 18:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

VESper™ is a unique ventilator expansion device that allows a single ventilator to support up to four patients under emergency use authorization by the FDA during times of acute equipment shortages [VESper™ is a unique ventilator expansion device that allows a single ventilator to support up to four patients under emergency use authorization by the FDA during times of acute equipment shortages]185.18.60.122 (talk) 19:19, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

$500 ventilator

Developed in 2007 by John Strupat for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The agency was looking for a life support device that could run on batteries and be deployed cheaply and effectively in a potential mass casualty situation. The proposal never worked out and it was never produced. for one unit, his design would cost about $500 a unit. He says it's a freebie if anyone is interested in mass producing it. [7] 185.18.60.122 (talk) 19:08, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The photo of the East-Radcliffe

The photo is captioned as the East Radcliffe Ventillator, but is is in fact an anaesthetic machine in UK medical terminology. The ventillator is the cube in the middle of the machine. Is that not the case in US English as well? Pedalcat (talk) 15:15, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian invention of a proto ventilator

Greetings and hoping all is well. The claim about the origin of ventilator is not absurd. It is not my own self-published work. It was sourced and not just any source but a reliable one. The ventilator then was not advanced as today's. Do not have it in mind that the Ancient Egyptian ventilator is exactly the same as the modern. Maybe if it had been the likes of Greece, Rome or middle ages, the post will still be around, not deleted as well. Lol, I haven't poked my finger at anyone; just a joke. Sorry for the troubles tho. Kwesi Yema (talk) 14:22, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright fine, I admit this will go nowhere. I raise the white flag. Kwesi Yema (talk) 14:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the medical device, the source you were adding was about ventilation shafts in buildings. The article on those is located at Windcatcher - MrOllie (talk) 14:42, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No prob bro. So sorry for this. It seems the organization somehow got to brainwash me into this silly blunder. Kwesi Yema (talk) 15:11, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Ventilator"