Gracey, Douglas R.

Ten patients with known but clinically stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were studied while breathing low-flow (1-2 L/min) supplemental oxygen by nasal cannula and by biflow nasal mask. Although the increase in inspired oxygen when breathing with the cannula has been documented, the nasal mask has not been tested by measurement of PaO2 change. The mean age of the group was 64.6 years, and their mean PaO2 was 54 ± 10.5 torr while they were at rest and breathing room air. Patients were each given oxygen alternately with the mask and cannula, with no change in flowrate; time was allowed between the two for equilibration and return to baseline values. PaO2 values were compared by t test for nonindependent samples, which provided a t value of 1.893, with P = 0.09. Differences in measured arterial saturation (SaO2) and PaCO2 also proved to be insignificant when patients breathed via the two devices. We conclude that the nasal cannula and the biflow nasal mask produce comparable PaO2 in patients who may need low-flow supplemental oxygen at rest. The mask can be considered an alternative oxygen appliance if preferred by patients because of comfort. (Respir Care 1985;30:250-255.)

Three patients with different neurologic diseases—amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, poliomyelitis, and idiopathic bilateral diaphragm paralysis—and with chronic ventilatory failure were successfully ventilated with negative pressure. This noninvasive ventilatory technique uses a chest cuirass and provides an alternative to tracheostomy and positive-pressure ventilation. As a result of the benefits that these three patients received, we conclude that the cuirass remains an acceptable method of ventilation for some patients with chronic neurologic disease.

Abstract We analyzed the results of interrupter mechanics tests of 73 consecutive patients who were admitted to a chronic ventilator dependency unit. The purposes of this study were (1) to establish guidelines for grading the severity of airway obstruction based on interrupter mechanics measurements; (2) to estimate the prevalence of airway obstruction in this population; (3) to compare interrupter test results with the clinical assessment of airway function; and (4) to characterize the distribution of bronchodilator-induced changes in isorecoil flow. Measurements from 65 of 73 patients (89%) were considered technically adequate. Of 65 patients, 29 (45%) showed signs of flow limitation during passive expiration. All patients with severe obstruction documented with spirometry during clinical stability were flow-limited and achieved maximal flows ⩽ 0.45 L/s at recoil pressures of 10 cm H2O. In contrast to measures of expiratory dynamics, the inspiratory resistance of the respiratory system was a poor index of severity of obstruction. In seven of 12 patients, interrupter testing failed to substantiate a clinical diagnosis of severe obstruction while revealing unsuspected obstruction in six of 25 (24%) patients. The administration of 270 µg of albuterol increased flows at comparable recoil pressures by ⩾ 0.1 L/s in 29% of 41 patients. Changes in flow were unimodally distributed and were not correlated with severity of obstruction. In summary, the routine use of the interrupter technique in ventilator-dependent patients is helpful in determining the severity and prevalence of airway obstruction, in identifying patients with otherwise unsuspected expiratory airflow limitation or those in whom this diagnosis is clinically suspected but cannot be substantiated, and in assessing the individual responses to bronchodilators.