Clarke Richard
National Baromedical Services, Columbia, South Carolina, USA.
Corresponding author: Richard Clarke, National Baromedical Services, Nine Richland Medical Park, Suite 440, Columbia, SC 29203, USA,
Diving Hyperb Med. 2020 Sep 30;50(3):264-272. doi: 10.28920/dhm50.3.264-272.
This paper summarises the history and capabilities of monoplace chambers in treatment of decompression illness (DCI); both in support of diving operations and in the hospital setting. In the field, monoplace hyperbaric chambers provide victims of DCI immediate access to recompression in settings where traditional multiplace chambers are not available. Alternatively, they may facilitate pressurised transport to a multiplace chamber for continued management. Recently, collapsible lightweight versions have improved suitability for field deployment aboard small vessels in remote settings, and for use by less technically capable military, occupational and civilian operators. The resulting elimination of treatment delays may prove lifesaving and central nervous system sparing, and avoid subsequent diving fitness disqualification. Monoplace chambers thus facilitate diving operations that would otherwise be difficult to condone on health and safety grounds. The 1960s saw the introduction of multiplace hyperbaric chambers into the hospital setting, as a number of non-diving conditions appeared to benefit from hyperbaric oxygen. This coincided with interest in hyperbaric oxygen as a solid tumour radiation sensitiser. Development of a novel acrylic-hulled single occupancy chamber enabled patients to undergo radiotherapy while pressurised within its oxygen atmosphere. Increasing numbers of health care facilities adopted this chamber type as a more economical, less complex alternative to the multiplace chamber. Incorporation of relevant biomedical technologies have allowed monoplace chambers to support increasingly complex patients in a safe, effective manner. Despite these advances, criticism of medical centre-based monoplace chamber treatment of DCI exists. This paper evaluates this controversy and presents relevant counter-arguments.
本文总结了单人高压氧舱在治疗减压病(DCI)方面的历史和功能;包括在支持潜水作业以及医院环境中的应用。在野外,单人高压氧舱能让减压病患者在没有传统多人高压氧舱的情况下立即接受再加压治疗。或者,它们可以便于将患者加压转运至多人高压氧舱进行后续治疗。最近,可折叠的轻型单人高压氧舱更适合在偏远地区的小型船只上进行野外部署,也便于技术能力稍弱的军事、职业和民用操作人员使用。由此消除治疗延迟可能会挽救生命、保护中枢神经系统,并避免随后潜水健康资格被取消。单人高压氧舱因此便于开展一些从健康和安全角度原本难以批准的潜水作业。20世纪60年代,随着一些非潜水疾病似乎从高压氧治疗中获益,多人高压氧舱被引入医院环境。这与高压氧作为实体瘤放射增敏剂受到关注的情况相吻合。一种新型丙烯酸外壳的单人舱的研发,使患者能够在其氧气环境中加压的同时接受放射治疗。越来越多的医疗机构采用这种舱型,作为比多人舱更经济、更简单的选择。相关生物医学技术的融入,使单人高压氧舱能够以安全、有效的方式支持越来越复杂的患者。尽管有这些进展,但对于基于医疗中心的单人高压氧舱治疗减压病仍存在批评意见。本文对这一争议进行评估并提出相关反驳观点。