Viehberg H, Tontschev G, Bensow C
Z Exp Chir. 1979 Aug;12(4):258-68.
Basing on own measurements of the efficiency of customary water-bath humidifiers (humidifier of the ventilator RO-5 R, humidifier of the ventilator Engström ER 200, Bennett Cascade Humidifier, Hydrotrop 200 and Nicholas Humidifier) a critical review is given. As the results show only 3 of the humidifiers (Bennett Cascade Humidifier, Hydrotrop 200 and Nicholas Humidifer) make sure a really breathing air "conditioning" (moistening and rewarming). The humidifers of the ventilators RO-5 R and Engström ER 200 have only a very low efficiency, therefore they are not suitable for long term ventilation. Finally, the safety for the patient (the dangers of watercondensation, watertransport into the lungs, overheating, hypothermia and superhumidication) and the different expenditure of the clinical use of the humidifiers should be mentioned.
基于对传统水浴加湿器(呼吸机RO - 5 R的加湿器、Engström ER 200呼吸机的加湿器、贝内特级联加湿器、Hydrotrop 200和尼古拉斯加湿器)效率的自行测量,进行了批判性综述。结果表明,只有3种加湿器(贝内特级联加湿器、Hydrotrop 200和尼古拉斯加湿器)能确保真正的呼吸空气“调节”(加湿和复温)。呼吸机RO - 5 R和Engström ER 200的加湿器效率极低,因此不适合长期通气。最后,应提及患者的安全性(水凝结、水进入肺部、过热、体温过低和过度加湿的危险)以及加湿器临床使用的不同费用。