The Science Journal of the American Association for Respiratory Care
Background: During anesthesia, MV is typically provided using a 3-L BB. Effective ventilation depends on fresh gas flow, clinician skill, pt impedance, and BB characteristics. We evaluated 3 types of BB during MV by 11 CRNA students. Method: An anesthesia ventilator and 40
Results: Results are mean ± SD. ANOVA for repeated measures was used to compare variables using each BB.
|BAG||Gender||2- L Std||3-L Std||2-L HS|
|VT (L)||All||1.01 (0.11)||0.99 (0.11)||0.89 (0.08)*|
|Men||1.06 (0.12)||1.03 (0.17)||0.94 (0.07)*|
|Women||0.96 (0.11)||0.98 (0.10)||0.87 (0.09)*|
|PIP||All||22.7 (3.0)||21.2 (2.5)||20.9 (2.3)|
|(cmH2O)||Men||24.5 (3.7)||22.4 (4.2)||22.4 (1.4)|
|Women||21.9 (3.4)||20.6 (1.5)||20.2 (2.4)|
|* p < 0.05 vs 2-L and 3-L standard bags|
8 of 11 VOLs preferred the 2-L HS BB. 3 VOLs preferred the std 2-L BB. Ease of use and perceived control over ventilation was better with the 2-L BBs. Conclusion: VT provided with 2-L HS BB was smaller and closer to the 0.8 L target compared to other BBs. Differences in VT were statistically, but not clinically significant. The 2-L HS BB was preferred for ease of use compared to std 2-L and 3-L BBs.