Cargando…

Comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers

OBJECTIVES: Warming intravenous fluids is essential to prevent hypothermia in patients with trauma, especially when large volumes are administered. Prehospital and transport settings require fluid warmers to be small, energy efficient and independent of external power supply. We compared the warming...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lehavi, Amit, Yitzhak, Avraham, Jarassy, Refael, Heizler, Rami, Katz, Yeshayahu (Shai), Raz, Aeyal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6109241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29880720
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2017-207112
_version_ 1783350289221287936
author Lehavi, Amit
Yitzhak, Avraham
Jarassy, Refael
Heizler, Rami
Katz, Yeshayahu (Shai)
Raz, Aeyal
author_facet Lehavi, Amit
Yitzhak, Avraham
Jarassy, Refael
Heizler, Rami
Katz, Yeshayahu (Shai)
Raz, Aeyal
author_sort Lehavi, Amit
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Warming intravenous fluids is essential to prevent hypothermia in patients with trauma, especially when large volumes are administered. Prehospital and transport settings require fluid warmers to be small, energy efficient and independent of external power supply. We compared the warming properties and resistance to flow of currently available battery-operated fluid warmers. METHODS: Fluid warming was evaluated at 50, 100 and 200 mL/min at a constant input temperature of 20°C and 10°C using a cardiopulmonary bypass roller pump and cooler. Output temperature was continuously recorded. RESULTS: Performance of fluid warmers varied with flows and input temperatures. At an input temperature of 20°C and flow of 50 mL/min, the Buddy Lite, enFlow, Thermal Angel and Warrior warmed 3.4, 2.4, 1 and 3.6 L to over 35°C, respectively. However, at an input temperature of 10°C and flow of 200 mL/min, the Buddy Lite failed to warm, the enFlow warmed 3.3 L to 25.7°C, the Thermal Angel warmed 1.5 L to 20.9°C and the Warrior warmed 3.4 L to 34.4°C (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: We found significant differences between the fluid warmers: the use of the Buddy Lite should be limited to moderate input temperature and low flow rates. The use of the Thermal Angel is limited to low volumes due to battery capacity and low output temperature at extreme conditions. The Warrior provides the best warming performance at high infusion rates, as well as low input temperatures, and was able to warm the largest volumes in these conditions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6109241
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61092412018-08-27 Comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers Lehavi, Amit Yitzhak, Avraham Jarassy, Refael Heizler, Rami Katz, Yeshayahu (Shai) Raz, Aeyal Emerg Med J Original Article OBJECTIVES: Warming intravenous fluids is essential to prevent hypothermia in patients with trauma, especially when large volumes are administered. Prehospital and transport settings require fluid warmers to be small, energy efficient and independent of external power supply. We compared the warming properties and resistance to flow of currently available battery-operated fluid warmers. METHODS: Fluid warming was evaluated at 50, 100 and 200 mL/min at a constant input temperature of 20°C and 10°C using a cardiopulmonary bypass roller pump and cooler. Output temperature was continuously recorded. RESULTS: Performance of fluid warmers varied with flows and input temperatures. At an input temperature of 20°C and flow of 50 mL/min, the Buddy Lite, enFlow, Thermal Angel and Warrior warmed 3.4, 2.4, 1 and 3.6 L to over 35°C, respectively. However, at an input temperature of 10°C and flow of 200 mL/min, the Buddy Lite failed to warm, the enFlow warmed 3.3 L to 25.7°C, the Thermal Angel warmed 1.5 L to 20.9°C and the Warrior warmed 3.4 L to 34.4°C (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: We found significant differences between the fluid warmers: the use of the Buddy Lite should be limited to moderate input temperature and low flow rates. The use of the Thermal Angel is limited to low volumes due to battery capacity and low output temperature at extreme conditions. The Warrior provides the best warming performance at high infusion rates, as well as low input temperatures, and was able to warm the largest volumes in these conditions. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-09 2018-06-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6109241/ /pubmed/29880720 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2017-207112 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Original Article
Lehavi, Amit
Yitzhak, Avraham
Jarassy, Refael
Heizler, Rami
Katz, Yeshayahu (Shai)
Raz, Aeyal
Comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers
title Comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers
title_full Comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers
title_fullStr Comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers
title_short Comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers
title_sort comparison of the performance of battery-operated fluid warmers
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6109241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29880720
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2017-207112
work_keys_str_mv AT lehaviamit comparisonoftheperformanceofbatteryoperatedfluidwarmers
AT yitzhakavraham comparisonoftheperformanceofbatteryoperatedfluidwarmers
AT jarassyrefael comparisonoftheperformanceofbatteryoperatedfluidwarmers
AT heizlerrami comparisonoftheperformanceofbatteryoperatedfluidwarmers
AT katzyeshayahushai comparisonoftheperformanceofbatteryoperatedfluidwarmers
AT razaeyal comparisonoftheperformanceofbatteryoperatedfluidwarmers