Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 11 December 2003
- Published on: 22 April 2003
- Published on: 5 March 2003
- Published on: 11 December 2003Oxygen administration in infants: another optionShow More
Dear Editor
Frey and Shann have described different methods of administering oxygen with their pros and cons[1] : There is one more option available, although less-known and less tried, i.e., oropharyngeal administration of oxygen.[2] Head box oxygen is wasteful, hence uneconomical. Face mask is difficult to keep in place in children. Nasal prongs are expensive and are not available universally. Nasopharyngeal cathe...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 22 April 2003Wafting Does WorkShow More
Dear Editor
We were interested to see the article “Oxygen Administration in Infants” [1], and subsequent e-letter responses. Both the original article and e-letters were unsure of the efficacy of “non-contact” oxygen delivery, or “wafting” as it is more commonly known. We would like to refer to our study “The Efficacy of Non-Contact Oxygen Delivery Systems”[2] which demonstrated how effective wafting oxygen can be....
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 5 March 2003Oxygenation by Headbox and Catheter close to faceShow More
Dear Editor
Oxygenation by head box is a very useful method as highlighted by the authors of the article.[1] However, there are some issues which need deliberation on head box. The disturbance of oxygen enriched environment may occur during routine care procedures like feeding & suctioning. A newer head box developed by Jain MM et al, provides facility of feeding & other nursing care with out affectin...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.