You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letter
Response to Hinder et al regarding t-piece resuscitators in the low-compliant newborn lung
  1. Katie A Hunt1,
  2. Vadivelam Murthy1,
  3. Anthony D Milner1,
  4. Anne Greenough1,2
  1. 1 Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Sciences, Faculty of Life Science and Medicine, King's College London, London, UK
  2. 2 NIHR Biomedical Centre at Guy's and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, King's College London, King's College London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Katie A Hunt, Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Sciences, Faculty of Life Science and Medicine, King's College London, London WC2R 2LS, UK; katie.a.hunt{at}kcl.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2020-320205

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We read with interest the article by Hinder et al 1 investigating the phenomenon of spikes in peak inspiratory pressure and in delivered tidal volume at the onset of inflations when using in built t-piece resuscitator devices as compared with the standalone Neopuff device.

    We have some concerns regarding their findings. The lung models used appear to have a major limitation …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors AG and ADM designed the original study. VM collected the data. All authors contributed to data analysis and approval of the manuscript.

    • Funding The research was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre based at Guy's and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London.

    • Disclaimer The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles