A pro/con review comparing the use of mono- and multiplace hyperbaric chambers for critical care.

A pro/con review comparing the use of mono- and multiplace hyperbaric chambers for critical care. Diving Hyperb Med. 2015 Mar;45(1):56-60 Authors: Lind F Abstract Hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) of critically ill patients requires special technology and appropriately trained medical team staffing for '24/7' emergency services. Regardless of the chamber system used it is essential that the attending nurse and critical care specialist understand the physics and physiology of hyperbaric oxygen for safe treatment and compression/decompression procedures. Mechanical ventilation through endotracheal tube or tracheotomy is hampered by the increased gas density and flow resistance with risks of hypoventilation, carbon dioxide retention and oxygen seizures. Ventilation should be controlled and arterial and end-tidal carbon dioxide levels monitored. Haemodynamically unstable patients require careful risk-benefit evaluation, invasive monitoring and close supervision of inotropes, vasopressors and sedative drug infusions to avoid blood pressure swings and risk of awareness. Two distinctly different chambers are used for critical care. Small cost-efficient and easy-to-install acrylic monoplace chambers require less staffing and no inside attendant. Major disadvantages include patient isolation with difficulties to maintain standard organ support and invasive monitoring. Monoplace ventilators are less advanced and require the use of muscle rela...
Source: Diving and Hyperbaric Medicine - Category: Sports Medicine Tags: Diving Hyperb Med Source Type: research