17.10.2019 | Original Research | Ausgabe 5/2020
Warming efficacy of Ranger™ and FT2800 fluid warmer under different room temperatures and flow rates
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
- Ximou Xu, Chaohui Lian, Yao Liu, Hehe Ding, Yi Lu, Wangning ShangGuan
The comparison of the heating capabilities with different warming system between 3M™ Ranger™ warmer (3M) and FT2800 fluid warmer (FT) under different room temperatures and infusion rates, has been rarely reported previously. The study was then aimed to compare the warming efficacies of dry heat technology (3M) and coaxial warming system (FT) under different room temperatures and infusion rates, the advantages and disadvantages of both infusion systems would be compared to provide reference for clinical infusion practice. In the study, both target warming temperatures of 3M and FT warmer were set at 41 °C, fluid was administrated under 20, 22 and 24 °C room temperatures and drip rates of 60, 80, 100, 120, 140, 160, 200, 350 drops min−1. The fluid temperature at the outlet of the infusion tube (Toutlet) was measured and compared. The Toutlet of FT was higher than that of 3 M (P < 0.001) under different room temperatures. The Toutlet of FT increased with the room temperature raised (P < 0.05). As for 3M, Toutlet was lowest at 20 °C (P < 0.001) and no statistical difference of Toutlet was found between 22 and 24 °C (P = 0.667). Linear regression showed that the Toutlet of 3M increased with the speed up of drip rate, while the Toutlet of FT was decreased. The relationship between Toutlet & room temperature & drip rate for both 3M and FT warmers was calculated by a formula. 3M Ranger™ and FT2800 show different heating capabilities under different room temperatures and drip rates. 3M is more efficient at high flow rate while FT is more efficient at low flow rate. There is a formula relationship between Toutlet & room temperature & drip rate for both 3M and FT warmers.