Skip to main content
main-content

17.10.2019 | Original Research | Ausgabe 5/2020

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 5/2020

Warming efficacy of Ranger™ and FT2800 fluid warmer under different room temperatures and flow rates

Zeitschrift:
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing > Ausgabe 5/2020
Autoren:
Ximou Xu, Chaohui Lian, Yao Liu, Hehe Ding, Yi Lu, Wangning ShangGuan
Wichtige Hinweise

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Abstract

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.

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

★ PREMIUM-INHALT
e.Med Interdisziplinär

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag als Mediziner

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Alle e.Med Abos bis 30. April 2021 zum halben Preis!

Jetzt e.Med zum Sonderpreis bestellen!

Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2020

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 5/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Neu im Fachgebiet AINS

Mail Icon II Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update AINS und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Bildnachweise