Neonatal CPAP Breathing Apparatus Design Andrea Holland Mindy Leelawong Sponsor: Bill Walsh, MD Monday, March 22, 2004
Project Overview Continuous Positive Air Pressure (CPAP) breathing apparatus Assists respiration by forcing air at a pressure ranging from 4-8 cmH2O Primarily used for infant respiratory distress
CPAP Administration Polin and Shani (2002)
Problems Nosepiece pressure causes injuries to the delicate skin of the nasal area Ulceration and contusion Tissue necrosis Nasal flaring Nasal snubbing
Problems Mask Prongs Snubbing Septal erosion Nasal bridge contusion and blistering Prongs Nasal flaring Septal erosion and blistering http://www.eme-med.co.uk/products/product-29-45420.pdf
Objectives Analyze the applied force of the device on the nasal area Determine the cause of specific injury Suggest revisions to current device http://www.eme-med.co.uk/products-neo-infant_flow.asp
Hypothesis Friction Sizing Pressure Incorrect nosepiece or bonnet size Limited nosepiece size range Pressure Position of device in relation to infant’s nose Weight of device Tightness of seal http://www.eme-med.co.uk/products-neo-infant_flow.asp
Testing Before After Modeling Clay Molding Gel Initial pressure points Deformation over time
Current Work Analyzing deformation in clay model to determine the cause Determining better prong design Biomaterial research Meetings with our adviser and professors
Work Completed Researched similar designs Researched problem and possible causes Developed soft gel model representing infant skin Literature search Young’s modulus of skin (inconsistent, ~3.5) Possible causes Frequency (widely disputed)
Work Completed Tested models to determine location and nature of damage Consulted with professors on skin-like materials Consulted with doctors and nurses in the NICU on specific problems and possible remedies
Project Limitations Mathematical representations Measurements Young’s modulus of model Pressure exerted by device Limited literature on infant skin
Future Work March 2004 April 2004 Additional biomaterial research Research alternative solution New prong design Different prong material April 2004 Device weight reduction Formalized list of recommendations optimal use future design considerations
Acknowledgements Dr. Bill Walsh, MD Dr. Paul King Shirley Carpenter http://www.vanderbiltchildrens.com/interior.php?mid=208 http://frontweb.vuse.vanderbilt.edu/vuse_web/directory/facultybio.asp?FacultyID=49
Questions?
References Polin, R.A, R. Sahni. Newer experience with CPAP. Semin Neonatol. 2002 Oct;7(5):379-89.