The comparison of three high-frequency chest compression devices

High-frequency chest compression (HFCC) is shown to enhance clearance of pulmonary airway secretions. Several HFCC devices have been designed to provide this therapy. Standard equipment consists of an air pulse generator attached by lengths of tubing to an adjustable, inflatable vest/jacket (V/J) garment. In this study, the V/Js were fitted over a mannequin. The three device air pulse generators produced characteristic waveform patterns. The variations in the frequency and pressure setting of devices were consistent with specific device design features. These studies suggest that a better understanding of the effects of different waveform, frequency, and pressure combinations may improve HFCC therapeutic efficacy of three different HFCC machines. The V/J component of HFCC devices delivers the compressive pulses to the chest wall to produce both airflow through and oscillatory effects in the airways. The V/J pressures of three HFCC machines were measured and analyzed to characterize the frequency, pressure, and waveform patterns generated by each of three device models. The dimensions of all V/Js were adjusted to a circumference of approximately 110% of the chest circumference. The V/J pressures were measured, and maximum, minimum, and mean pressure, pulse pressure, and root mean square of three pulse generators were calculated. Jacket pressures ranged between 2 and 34 mmHg. The 103 and 104 models' pulse pressures increased with the increase in HFCC frequency at constant dial pressure. With the ICS the pulse pressure decreased when the frequency increased. The waveforms of models 103 and 104 were symmetric sine wave and asymmetric sine wave patterns, respectively. The ICS had a triangular waveform. At 20 Hz, both the 103 and 104 were symmetric sine waveform but the ICS remained triangular. Maximum crest factors emerged in low-frequency and high-pressure settings for the ICS and in the high-frequency and low-pressure settings for models 103 and 104. Recognizing the significant differences in frequency and pressure amplitude may help clinicians and patients optimize the efficacy of HFCC therapy. Evidence-based therapeutic guidelines are needed.