Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 16, 2025

Basic Methods for the Study of Reproductive Ecology of Fish in Aquaria
Published on: July 20, 2017
Decompression procedures for transfer under pressure ('TUP') diving
Jan Risberg1,2, Pieter-Jan van Ooij3, Olav Sande Eftedal4
1NUI, Bergen, Norway.
Background:
There is an increasing interest in 'transfer under pressure' (TUP) decompression in commercial diving, bridging traditional surface-oriented diving and saturation diving. In TUP diving the diver is surfaced in a closed bell and transferred isobarically to a pressure chamber for final decompression to surface pressure.
Methods:
Tables for air diving and air and oxygen decompression have been compared for total decompression time (TDT), oxygen breathing time as well as high and low gradient factors (GF high and low). These have been considered surrogate outcome measures of estimated decompression sickness probability (PDCS).
Results:
Six decompression tables from DadCoDat (DCD, The Netherlands), Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine (DCIEM, Canada), Comex MT92 tables (France) and the United States Navy (USN) have been compared. In general, USN and DCD procedures advised longer TDT and oxygen breathing time and had a lower GF high compared to MT92 and DCIEM tables. GF low was significantly higher in USN procedures compared to DCD and one of the MT92 tables due to a shallower first stop in many USN profiles compared to the two others. Allowance and restrictions for repetitive diving varied extensively between the six procedures. While USN procedures have been risk-assessed by probabilistic models, no detailed documentation is available for any of the tables regarding validation in experimental and operational diving.
Conclusions:
Absence of experimental testing of the candidate tables precludes firm conclusions regarding differences in PDCS. All candidate tables are recognised internationally as well as within their national jurisdictions, and final decisions on procedure preference may depend on factors other than estimated PDCS. USN and DCD procedures would be expected to have lower PDCS than MT92 and DCIEM procedures, but the magnitude of these differences is not known.
More Related Videos
03:24Author Spotlight: Development and Application of a Novel Suture Technique for Annular Fibrosus Repair in Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy
Published on: January 26, 2024
09:22Quantitatively Measuring In situ Flows using a Self-Contained Underwater Velocimetry Apparatus SCUVA
Published on: October 31, 2011
Related Concept Videos
Tracheostomy Decannulation
Description of the Procedure
Decannulation refers to the permanent removal of the tracheostomy tube, signaling the resolution of the condition that initially necessitated the tracheostomy. The process requires a well-coordinated interplay between...
Endoscopic Studies II: Thoracocentesis
Description
Excess pleural fluid or air may accumulate in some respiratory disorders in the thoracic cavity. To treat pleural effusion, a physician conducts thoracentesis by carefully piercing the chest wall and entering...
Pressure Relationships in Thoracic Cavity
Breathing Mechanisms
Both intra-alveolar and intrapleural pressures rely on specific lung properties. The ability to breathe—allowing air to enter the lungs...
Buoyancy and Stability for Submerged and Floating Bodies
Pneumothorax-II
Clinical Manifestations:
Assessing Blood pressure using a doppler ultrasound
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Doppler Ultrasound Blood Pressure Assessment:
Preparation of Equipment: