Read with interest the two articles on variable flow CPAP in
September 2001 and February 2001. I am concerned about the missing
patients, the correction for weight in change in volume, the correction
for tidal volume for WOB, and the elaborate statistics for what appears to
be paired tests each in the same patient.
Each article refers to 35 patients recruited, but one reported on 32,
the other on 24. No data are provided on the missing patients, nor on the
reasons that they were deleted from anaylsis. This raises questions about
the generalizability of the results.
While the correction of volume changes for body weight permit
comparison to individual patients, would like reassurance that failure to
correct doesn't change the statistics.
Since variable flow CPAP is associated with larger tidal volumes,
correction of WOB by dividing by Vt will result in a apparently lower WOB
for these babies, even if the total WOB is actually the same. What has
improved is the efficiency of breathing if the larger Vt are useful, but
the caloric consumption will be the same. It appears from the figures that
6-8 cm constant flow CPAP might be clinically comparble to 4-6 cm of
variable flow CPAP.Can you compare the WOB for the two styles of CPAP at
similar clinical settings to show that variable flow CPAP has less WOB for
similar ventilation.
Thank you.