HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Prigent, H. Articles by Lofaso, F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Prigent, H. Articles by Lofaso, F.

Characteristics of tracheostomy phonation valves

¹ Services de Réanimation Médicale, Physiologie-Explorations Fonctionnelles et Centre d'Innovation Technologique, Hôpital Raymond Poincaré, AP-HP, Garches, ² Head and Neck Surgery Dept, Foch Teaching Hospital, Suresnes, ³ Association d'Entraide des Polios et Handicapés (ADEP), Puteaux, and ⁴ Inserm U 651, Créteil, France.

CORRESPONDENCE: F. Lofaso, Service de Physiologie-Explorations Fonctionnelles, Hôpital Raymond Poincaré, 92380 Garches, France. Fax: 33 147107943. E-mail: f.lofaso{at}rpc.ap-hop-paris.fr

Keywords: Phonation valve, resistance, respiratory load, speaking valve, tracheostomy

Received: January 26, 2005
Accepted December 11, 2005

Phonation valves are commonly used devices that allow the restoration of speech in tracheostomised patients. However, their use should not compromise the physiological benefit of tracheostomy.

Six commercialised phonation valves were studied in a dynamic set-up simulating a respiratory frequency of 20 breaths·min^–1, a tidal volume of 0.5 L and a peak flow rate of 0.5 L·s^–1. Resistance and additional work of breathing (WOB) were calculated. In 10 tracheostomised patients, evaluations using no phonation valve (baseline), and the most and one of the least resistive valves were carried out. Respiratory patterns and gas exchanges were recorded. Inspiratory difficulty was evaluated using the modified Borg scale.

Valves displayed a wide array of resistance ranging 1.3–5.9 cmH₂O·L^–1·s^–1. Additional WOB varied with a ratio of 4.4 between the best and the worst valve. While the different clinical conditions did not modify respiratory patterns and gas exchanges, a significant effect on the Borg scale rating was observed using ANOVA and post hoc analysis of baseline versus worst valve and one of the best valves versus worst valve.

In conclusion, the variety of aerodynamic characteristics of phonation valves should be considered when choosing the device, according to the underlying condition of the patients benefiting from their use.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F. Lofaso, D. Orlikowski, and J-C. Raphael From the authors Eur. Respir. J., July 1, 2007; 30(1): 180 - 181. [Full Text] [PDF]