TY - JOUR
T1 - Physiological response to “pressure-demand” respirator wear
AU - Raven, Peter B.
AU - Bradley, Ovule
AU - Rohm-Young, Debbie
AU - Leland McClure, F.
AU - Skaggs, Barbara
PY - 1982/10/1
Y1 - 1982/10/1
N2 - Thirty-seven male and female volunteers, twenty-two normal and fifteen moderately impaired with respect to lung function were submaximally exercised with and without a “pressure-demand” type air-line respirator. The respirator was equipped with an inspiratory reststance of 85 mmH20 at 85 L/ min air flow and expiratory resistance of 25 mmH20 at 85 L/ min air flow over and above the inhalation and exhalation “pressure-demand” resistance of 25 mmH20. Comparisons between normals and moderately impaired at submaximal workloads of 35%, 50%, and 80% of maximal capacity (VO2max) exhibited no difference in response, even though the impaired subjects were utilizing a greater percentage of their pulmonary reserves at 80% VO2max. However, the pressure swings across the facepiece were 22-25 cmH20 at 80% VO2 max as a result of inordinately high impaired pressures and may have been the primary cause that 50% of both groups of subjects were unable to complete the 80% VO2max workload. Also, it was noted that the greater the ventilatory demand imposed by the high workloads the more like a “demand” type respirator the “pressure-demand” system became, regardless of an individual's lung function. Hence, it was concluded that the ventilatory stresses of high workloads emphasized the inadequacy of current pressure-demand designs and placed significant psychophysiological stress on the wearer. Further to the current work a need for determining the relationship between MVV.25 and VO2maxwith and without respirator wear was identified.
AB - Thirty-seven male and female volunteers, twenty-two normal and fifteen moderately impaired with respect to lung function were submaximally exercised with and without a “pressure-demand” type air-line respirator. The respirator was equipped with an inspiratory reststance of 85 mmH20 at 85 L/ min air flow and expiratory resistance of 25 mmH20 at 85 L/ min air flow over and above the inhalation and exhalation “pressure-demand” resistance of 25 mmH20. Comparisons between normals and moderately impaired at submaximal workloads of 35%, 50%, and 80% of maximal capacity (VO2max) exhibited no difference in response, even though the impaired subjects were utilizing a greater percentage of their pulmonary reserves at 80% VO2max. However, the pressure swings across the facepiece were 22-25 cmH20 at 80% VO2 max as a result of inordinately high impaired pressures and may have been the primary cause that 50% of both groups of subjects were unable to complete the 80% VO2max workload. Also, it was noted that the greater the ventilatory demand imposed by the high workloads the more like a “demand” type respirator the “pressure-demand” system became, regardless of an individual's lung function. Hence, it was concluded that the ventilatory stresses of high workloads emphasized the inadequacy of current pressure-demand designs and placed significant psychophysiological stress on the wearer. Further to the current work a need for determining the relationship between MVV.25 and VO2maxwith and without respirator wear was identified.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0019948079&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0019948079&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/15298668291410567
DO - 10.1080/15298668291410567
M3 - Article
C2 - 7148683
AN - SCOPUS:0019948079
SN - 0002-8894
VL - 43
SP - 773
EP - 781
JO - American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal
JF - American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal
IS - 10
ER -