Skip to main content

. 1986 Oct;41(10):808–809. doi: 10.1136/thx.41.10.808

Comparison of two oxygen conserving nasal prong systems and the effects of nose and mouth breathing.

G A Gould, I S Forsyth, D C Flenley

PMCID: PMC460494 PMID: 3787514

808

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

Gould G. A., Hayhurst M. D., Scott W., Flenley D. C. Clinical assessment of oxygen conserving devices in chronic bronchitis and emphysema. Thorax. 1985 Nov;40(11):820–824. doi: 10.1136/thx.40.11.820. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Rodenstein D. O., Stănescu D. C. Soft palate and oronasal breathing in humans. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol. 1984 Sep;57(3):651–657. doi: 10.1152/jappl.1984.57.3.651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Tiep B. L., Belman M. J., Mittman C., Phillips R., Otsap B. A new pendant storage oxygen-conserving nasal cannula. Chest. 1985 Mar;87(3):381–383. doi: 10.1378/chest.87.3.381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Tiep B. L., Nicotra B., Carter R., Belman M. J., Mittman C. Evaluation of a low-flow oxygen-conserving nasal cannula. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1984 Sep;130(3):500–502. doi: 10.1164/arrd.1984.130.3.500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

ACTIONS

RESOURCES