Table 2.
Effect of paralysis, PEEP and esophageal balloon position on the ratio between changes in esophageal pressure and airway pressure (ΔPes/ΔPaw)
| ΔPes/ΔPawa | Statistical analysisb | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEEP (cmH2O) | Middle balloon position | Low balloon position | Coeff. | 95 % CI | p | ||
| Positive pressure occlusion test—P | P versus no P | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.17 | <0.001 | ||
| 0 | 1.14 ± 0.18 | 1.12 ± 0.15 | PEEP 10 versus 0 | −0.03 | −0.09 | 0.03 | 0.376 |
| 10 | 1.09 ± 0.17 | 1.15 ± 0.14 | Low versus middle position | −0.02 | −0.08 | 0.04 | 0.515 |
| Baydur Occlusion test—no P | P × low position | 0.01 | −0.07 | 0.08 | 0.848 | ||
| 0 | 1.02 ± 0.16 | 1.00 ± 0.13 | P × PEEP 10 | −0.02 | −0.09 | 0.06 | 0.638 |
| 10 | 1.00 ± 0.11 | 1.05 ± 0.13 | Low position × PEEP 10 | 0.08 | −0.01 | 0.16 | 0.084 |
| P × Low position × PEEP 10 | −0.01 | −0.12 | 0.10 | 0.849 | |||
Multiple linear random-intercept regression models including main effects and interaction terms
“P versus no P” (paralysis versus no paralysis) means a comparison between Baydur and positive pressure occlusion tests
Statistically significant p value is in italics
ΔPes change in esophageal pressure, ΔPaw change in airway pressure, PEEP positive end-expiratory pressure (cmH2O), P paralysis, no P no paralysis
Data are presented as amean ± standard deviation and as b regression coefficient with 95 % confidence interval