Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 14;2017(9):CD004711. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004711.pub3

Ricard 1999.

Methods Randomized parallel/cross‐over* study comparing 4 types of HME to HH.
* Participants randomized to 2/5 interventions.
Participants Inclusion criteria: people requiring mechanical ventilation.
Mean age: 54 years.
Exclusion criteria: not stated.
Respiratory diagnosis: 58%.
Mean SAPS score: 14.
Setting: ICU, France.
Interventions HME (hydrophobic): Ultipor Filter BB2215 (Pall).
n = 20.
HME (hydrophobic): Biomedical BB50 (Pall).
n = 20.
HME (hydrophobic/hygroscopic): Ultipor Filter BB100 (Pall).
n = 20.
HME (hydrophobic/hygroscopic): Hygrobac (DAR).
n = 10.
HH: Fischer‐Paykel.
n = 15.
Time in study: 3 hr.
Outcomes
  • Minute ventilation.

  • Tidal volume.

Notes Funding: authors declared they did not have any funding support and had no conflict of interest.
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Not stated.
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Not stated.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Not stated.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk 100% follow‐up.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk No protocol available but 2 respiratory variables reported for this short‐term study.
Other bias Low risk None identified.