Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Springer Nature [academic journals on nature.com], Spinal Cord, 10(32), p. 687-693, 1994

DOI: 10.1038/sc.1994.111

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Tracheostomy ventilation versus diaphragmatic pacemaker ventilation in high spinal cord injury

Journal article published in 1994 by A. Esclarín ORCID, P. Bravo, O. Arroyo, J. Mazaira, H. Garrido, M. A. Alcaraz
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

We have made a retrospective comparative study of patients with spinal cord injury, nine with a diaphragmatic pacemaker and 13 with mechanical ventilation. Clinical outcome, cost and subjective satisfaction with both modalities have been evaluated. The functional status was the same with both types of treatment. Proper management of an electric wheelchair and optimal phonation were attained, respectively, in 100% and 89% of pacers and in 77% and 77% of mechanically ventilated. The rate of hospital discharge and satisfaction with the treatment were significantly better for pacers. The time devoted to ventilatory assistance and cost were also more favourable in this group.