Skip to main content
Fig. 3 | Journal of Intensive Care

Fig. 3

From: Performance comparison of a new automated cuff pressure controller with currently available devices in both basic research and clinical settings

Fig. 3

Performance comparison of the new automated cuff pressure controller with currently available devices. a Mean cuff pressure variation ± SD in response to the impact from weight dropping is shown for the newly developed automated cuff pressure controller (Cuff-Keeper, Tokuki Giken Kogyo, Oita, Japan; device A), automated cuff pressure controller (COVIDIEN, Ireland; device B), and intermittent monitoring method (COVIDIEN, Ireland; device C). White bars indicate that 5 g weights were dropped from a height of 10 cm onto the top of the cuff. Black bars indicate that 20 g weights were dropped from a height of 10 cm onto the top of the cuff. *p < 0.0001 vs. device A 5 g. # p < 0.0001 vs. device A 20 g. $ p < 0.001 vs. device B 20 g. b Mean time ± SD for cuff pressure to return to the set pressure after weight dropping is shown for the newly developed automated cuff pressure controller (Cuff-Keeper, Tokuki Giken Kogyo, Oita, Japan; device A), automated cuff pressure controller (COVIDIEN, Ireland; device B), and intermittent monitoring method (COVIDIEN, Ireland; device C). White bars indicate that 5 g weights were dropped from a height of 10 cm onto the top of the cuff. Black bars indicate that 20 g weights were dropped from a height of 10 cm onto the top of the cuff. *p < 0.0001 vs. device A 5 g. # p < 0.0001 vs. device A 20 g

Back to article page