Currently article opening sentence reads; ....which applies mild air pressure on a continuous basis to keep the airways continuously open in people who are able to breathe spontaneously on their own. Shouldn't it read UNable? Not sure...thought I would check before changing ―Buster7☎16:30, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Somehow BiPAP is being redirected to CPAP, and then never mentioned in the article. BiPAP (bilevel positive airway pressure) and CPAP (continuous positive airway pressure) are distinct, though related, technologies. At least the redirect should be broken, if there is no page or even a mention of BiPAP here. Unitsquarehead (talk) 23:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Unitsquarehead[reply]
UK, China and Italy used them to help Covid-19 patients. CPAP devices are less invasive than a ventilator, for which patients have to be heavily sedated and have a tube inserted into their airway. Early reports from Lombardy in Italy suggest about 50% of patients given CPAP have avoided the need for invasive mechanical ventilation.
UCLH critical care consultant Prof Mervyn Singer: "These devices are a halfway house between a simple oxygen mask and invasive mechanical ventilation which requires patients to be sedated. They will help to save lives by ensuring that ventilators, a limited resource, are used only for the most severely ill." Duncan Young, Prof of Intensive Care Medicine, University of Oxford: "The use of CPAP machines in patients with contagious respiratory infections is somewhat controversial as any small leaks round the mask could spray droplets of secretions on to attending clinical staff." Mervyn Singer's respone: "if a tight seal is maintained on the mask or, even better, a helmet is worn, and clinical staff have adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) then this risk would be minimised." [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Setenzatsu.2 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
