A High-Value, Low-Cost Bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure System for Low-Resource Settings: Technical Assessment and Initial Case Reports
Open accessAbstract
Acute respiratory infections are the leading cause of global child mortality. In the developing world, nasal oxygen therapy is often the only treatment option for babies who are suffering from respiratory distress. Without the added pressure of bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (bCPAP) which helps maintain alveoli open, babies struggle to breathe and can suffer serious complications, and frequently death. A stand-alone bCPAP device can cost $6,000, too expensive for most developing world hospitals. Here, we describe the design and technical evaluation of a new, rugged bCPAP system that can be made in small volume for a cost-of-goods of approximately $350. Moreover, because of its simple design--consumer-grade pumps, medical tubing, and regulators--it requires only the simple replacement of a <$1 diaphragm approximately every 2 years for maintenance. The low-cost bCPAP device delivers pressure and flow equivalent to those of a reference bCPAP system used in the developed world. We describe the initial clinical cases of a child with bronchiolitis and a neonate with respiratory distress who were treated successfully with the new bCPAP device.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In Malawi, hospitals lack centrally provided medical gases, and stand-alone bubble CPAP systems cost over 6000 USD per unit, making them prohibitively expensive.
“However, even in the tertiary facilities in Malawi, hospitals do not have access to centrally provided medical gases, and stand-alone bubble CPAP systems that cost over 6000 USD per unit are prohibitively expensive [11].”
From Barriers and enablers of implementing bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP): Perspectives of health professionals in Malawi (2020) · cites this paper as [11]
Pumani is a bubble CPAP system designed for low-resource settings, durable, easy to use and repair, and costs 800 USD per unit, making it more affordable than conventional commercial systems.
“In 2011, researchers from Rice University developed Pumani, a bubble CPAP system designed for low-resource settings with similar delivery of air pressure and flow to bubble CPAP systems used in high-resource settings.”
From Barriers and enablers of implementing bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP): Perspectives of health professionals in Malawi (2020) · cites this paper as [11]
Bubble CPAP is a simple and relatively inexpensive form of CPAP that may be safe and cost-effective for delivering CPAP and reducing neonatal mortality in LMICs.
“Bubble CPAP is a simple and relatively inexpensive form of CPAP [8,11].”
From Barriers and enablers of implementing bubble Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP): Perspectives of health professionals in Malawi (2020) · cites this paper as [11]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 15 · Cited by 72
- Authors
- Brown, J., Machen, H., Kawaza, K., Mwanza, Z., Iniguez, S., Lang, H., Gest, A., Kennedy, N., Miros, R., Richards-Kortum, R., Molyneux, E., & Oden, M.
- Affiliations
- Rice University (US)
- Baylor College of Medicine (US)
- Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital (MW)
- Texas Children's Hospital (US)
- Kamuzu Central Hospital (MW)
- Corresponding author
- Richards-Kortum, Rebecca
- ORCID
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2013-01-23
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e53622
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3553107
- OpenAlex
- W2017124157
- Cited by
- 72
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 4.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
- Rice Research Repository (Rice University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Greater South Information System
- Funders
- United States Agency for International Development
- Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
- World Bank Group
- Rice University
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Neonatal Respiratory Health Research
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Neuroscience of respiration and sleep
- Keywords
- bubble continuous positive airway pressure, low-cost medical device, resource-limited settings, neonatal respiratory distress, bronchiolitis, nasal oxygen therapy, pediatric respiratory infection
- MeSH terms
- Acute Disease, Bronchiolitis, Developing Countries, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Oxygen Inhalation Therapy, Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn, Treatment Outcome, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review