Open Access Biomedical Publisher Using Post Publication Peer Review
I would like to congratulate Drs. Agard and Brzezinski for this excellent review of many key elements in the development of positive pressure ventilation and PEEP.
The presentation is interesting and insightful.
I have a few suggestions to improve the presentation of the manuscript
There are some typos which should be edited.
In my opinion, there are a numerous references missing. I would suggest that all statements beginning with the Bible and references to original articles (e.g.:T. Petty’s original article about PEEP published in the Lancet, or Draeger). I believe adding all these references will made a much stronger review as readers are able to search for them more easily.
I believe any historical review should also have images of either the personalities described in this review as well as images of the devices described. In my opinion this would add a lot of information for the reader.
I suggest spelling out any abbreviations mentioned for the first time even O2 and CO2. In addition, PEEP is mentioned as an abbreviation before the paragraph about PEEP.
The dose of 100mg Pentothal in the paragraph about Positive pressure ventilation. I found that noteworthy that Lassen and Ibsen used the same dose for all patients regardless of age and weight. Did the referenced article nto mentioned the dose in mg/kg?
Research Neonatologist, Educator,
Overview: Drs. Agard and Brzezinski present a concise review of many key elements in the development of positive pressure ventilation and PEEP. The authors should be congratulated for presenting this topic in a way that is efficient, interesting, and insightful. I highly recommend review of this topic for those at all levels, from medical student through staff, as it helps provide a context for the ways in which we manage patients today. I have a few specific suggestions for revision to make the manuscript even stronger:
In Part I
Second paragraph could use a bit more description, perhaps a reason why it took another 100 + years for the next advance?
Paragraph 3, would write out oxygen and carbon dioxide
Please site a reference for the final statement in the 5th paragraph regarding cricoid pressure. This is, by the way, quite an interesting fact.
Please site references for the 6th and 7th paragraphs.
Would suggest combining paragraph 6 (“multiple components”) with the preceding paragraph. Would add a final sentence to the 7th paragraph explaining why this is important for modern ventilators.
In Part II
Need some references in the second paragraph
There is a typo in the large paragraph starting ‘on his way through the wards . . .”
In the 4th sentence, “Phil had the machine move into the ward near the child’s bee so she could se “ I presume means see instead of se”
Am unsure whether there is supposed to be a picture under “Catherine Drinker, Family Portrait.” But none appears, please address.
Need more references in this section, specifically where the quote came from and the studies on negative pressure ventilation
In Part IV, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence, would change tense of describes to described to match others.
Would add a summary paragraph about why these innovations were critical in the advancement of modern ventilator management and what future directors are in this area.
Overall, I find this a very useful resource for teaching on the history and evolution of modern anesthetic and critical care practices. I will certainly be integrating this resource into my own teaching. I would like to suggest that the authors use this as the first in a series of articles of historical interest in our specialty, as it would prove greatly illuminating for students.
Anesthesiologist and educator
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution License