Quality versus emergency: How good were ventilation fittings produced by additive manufacturing to address shortages during the COVID19 pandemic?

Abstract

Objective The coronavirus disease pandemic (COVID-19) increased the risk of shortage in intensive care devices, including fittings with intentional leaks. 3D-printing has been used worldwide to produce missing devices. Here we provide key elements towards better quality control of 3D-printed ventilation fittings in a context of sanitary crisis. Material and methods Five 3D-printed designs were assessed for non-intentional (junctional and parietal) and intentional leaks: 4 fittings 3D-printed in-house using FDeposition Modelling (FDM), 1 FDM 3D-printed fitting provided by an independent maker, and 2 fittings 3D-printed in-house using Polyjet technology. Five industrial models were included as controls. Two values of wall thickness and the use of coating were tested for in-house FDM-printed devices. Results Industrial and Polyjet-printed fittings had no parietal and junctional leaks, and satisfactory intentional leaks. In-house FDM-printed fittings had constant parietal leaks without coating, but this post-treatment method was efficient in controlling parietal sealing, even in devices with thinner walls (0.7 mm vs 2.3 mm). Nevertheless, the use of coating systematically induced absent or insufficient intentional leaks. Junctional leaks were constant with FDM-printed fittings but could be controlled using rubber junctions rather than usual rigid junctions. The properties of Polyjet-printed and FDM-printed fittings were stable over a period of 18 months. Conclusions 3D-printing is a valid technology to produce ventilation devices but requires care in the choice of printing methods, raw materials, and post-treatment procedures. Even in a context of sanitary crisis, devices produced outside hospitals should be used only after professional quality control, with precise data available on printing protocols. The mechanical properties of ventilation devices are crucial for efficient ventilation, avoiding rebreathing of CO2, and preventing the dispersion of viral particles that can contaminate health professionals. Specific norms are still required to formalise quality control procedures for ventilation fittings, with the rise of 3D-printing initiatives and the perspective of new pandemics.

How makers responded to the Personal Protective Equipment shortage during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis focused on the Hauts-de-France region

“…The request for a third party is linked to the fear of a shortage of accessories, which it is hoped to alleviate by developing in-house production capacities. If this solution has been chosen by the AP-HP 13 ( François et al, 2021 ; Khonsari et al, 2022 ), it is a second objective that emerges through contact with the healthcare staff: the production of individual protective equipment. This common objective, oriented toward helping the society, is consistent with the values of the makers ( Wolf et al, 2014 ).…”

“…Furthermore, we have shown through the case of the Hauts-de-France initiative that in times of health crisis, the institutions themselves borrow from the practices of the makers to respond to the emergency. Whether through the launch of initiatives such as those in Hauts-de-France, or through the purchase of entire fleets of 3D printers within the institutions themselves, as we saw at the AP-HP ( François et al, 2021 ; Khonsari et al, 2022 ), the traditional opposition between “underground” and “upperground” tended to fade away. This situation is even more particular that it develops without the intermediary of the third places which usually act as a place of transition and exchange between the “underground” and the “upperground”.…”

Mask interfaces and devices for home noninvasive ventilation in children

“…36 Outcomes related to costs, efficacy, and comfort of custom-made masks but also pitfalls due to 3D printing, such as intentional leaks or pressure injuries, need to be further investigated. 33,37 3 | NIV DEVICES…”

“…However, the mask design should respond to several requirements and considerations 36 . Outcomes related to costs, efficacy, and comfort of custom‐made masks but also pitfalls due to 3D printing, such as intentional leaks or pressure injuries, need to be further investigated 33,37 …”

Publications About COVID-19 Research by the BME Community

“… 22 Multiple experiments have been performed to further address the difficulties associated with quality control of 3D printing medical devices and improve future iterations. 9 , 19 …”