Re: monitors

["Geoff Scott" <trirn@hotmail.com>]

We trialed the one of the new MRL monitors and found that they had a few
pros and cons.  While they do have invasive pressure capabilities in the
near future (we were told fall of 2000!) they did not meet our needs for
neonatal monitoring for neither invasive nor non-invasive pressures.  We
also found that the SaO2 probes tended to be extremely effected with motion
artifact in flight.  This was improved a bit using Nelcor probes, however.
Personally, I found that the soft keys were nice but could be troublesome in
the dark and with turbulence.  The integrated defib/pacer is nice (a la
Lifepack 12) but we found that we used these options infrequently enough
that the additional weight for everyday use could be a burden.  Ultimately,
we decided to continue to use the Protocol Propaq for our monitoring needs
and we carry a Lifepack 10 for defib/external pacing.  Hope this helps!

Geoff Scott RN, BSN, BS
Flight Nurse
University of Chicago Aeromedical Network
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Butler" <TButler@tulsatech.org>
To: <flightmed@flightweb.com>
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: monitors


My preveous experiences with MRL monitors in flight have not been very good.
I am not sure if they worked out the EMI problems and am not aware if
USAFSAM has approved it for Air Force use as of yet.(They do a lot of
research in this area)  I for one am interested in knowing more about it.
Feel free to contact me at tbutler@tulsatech.org   Thanks

>>> <RNCCT@aol.com> 04/06/01 08:27AM >>>
Looking for anyone using or having looked at the new MRL monitors.  From
what
I have found, it appears to be one of the smallest user friendly monitors on
the market today.  I know the FDA approval for invasive monitoring is 90-120
days away, but was curious if anyone else had any experience with this unit?

Feel free to respond off list, I will forward responses to those interested