Loading…
PO-0652 New Neonatal Resuscitator Gives More Lung Volume On A Mannequin Model
BackgroundBag mask ventilation of the newborn is the most difficult part of neonatal resuscitation, as experienced in the Helping Babies Breathe program. Methods to facilitate improved bag mask ventilation and aid training are therefore needed.Methods41 nursing and medical students without any knowl...
Saved in:
Published in: | Archives of disease in childhood 2014-10, Vol.99 (Suppl 2), p.A467-A467 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | A467 |
container_issue | Suppl 2 |
container_start_page | A467 |
container_title | Archives of disease in childhood |
container_volume | 99 |
creator | Thallinger, M Ersdal, H Størdal, K |
description | BackgroundBag mask ventilation of the newborn is the most difficult part of neonatal resuscitation, as experienced in the Helping Babies Breathe program. Methods to facilitate improved bag mask ventilation and aid training are therefore needed.Methods41 nursing and medical students without any knowledge of newborn resuscitation were trained in basic bag mask ventilation and ventilated with the two devices; a new Upright resuscitator (Laerdal Global Health, Stavanger) and a standard newborn resuscitator (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger) on a manikin in random order. Ventilation data was collected with the Newborn Resuscitation Monitor (Laerdal Global Health) and analysed for 40 students. One was omitted due to inaccurate data signal reading. The students answered questions grading mask seal (1) and ease of air entry (2) from 1 (difficult) to 4 (easy) and finally which device they preferred.Results31 of 41 (76%) students preferred the Upright resuscitator. For "mask seal" mean score was 3 for Upright and 2.5 for standard (one sample binomial test p = 0.03), and for “ease of air entry” 3.5 for Upright and 3.2 for standard (p = 0.05). Mean expired lung volume was 15.5 ml for Upright and 13.8 for standard resuscitator with mean difference 1.7 ml (95% confidence interval 3.2–0.2, one sample t-test for paired observations p = 0.03). Mean mask leakage for Upright was 46% and standard 60% (paired sample test p < 0,001).ConclusionThe students showed a preference towards the Upright resuscitator, which also provided a slightly higher expiratory volume and significantly reduced mask leakage compared to the standard resuscitator. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1136/archdischild-2014-307384.1293 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2138061464</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2138061464</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1373-e08fa80bb9f37509e4692d9d258a198539ad7b9bdbadfa95463d9b01397667973</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpN0M1OwzAMB_AIgcQYvEMkxLHDqdM0OXCYJhhI-0AIuEZpk7JOXbslLYgbF16UJ6HTOHCyZP9lyz9CrhiMGENxbXy-smXIV2VloxgYjxBSlHzEYoVHZMC4kH2f82MyAACMlJTylJyFsAZgsZQ4IMvHZQQiiX--vhfugy5cU5vWVPTJhS7kZWvaxtNp-e4CnTfe0VlXv9HXpuo2ji5rOqZzU9du15V1P7euOicnhamCu_irQ_Jyd_s8uY9my-nDZDyLcoYpRg5kYSRkmSowTUA5LlRslY0TaZiSCSpj00xlNjO2MCrhAq3KgKFKhUhVikNyedi79c2uc6HV66bzdX9SxwwliP553qduDqncNyF4V-itLzfGf2oGem-o_xvqvaE-GOq9If4CjpBn8A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2138061464</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>PO-0652 New Neonatal Resuscitator Gives More Lung Volume On A Mannequin Model</title><source>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>Education Collection</source><creator>Thallinger, M ; Ersdal, H ; Størdal, K</creator><creatorcontrib>Thallinger, M ; Ersdal, H ; Størdal, K</creatorcontrib><description>BackgroundBag mask ventilation of the newborn is the most difficult part of neonatal resuscitation, as experienced in the Helping Babies Breathe program. Methods to facilitate improved bag mask ventilation and aid training are therefore needed.Methods41 nursing and medical students without any knowledge of newborn resuscitation were trained in basic bag mask ventilation and ventilated with the two devices; a new Upright resuscitator (Laerdal Global Health, Stavanger) and a standard newborn resuscitator (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger) on a manikin in random order. Ventilation data was collected with the Newborn Resuscitation Monitor (Laerdal Global Health) and analysed for 40 students. One was omitted due to inaccurate data signal reading. The students answered questions grading mask seal (1) and ease of air entry (2) from 1 (difficult) to 4 (easy) and finally which device they preferred.Results31 of 41 (76%) students preferred the Upright resuscitator. For "mask seal" mean score was 3 for Upright and 2.5 for standard (one sample binomial test p = 0.03), and for “ease of air entry” 3.5 for Upright and 3.2 for standard (p = 0.05). Mean expired lung volume was 15.5 ml for Upright and 13.8 for standard resuscitator with mean difference 1.7 ml (95% confidence interval 3.2–0.2, one sample t-test for paired observations p = 0.03). Mean mask leakage for Upright was 46% and standard 60% (paired sample test p < 0,001).ConclusionThe students showed a preference towards the Upright resuscitator, which also provided a slightly higher expiratory volume and significantly reduced mask leakage compared to the standard resuscitator.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9888</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2044</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2014-307384.1293</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: BMJ Publishing Group LTD</publisher><subject>Global health ; Leakage ; Medical students ; Neonates ; Newborn babies ; Nursing ; Students ; Ventilation ; Ventilators</subject><ispartof>Archives of disease in childhood, 2014-10, Vol.99 (Suppl 2), p.A467-A467</ispartof><rights>2014 2014, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2138061464/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2138061464?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21378,21394,27924,27925,33611,33877,43733,43880,74221,74397</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Thallinger, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ersdal, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Størdal, K</creatorcontrib><title>PO-0652 New Neonatal Resuscitator Gives More Lung Volume On A Mannequin Model</title><title>Archives of disease in childhood</title><description>BackgroundBag mask ventilation of the newborn is the most difficult part of neonatal resuscitation, as experienced in the Helping Babies Breathe program. Methods to facilitate improved bag mask ventilation and aid training are therefore needed.Methods41 nursing and medical students without any knowledge of newborn resuscitation were trained in basic bag mask ventilation and ventilated with the two devices; a new Upright resuscitator (Laerdal Global Health, Stavanger) and a standard newborn resuscitator (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger) on a manikin in random order. Ventilation data was collected with the Newborn Resuscitation Monitor (Laerdal Global Health) and analysed for 40 students. One was omitted due to inaccurate data signal reading. The students answered questions grading mask seal (1) and ease of air entry (2) from 1 (difficult) to 4 (easy) and finally which device they preferred.Results31 of 41 (76%) students preferred the Upright resuscitator. For "mask seal" mean score was 3 for Upright and 2.5 for standard (one sample binomial test p = 0.03), and for “ease of air entry” 3.5 for Upright and 3.2 for standard (p = 0.05). Mean expired lung volume was 15.5 ml for Upright and 13.8 for standard resuscitator with mean difference 1.7 ml (95% confidence interval 3.2–0.2, one sample t-test for paired observations p = 0.03). Mean mask leakage for Upright was 46% and standard 60% (paired sample test p < 0,001).ConclusionThe students showed a preference towards the Upright resuscitator, which also provided a slightly higher expiratory volume and significantly reduced mask leakage compared to the standard resuscitator.</description><subject>Global health</subject><subject>Leakage</subject><subject>Medical students</subject><subject>Neonates</subject><subject>Newborn babies</subject><subject>Nursing</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Ventilation</subject><subject>Ventilators</subject><issn>0003-9888</issn><issn>1468-2044</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>CJNVE</sourceid><sourceid>M0P</sourceid><recordid>eNpN0M1OwzAMB_AIgcQYvEMkxLHDqdM0OXCYJhhI-0AIuEZpk7JOXbslLYgbF16UJ6HTOHCyZP9lyz9CrhiMGENxbXy-smXIV2VloxgYjxBSlHzEYoVHZMC4kH2f82MyAACMlJTylJyFsAZgsZQ4IMvHZQQiiX--vhfugy5cU5vWVPTJhS7kZWvaxtNp-e4CnTfe0VlXv9HXpuo2ji5rOqZzU9du15V1P7euOicnhamCu_irQ_Jyd_s8uY9my-nDZDyLcoYpRg5kYSRkmSowTUA5LlRslY0TaZiSCSpj00xlNjO2MCrhAq3KgKFKhUhVikNyedi79c2uc6HV66bzdX9SxwwliP553qduDqncNyF4V-itLzfGf2oGem-o_xvqvaE-GOq9If4CjpBn8A</recordid><startdate>201410</startdate><enddate>201410</enddate><creator>Thallinger, M</creator><creator>Ersdal, H</creator><creator>Størdal, K</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201410</creationdate><title>PO-0652 New Neonatal Resuscitator Gives More Lung Volume On A Mannequin Model</title><author>Thallinger, M ; Ersdal, H ; Størdal, K</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1373-e08fa80bb9f37509e4692d9d258a198539ad7b9bdbadfa95463d9b01397667973</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Global health</topic><topic>Leakage</topic><topic>Medical students</topic><topic>Neonates</topic><topic>Newborn babies</topic><topic>Nursing</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Ventilation</topic><topic>Ventilators</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Thallinger, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ersdal, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Størdal, K</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest_Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Education Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Archives of disease in childhood</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Thallinger, M</au><au>Ersdal, H</au><au>Størdal, K</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>PO-0652 New Neonatal Resuscitator Gives More Lung Volume On A Mannequin Model</atitle><jtitle>Archives of disease in childhood</jtitle><date>2014-10</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>99</volume><issue>Suppl 2</issue><spage>A467</spage><epage>A467</epage><pages>A467-A467</pages><issn>0003-9888</issn><eissn>1468-2044</eissn><abstract>BackgroundBag mask ventilation of the newborn is the most difficult part of neonatal resuscitation, as experienced in the Helping Babies Breathe program. Methods to facilitate improved bag mask ventilation and aid training are therefore needed.Methods41 nursing and medical students without any knowledge of newborn resuscitation were trained in basic bag mask ventilation and ventilated with the two devices; a new Upright resuscitator (Laerdal Global Health, Stavanger) and a standard newborn resuscitator (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger) on a manikin in random order. Ventilation data was collected with the Newborn Resuscitation Monitor (Laerdal Global Health) and analysed for 40 students. One was omitted due to inaccurate data signal reading. The students answered questions grading mask seal (1) and ease of air entry (2) from 1 (difficult) to 4 (easy) and finally which device they preferred.Results31 of 41 (76%) students preferred the Upright resuscitator. For "mask seal" mean score was 3 for Upright and 2.5 for standard (one sample binomial test p = 0.03), and for “ease of air entry” 3.5 for Upright and 3.2 for standard (p = 0.05). Mean expired lung volume was 15.5 ml for Upright and 13.8 for standard resuscitator with mean difference 1.7 ml (95% confidence interval 3.2–0.2, one sample t-test for paired observations p = 0.03). Mean mask leakage for Upright was 46% and standard 60% (paired sample test p < 0,001).ConclusionThe students showed a preference towards the Upright resuscitator, which also provided a slightly higher expiratory volume and significantly reduced mask leakage compared to the standard resuscitator.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</pub><doi>10.1136/archdischild-2014-307384.1293</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-9888 |
ispartof | Archives of disease in childhood, 2014-10, Vol.99 (Suppl 2), p.A467-A467 |
issn | 0003-9888 1468-2044 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2138061464 |
source | Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); Education Collection |
subjects | Global health Leakage Medical students Neonates Newborn babies Nursing Students Ventilation Ventilators |
title | PO-0652 New Neonatal Resuscitator Gives More Lung Volume On A Mannequin Model |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T11%3A37%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=PO-0652%E2%80%85New%20Neonatal%20Resuscitator%20Gives%20More%20Lung%20Volume%20On%20A%20Mannequin%20Model&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20disease%20in%20childhood&rft.au=Thallinger,%20M&rft.date=2014-10&rft.volume=99&rft.issue=Suppl%202&rft.spage=A467&rft.epage=A467&rft.pages=A467-A467&rft.issn=0003-9888&rft.eissn=1468-2044&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/archdischild-2014-307384.1293&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2138061464%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1373-e08fa80bb9f37509e4692d9d258a198539ad7b9bdbadfa95463d9b01397667973%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2138061464&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |