Ventilating the Bearded: A Randomized Crossover Trial Comparing a Novel Bag-Valve-Guedel Adaptor to a Standard Mask.
Journal
Military medicine
ISSN: 1930-613X
Titre abrégé: Mil Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 2984771R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 08 2020
14 08 2020
Historique:
received:
01
04
2019
revised:
08
09
2019
accepted:
10
09
2019
entrez:
14
1
2021
pubmed:
15
1
2021
medline:
4
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Emergency field ventilation using bag-valve face mask devices can be difficult to perform, especially in bearded individuals. In view of the increasing numbers of servicemen and civilians sporting a beard or moustache, the issue of finding a technical solution for ventilation in this population has gained importance. We therefore developed a novel adaptor that enables the direct connection of a bag-valve device to a Guedel-type oropharyngeal airway device thereby directly connecting the oral airway to the bag valve, eliminating the need for a face mask. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of the bag-valve-Guedel adaptor (BVGA) to the common face mask in healthy bearded volunteers. This study was a randomized-by-sequence, crossover-controlled trial (NCT02768246) approved by the local IRB (0051-16-HMO). All subjects signed an informed consent before participation. Twenty-five healthy bearded men (age 28 ± 7) were recruited. After randomization, the first group (mask then BVGA, n = 12) began breathing room air through the face mask, followed by 100% O2. After washout in room air, the procedure was repeated with the BVGA. The second group (BVGA then mask, n = 13) began with the BVGA followed by the face mask. Subjects were awake and breathed spontaneously throughout the experiment. Therefore, a Guedel was not used. Physiological and respiratory parameters were monitored continuously. The primary endpoint was the presence of suspected leak as determined by end-tidal-CO2 (EtCO2 < 20 mmHg). Secondary endpoints included tidal volume and safety. The order of device use did not affect the results significantly (p > 0.05 by Mann-Whitney-U test); therefore, the data were pooled. There were no cases of suspected leak while breathing through the BVGA. By contrast, while breathing through a face mask, there were 8 of 25 (32%) and 5 of 25 (20%) cases of suspected leak in air and 100% O2, respectively (air: p = 0.002; 100% O2: p = 0.014 by McNemar test). No adverse events were observed. In bearded individuals, the BVGA provides significantly more efficient (less leak) ventilation compared to a face mask. This is also of particular importance in view of the increasing number of bearded individuals serving in the armed forces. Moreover, since effective ventilation with a mask requires experience, the relatively easy-to-apply BVGA will enable less experienced first responders to achieve higher success rates in this critical phase of treatment. Further studies are planned to evaluate the efficacy of the BVGA in the prehospital setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33444455
pii: 5614297
doi: 10.1093/milmed/usz378
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02768246']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1300-e1308Informations de copyright
© Association of Military Surgeons of the United States 2019. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.