Kohama H, Komasawa N, Ueki R, Kaminoh Y, Nishi S. Pediatr Int. 2015;57(1):180-2
Study on performance of air-Q, Ambu Aura-i and i-gel in a manikin simulation, undertaken by 22 novice physicians. Rate of success and insertion time with and without chest compressions were measured.
Link to abstract
Tags :
2015,
Kohama H,
Pediatr Int,
Manikin study,
Paediatric,
Novice users,
Chest compressions,
Resuscitation,
Infant,
Simulation,
Comparison trial,
vs air-Q,
vs Ambu Aura-i,
Free
75068e02-bd37-4608-b5bd-dac5540f665b|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Mukadder S, Zekine B, Erdogan KG, Ulku O, Muharrem U, Saim Y, Mahmut D. ScientificWorldJournal. 2015;2015:634320
105 patients were randomly distributed between the three device groups. Initial leak pressure, insertion time, ease of placement and airway morbidity results all favoured the i-gel.
Link to abstract
Tags :
2015,
Mukadder S,
ScienfiticWorldJournal,
Adult,
Anaesthesia,
Comparison trial,
vs ProSeal,
vs LMA Supreme,
Gynaecologic surgery,
Laparoscopic,
Free
03380d16-91cd-45cd-8f5f-d929cbc57416|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Kayhan GE, Begec Z, Sanli M, Gedik E, Durmus M. ScientificWorldJournal. 2015;2015:426186
50 patients were split between the two groups, with airway leak pressure the primary outcome measured. No significant differences were found here, however i-gel insertion time was shorter.
Link to abstract
ffb95468-880a-41e7-8cc3-c521c32915a5|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c