Peutrell I, Jennison N. British Journal of Midwifery 2014 May; 22(5): 254-8
Twenty midwives asked to manage newborn resuscitation scenarios on a manikin using two techniques: Bag valve mask with a Guedel, and a bag with an i-gel. Time to first breath quicker with i-gel, no significant difference in duration of inflation breaths. Higher inflation pressures generated with i-gel.
Link to abstract
c82955f5-3e2c-423b-b5fa-96879c4df39b|1|1.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Seno H, Komasawa N, Fujiwara S, Miyazaki S, Tatsumi S, Sawai T, Minami T. Masui. 2014 May;63(5):590-3
Manikin study to investigate effectiveness of three fixation methods on an automated chest compressor. Fixation strap may prove useful in stabilising i-gel insertion in this scenario.
Link to abstract
f37845fe-434d-42ed-bd90-e8ec2d29252b|1|4.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Adelborg K, Al-Mashhadi RH, Nielsen LH, Dalgas C, Mortensen MB and Løfgren B. Anaesthesia. 2014 Apr; 69(4): 343-7
Forty lifeguards took part in this manikin study, where time to ventilation and proportion of successful ventilations (both with and without ‘concurrent’ chest compressions) were measured. Mean time to ventilate with i-gel® was 15.6 seconds, compared to 35.2 for Soft Seal and 35.1 for AuraOnce. Authors concluded that ‘most lifeguards preferred the i-gel®’.
Link to abstract
Tags :
2014,
Adelborg K,,
Anaesthesia,
RCT,
Manikin study,
vs Soft Seal,
vs AuraOnce,
Lifeguards,
Drowning patients,
Prehospital airway management,
Chest compressions,
Mean time to ventilation,
Free
fd980dc1-9700-4045-9eed-7df2ef2b1f96|1|1.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Melissopoulou T, Stroumpoulis K, Sampanis M A, Vrachnis N, Papadopoulos G, Chalkias A, Xanthos T. Heart Lung. 2014 Mar-Apr; 43(2): 112-6
A group of 45 nurses inserted the i-gel® and ILMA in a manikin with and without continuous chest compressions. ILMA proved more successful than the i-gel®, but continuation of compressions caused higher insertion times in both devices. Authors conclude that nursing staff can use both devices ‘as conduits with comparable success rates, regardless of whether chest compressions are interrupted or not’.
Link to abstract
caee3229-4e46-40b5-b424-13b4d63f8f94|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c
Sanuki T, Sugioka S, Komasawa N, Ueki R, Kaminoh Y, Kotani J. Anesth Prog. 2014 Winter;61(4):145-9
Manikin study, including novice practitioners, using a modified i-gel device and LMA Flexible. Mean insertion time was significantly shorter for the modified i-gel.
Link to abstract
3f1f0910-6d51-40bd-b521-84fd62c2f9b2|1|3.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c