ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2020
A comparison of controlled ventilation with a noninvasive ventilator versus traditional mask ventilation.
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Non-inferiority Comparative Trial Between Sotair® Device Attached to Manual Resuscitator Versus Mechanical Ventilation in Patients Undergoing Non-emergent Surgery With General Anesthesia
A Comparative Trial Between Sotair® Device Attached to Manual Resuscitator Versus Manual Ventilation Alone in Patients Undergoing Non-emergent Surgery With General Anesthesia: A Prospective Randomized Cross-over Clinical Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bilevel positive airway pressure reduces anaesthesiologist workload and turnover time in electroconvulsive therapy: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
- Article
- EACTA/SCA Recommendations for the Cardiac Anesthesia Management of Patients With Suspected or Confirmed COVID-19 Infection: An Expert Consensus From the European Association of Cardiothoracic Anesthesiology and Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists With Endorsement From the Chinese Society of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesiology.Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia · 2021Article
- Preintubation feedback controlled machine delivered noninvasive ventilation versus human delivered traditional mask ventilation: is human performance inferior to machine?Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After induction, but before intubation, many general anesthesia patients are manually bag-mask ventilated. The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of bag-mask ventilation (MkV) of an anesthetized patient versus mask ventilation using a noninvasive ventilator (NIV). We hypothesized that feedback-controlled, mask ventilation via NIV is more efficacious and safer. This critical short period of time in the operating room was chosen to compare MkV versus NIV. 30 ASA I-III patients, aged 18-74, presenting for elective surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled in the study. Patients were ventilated first with MkV and then with NIV. One minute of ventilation data was collected for each method. Respiratory inductance plethysmography (RIP) bands around the chest and abdomen were used to measure tidal volumes and breath rates for each method of ventilation. The NIV was set to deliver 10 breaths per minute with 12 cmH
Indexed as
Identifiers
31338661What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.