Trial reportInternal and emergency medicine2021
Using gel for difficult mask ventilation on the bearded patients: a simulation-based study.
Trial report in Internal and emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Superiority of the Bag-Valve-Guedel Adaptor Over the Standard Face Mask for Preintubation Ventilation of Bearded Patients by Trainees With Limited Experience: Prospective Controlled Cross-Over Clinical Trial.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Article
- Pre-intubation ventilation device for bearded patients: prospective, randomized, crossover trial in anesthetized patients.Internal and emergency medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The beard is a well-known cause of difficult mask ventilation due to excessive air leaks. Various techniques have been proposed to overcome this difficulty, such as applying a gel on the mask edge. Our objective was to determine whether the gel technique will improve ventilation and to assess the comfort of the provider. A randomized crossover design was conducted to assess the efficacy of gel in a bearded simulation model. Respiratory therapists (RT) were recruited by convenience sampling to hold the mask using a two-handed technique for a two-minute ventilation session. During the session, the ventilator provided a fixed Tidal Volume (TV) of 550 mL and a respiratory rate of 12 per minute, and the simulated model measured the received volumes. We compared the median TV and number of failed ventilation attempts with or without the gel. The comfort level while using the gel was assessed with constructed questions. We recruited 74 respiratory therapists working in Riyadh city. More than half of the participants had more than 5 years experience. The median tidal volume for standard mask ventilation without the gel was 283 mL [interquartile range (IQR) 224, 327], whereas that with the gel was 467 mL [451, 478], respectively (p < 0.01). The number of successful ventilations was recorded out of 24 breaths during the 2-min ventilation period for each technique; the proportion of successful ventilations increased significantly by 65% (95% CI 51-75%, p < 0.01) with the gel. In addition, only nine participants believed the technique was not comfortable, while the remaining individuals found it comfortable or natural. In our bearded simulation model, applying the gel significantly improved ventilation without negatively affecting comfort. Further studies and education are encouraged in the field of basic airway management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.