ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2022
Patient-worn endoscopy mask to protect against viral transmission.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Article
- Patient-worn endoscopy mask to protect against viral transmission.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo design and evaluate patient-worn personal protective equipment (PPE) that allows providers to perform endoscopy while protecting against droplet and airborne disease transmission. STUDY
designSingle subject study.
methodsMask efficacy was evaluated using a cough simulator that sprays dye visible under ultra-violet light. User-testing was performed on an airway trainer mannequin where each subject performed the endoscopy with and without the mask in random orders. Their time to completion and number of attempts before successful completion were recorded, and each subject was asked to fill out a NASA Task Load Index (TLX) form with respect to their experience.
resultsThe mask has a filtration efficiency of 97.31% and eliminated any expelled particles with the cough simulator. Without the mask, a simulated cough is visualized as it progresses away from the cough origin. Subjects who performed trans-nasal endoscopy spent 27.8 ± 8.0 s to visualize the vocal cords for the no mask condition and 28.7 ± 13.6 s for the mask condition (mean ± SD,
conclusionThe designed PPE provides an effective barrier for viral droplet and airborne transmission while allowing the ability to perform endoscopy with ease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3
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.