ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Quality of Ventilations during Infant Resuscitation: A Simulation Study Comparing Endotracheal Tube with Face Mask.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Agreement and Reliability of a Newly Developed Tidal Volume Monitoring Device in Bag-Valve Ventilation and Intubation Scenarios: A Simulation-Based Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Effect of Intermediate Airway Management on Ventilation Parameters in Simulated Pediatric Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: Protocol for a Multicenter, Randomized, Crossover Trial.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Impact of Two Resuscitation Sequences on Alveolar Ventilation during the First Minute of Simulated Pediatric Cardiac Arrest: Randomized Cross-Over Trial.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There are few studies that analyze ventilation volume and pressure during CPR carried out on infants. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of the ventilations administered using a self-inflating bag with an endotracheal tube and a face mask in manikins. Methods: a quasi-experimental simulation study with a randomized case crossover design [endotracheal tube (ET) vs. face mask (FM)] was performed. Sixty participants who were previously trained nursing students participated in the study. The estimated air volumes breathed, and the pressure generated during each ventilation were assessed and the quality of the chest compressions was recorded. Results: the ET test presented a higher percentage of ventilations that reached the lungs (100% vs. 86%; p < 0.001), with adequate volume (60% vs. 28%; p < 0.001) in comparison to FM. Both tests presented peak pressures generated in the airway greater than 30 cm H2O (ET: 22% vs. FM: 31%; p = 0.03). Conclusions: performing quality CPR ventilations on an infant model is not an easy skill for trained nursing students. Both tests presented a significant incidence of excessive peak pressure during ventilations. Specific training, focused on quality of ventilations guided by a manometer attached to the self-inflating bag, must be considered in life support training for pediatric providers.
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.