Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2023
Efficacy of an aerosol suction device Free-100 M in removing aerosols produced by coughing to minimize COVID-19 infection.
Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of a surgical mask during high-flow nasal oxygen therapy in preventing aerosol dispersion: a randomized controlled study.Journal of anesthesia · 2023Trial
- Surgical smoke exposure to patients and to healthcare workers in the operating room: a quantitative assessment.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
- Efficacy of an aerosol suction device and a drape in reducing surgical smoke exposure to patients and anesthesiologists: a prospective randomized controlled study.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
- Reduction method of exposure of anesthesiologists to inhalational anesthetics.Journal of anesthesia · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe healthcare workers are at the greatest risk of being exposed to viral infection during airway management of a patient with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). An air extractor which suctions air around the patient's face would reduce the spread of viral aerosols during coughing, but no study has confirmed this. We assessed whether or not an air extractor reduces the amount of aerosols spreading toward the operator's face, during coughing of simulated patients.
methodsAfter obtained approval of the study by a research ethics committee and written informed consent from 20 volunteers (and additional 20 volunteers), we asked each volunteer to lie supine on a table in a positive-pressure management operating room. As a cross-over design, we used an airborne particle counter (Handheld 3016, SGY company, Tokyo) to measure the aerosols approximately 30 cm above the participant's mouth, while the volunteer was coughing, with and without the use of an air extractor Free-100 M (Forest-one, Funabashi), facing the participant's mouth. In another 20 volunteers, the aerosols were measured, while each volunteer was lying supine, without coughing, and without the use of the air extractor.
resultsThe aerosol count during coughing was significantly lower when the air extractor was used [median: 55 (interquartile range: 15-128)] than when it was not used [73 (44-201)] [p = 0.001, difference: 19 (95%CI: 4-70)].
conclusionsThe Free-100 M air extractor would reduce, but do not remove all, aerosols produced by coughing of a patient, and thus may reduce the risk of infection of COVID-19.
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.