Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38234876›Full record

ArticleResuscitation plus2024

Introducing a novel respiratory function monitor for neonatal resuscitation training.

A M Dalley, K A Hodgson, J A Dawson, M B Tracy, P G Davis, M Thio

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

A M DalleyNewborn Research Centre, The Royal Women's Hospital, Level 7, 20 Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
K A HodgsonNewborn Research Centre, The Royal Women's Hospital, Level 7, 20 Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
J A DawsonNewborn Research Centre, The Royal Women's Hospital, Level 7, 20 Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
M B TracyWestmead Hospital, Department of Neonatology, Cnr Hawkesbury Road and Darcy Road, Westmead, New South Wales 2145, Australia.
P G DavisNewborn Research Centre, The Royal Women's Hospital, Level 7, 20 Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
M ThioNewborn Research Centre, The Royal Women's Hospital, Level 7, 20 Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
Royal Women's Hospital · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUThe University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A respiratory function monitor (RFM) gives immediate feedback, allowing clinicians to adjust face mask ventilation to correct leak or inappropriate tidal volumes. We audited the satisfaction of clinicians with a neonatal resuscitation training package, incorporating a novel RFM. Methods: This was a mixed-methods study conducted at The Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. Clinicians were approached to complete a neonatal resuscitation training session. Participants watched a training video, then provided ventilation to term and preterm manikins first without, and then with, the RFM. Clinicians completed a survey after the session and undertook a follow-up session three months later. The primary outcome was participant satisfaction with the RFM. Secondary outcomes included participants' self-assessment of face mask leak and tidal volumes when using the RFM. Results: Fifty clinicians completed both the initial and follow-up session. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the RFM for both term and preterm manikins: on a scale from 0, meaning "not at all", and 100, meaning "yes, for all resuscitations", the median response (interquartile range, IQR) was 82 (74-94) vs 81.5 (69-94.5). Levels of satisfaction were similar for less experienced and more experienced clinicians: median (IQR) 83 (77-93) vs 81 (71.5-95) respectively. When using the monitor, clinicians accurately self-assessed that they achieved leak below 30% and tidal volumes within the target range at least 80% of the time. Conclusion: Clinicians of all experience levels had a high level of satisfaction with a training package including a novel RFM.

Indexed as

Face mask ventilationNeonatal resuscitationPositive pressure ventilationRespiratory function monitorResuscitation technologyResuscitation training

Identifiers

PMID38234876
PMCPMC10792740
OpenAlexW4390456030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.